As a current high school educator, father of four public school students and president of the Washington Journalism Education Association, I'm dismayed that anyone would be less than thrilled to have Rep. Dave Upthegrove (D-Des Moines) named the recipient of the national Journalism Education Association's Friend of Scholastic Journalism Award.

But in keeping with the First Amendment rights of all American citizens, the Highline Times printed Donald F. Austin's letter admonishing the award, and now I am compelled to counter many of Austin's claims.

And that's how it should be. The press - whether it is the Highline Times or the local high school or college student publication - should be a place where information, ideas and opinions are freely expressed.

Unfortunately, that's not how it is in far too many student publications across this state, and that's why Rep. Upthegrove should be commended for his efforts.

The Friend of Scholastic Journalism Award is presented to individuals and/or groups who have made significant contributions to student journalism. As reported in the Times and elsewhere, the Journalism Education Association cited Rep. Upthegrove's "commitment to protecting the First Amendment rights of students through introducing state legislation to prohibit censorship of student newspapers at public colleges and high schools."

I fully support the legislation proposed by Rep. Upthegrove, as do the legislatures of seven other states, including Oregon, where a similar bill, modeled after Upthegrove's, was signed into law last year. Washington's bill has served as the model for other states seeking similar protections and clarification of the law.

Mr. Austin was one of just three people who testified against the legislation before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Although I witnessed his testimony, I remain unclear as to why he, as a school district attorney, would speak against legislation that both protects student rights and relieves public schools and school officials of any legal liability.

Upthegrove's bill clarifies the rights and responsibilities of all parties involved in editing, managing and advising student media in public high schools and colleges in this state. Right now there is such inequity and inconsistency from district to district and even within districts that students are being ill-served and administrators are finding themselves in no-win situations.

In the high school where I teach, students have never had administrative oversight of their publications and operate them as open, public forums free of any prior review, and totally responsible - post-publication - for their work.

In the district immediately to my north, however, well-established journalism programs are essentially dead and two amazing educators have been reassigned because of an unreasonable insistence on the part of district and building administrators to act as editors and publishers of the student press.

Most alarmingly, Austin states "there have not been any situations around the state where students have had their publications censored to make such legislation reasonable." Unfortunately, Mr. Austin is terribly wrong. Recently, more than a dozen egregious examples of student media suppression have occurred in public high schools in this state. In each of those situations, Rep. Upthegrove's legislation would have afforded all parties clarity and guidance.

His legislation both protects students' rights and the interests of school officials at no cost to taxpayers. That's right - only injunctive or declatory relief for a violation of the act is allowed. In other words, nobody is going to face some ridiculous fine, but peoples' rights will be respected and reinstated.

Austin referenced part of a column that appeared in the Puyallup Herald that stated: "Student newspapers are financed by taxpayers and are operated by school districts for educational purposes. That connection protects students from the liability associated with freedom of the press. The school district, on the other hand, is the target for any lawsuit and, therefore, has a responsibility to review student newspapers to prevent the publication of libelous or offensive material." Austin also stated "Rep. Upthegrove ('s) views would remove adult supervision of student publications."

I assure you that these assertions are nothing more than tired scare tactics. Here's the reality:

1) "Student newspapers are financed by taxpayers and are operated by school districts for educational purposes." Partly true, but misleading. Most student newspapers in this state are financed by ASB funds, advertising revenue, donations, subscriptions and other types of fund-raising. Very few receive any curricular funds, and none that I know of use those funds for the production of the publication. However, it would be fair to say that the publication adviser's stipend, the lights, heat and maybe some equipment are indirect ways taxpayers help cover the costs. As for school districts overtly operating publications solely for educational purposes, I have yet to see one of those papers. I doubt anyone would read it if it existed. That would be kind of like forming a varsity basketball team so that the coach could teach personal hygiene and nutrition.

2) "That connection protects students from the liability associated with freedom of the press." False. Student journalists enjoy no different or greater protection than any other member of the working press when it comes to liability for what they write and publish. Student journalists are expressly aware of this responsibility. In the past, my students have been served search warrants, subpoenas and threatened with lawsuits.

3) "The school district, on the other hand, is the target for any lawsuit and, therefore, has a responsibility to review student newspapers to prevent the publication of libelous or offensive material." Almost totally false. While anyone could bring any sort of lawsuit against just about anyone or any school district for just about anything, student publications are rarely the cause.

In fact, did you know that no public school district in the history of the United States has ever lost $1 defending the First Amendment rights of its students? On the other hand, many public school districts have lost a great deal of taxpayer dollars trying to justify the suppression of student rights.

This year alone, fines of more than $350,000 have been issued against districts across the country for such actions. Instead, the school district's responsibility is to educate and provide opportunities for the citizens of tomorrow.

Nowhere in any school district's charter does it state that the district must serve as the publisher of a small periodical, or that its administrators must act as newspaper editors, or that its teachers must become censors. We don't hire basketball coaches to step in at the buzzer to shoot the game-winning free-throws, either. Instead, districts hire competent educators who teach journalism and advise well-trained students who produce some of the finest student publications in the nation.

So, is this legislation needed? If your student attends my school, probably not. But what about the thousands of other students across our state? Don't they deserve the same opportunity to apply what they've learned? Shouldn't they enjoy the same rights and have the same responsibilities?

Dave Upthegrove should be commended. He is an amazingly articulate, thoughtful legislator who really gets it on this and many other important issues.

And do you have to worry about somebody "pulling the wool" over Rep. Upthegrove's eyes regarding this legislation?

Not at all.

In this case, Mr. Austin and those who would deny student journalists their rights are the sheep in wolves' clothing.

Vince DeMiero

President

Washington Journalism Education Association