Labonte's Auto School says a new law that prohibits out-of-state companies from offering driver education is a thinly veiled attempt by the teachers' unions to maintain control of a lucrative side business.
The Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals says the law will ensure that only certified teachers teach the 33-hour course, which is required for teenagers to get their learner's permit.
And the president of the Rhode Island Parent-Teacher Association doesn't care what group offers the training as long as more classes are available so teenagers don't have to wait to get their permit.
Meanwhile, two bills are working their way through the General Assembly. The first would shift responsibility for driver education from the state Department of Education, which says it can no longer pay for the program, to the Community College of Rhode Island.
The second seeks to postpone the prohibition against out-of-state companies by nine months, until CCRI has a chance to get its program up and running.
Although this issue is hardly as momentous as the separation-of-powers bill, if you are a parent of teenagers in Rhode Island, it may have much more impact.
"I don't see this as a battle between parents and teachers," says Rhode Island PTA President Mary Ann Roll. "Our concern is one of access. Over the past couple of years, the state hasn't been able to offer enough classes at the right times."
The controversy began last year, when the Education Department was forced to trim 100 driver's ed classes because of budget cuts. That left some students scrambling to find classes. Many of those who lived near the Massachusetts line chose to attend Labonte's programs, which are held in North Attleboro, Seekonk and Bellingham.
Meanwhile, the General Assembly approved a bill that would effectively prevent Rhode Island students from crossing the state line to attend classes in Massachusetts or Connecticut. That law took effect June 1.
That bill, submitted on behalf of driver-education teachers, requires that all instructors have a valid Rhode Island teacher's license and complete a three-credit course in traffic-safety education. It also says that an instructor cannot be associated with a commercial driving school.
Those requirements have been on the books in Rhode Island for years. The new law extends that criteria to out-of-state companies, saying that any provider of driver's education must meet the same regulations.
This is a huge hit for owner Henry Labonte, who stands to lose 3,000 Rhode Island clients or about $300,000 a year. So Labonte has asked Sen. Daniel J. Issa, D-Central Falls, to sponsor a bill that would delay the law's implementation for another nine months, "to prove that Rhode Island needs us."
"Teachers want to be the only providers of driver's education in the world," Labonte says. "Parents are very upset. We're getting calls every day. They have to wait in line to get into classes [in Rhode Island]."
But Marcia Reback, president of the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers, says the debate revolves around whether you need certified teachers to teach driver's education.
"Child development and learning theory are important," she says. Learning to drive "requires the ability to read, to do estimations. At least when you have certified teachers, you know that they know about styles of learning."
George Babcock, president of the Rhode Island Association of Certified Teachers of Driver Education, claims that Labonte's school compresses the 33-hour course into two or three days.
"Driver's education involves math and science," he says. "If we're only teaching to the test, then we're not in the education business."
Babcock says the law is not an attempt to squelch competition, nor is it meant as a personal attack against Labonte. "All we're asking is that we have a level playing field," he says.
In an earlier article, however, Babcock said he was concerned about the loss of revenue to the state, which pays driver education teachers about $900 for each course they teach.
Meanwhile, Roll, a former teacher, says she has reviewed Labonte's curriculum and found no evidence that he cuts corners. Why, she asks, would hundreds of parents choose to pay twice as much for Labonte's program ($99 versus $45) if it wasn't any good?
As for the argument that driver education should be taught by certified teachers, Roll is blunt: "This is test prep. It gets you ready to take a written test."
Roll supports allowing the commercial programs to continue until CCRI is able to get a driver's education program running effectively, which could take some time.
Rep. Joseph M. McNamara, the sponsor of the CCRI bill, says there is a good reason why driver ed should be run by the community college. CCRI can put tuition from the driver ed classes into a separate account, so that the program pays for itself. The Department of Education, however, must turn over those revenues to the general fund.
When the department's budget was cut last year, driver education bore some of the brunt. This year, Governor Carcieri's budget calls for increasing the driver education budget from $298,000 to $528,000, which would pay for 450 classes, twice as many as offered last year.
Because it would be a pay-as-you-go program, CCRI would be able to meet the demand for more classes as well as provide more flexible hours.
McNamara objects to private companies teaching driver education because he says the laws in Massachusetts and Rhode Island differ widely. Labonte, he says, does not devote enough time to the hazards of drinking and driving or the importance of being an organ donor.
But Labonte's daughter, Amy Labonte, says the program zeros in on students making the right choices, including eight hours on the dangers of using drugs and alcohol before driving. Labonte's also discusses organ donation at length, she says.
"These arguments are unfounded," Amy Labonte says. "We've been approved by the Rhode Department of Education for years and we've been doing an excellent job. For the legislature to restrict parental choice is nonsense."
McNamara's bill is currently before the House Finance Committee, while Senator Issa's bill is before the House Education Committee.
