Legislative debates use the use of technology to monitor students

Schools would be required to disclose how they watched, followed and monitored students, and if they sell their data, as part of a bill debated by the Legislative Assembly on Friday. And a public audience examined whether health care providers should have improved the protections against warning that violates their conscience.

Senator Danielle Conrad is the first introductory in the school bill, LB31. The State Department of Education should develop model standards, that schools should then respect, concerning their use of technologies such as digital rooms, anti-vapor devices, footprints digital, cameras and electronic surveys. Conrad says that using such technology becomes much more common and must be monitored.

“This bill is aligned with political objectives to empower parents and protect children from Big Tech,” said Conrad.

To promote this, Conrad, a liberal democrat of the officially non -supporting legislature, said that she was working with Dr. Sue Greenwald. Greenwald is a leader of the Condurator of the Nebraska Education Coalition, formerly known as Protect Nebraska Children, who led the opposition to the proposed health standards of the Ministry of Education who would have discussed the ‘Gender identity among other controversial subjects.

Conrad said that they share common concerns about the use of technology in schools.

“It is understood that whenever you have great technology and a great government that holds hands, civil rights and civil freedoms are in danger,” she said.

In a written statement, Greenwald said: “The fact that my group has this bill as our number one priority and that it was presented by Senator Conrad, who has never agreed with us on anything , should tell you that the surveillance and exploration of schoolchildren’s data is a universal concern for parents and non -political. »»

Senator Kathleen Kauth, a conservative republican, said that she had not yet decided to support the Conrad bill. But Kauth said that she shared concern about the data of potentially sold students.

“There are a lot of things in our schools that were never there when you and I were at school,” Kauth told his colleagues senators. “Children, their movements are followed. Their strikes are under follow -up. Their emotions are followed. Everything is followed. And what we know is that these data are worth money. »»

The proposal encountered a decline in a wide range of school groups, including administrators, teachers, school councils and the police. Senator Brad von Gillern, also a republican, said that the bill could compromise the school’s ability to ensure student safety, for example, requiring disclosure of the place where security cameras are and would require unnecessary costs.

“What does this bill do to increase teacher safety for children and staff in schools?” Von Gillern said. “The answer is, nothing. How does it help teachers to teach? How does it help administrators, helps provide support to staff? The influencers of our children?

Kauth said she was working on an amendment to solve the security problems raised by Von Gillern. And Von Gillern said he agreed with some, but not all of Conrad’s concerns.

“We are on the same wavelength. I absolutely do not believe that schools or technological companies should collect for -profit data. (But) I absolutely believe that data collection for the protection of our children and our staff is an interesting company, “he said.

Von Gillern said federal law is already protecting students’ privacy. But Conrad argued that there is an escape that allows schools to leave these protections to technological companies when they sign a contract for their services.

Senator Machaela Cavanaugh, a democrat, supported the bill. Cavanaugh said parents must be aware of what is done with their student data.

“When you download an application on your phone and accept policies, it’s on you,” she said. To tell parents if these data is sold. “”

The legislators postponed for the day without reaching a vote on the bill.

Also Friday, the health and social services committee held a public audience on a proposal to strengthen the rights of health care providers to choose to participate in procedures in which they have religious, ethical or legal objections.

Dr. Carolyn Manhart, a specialist in internal medicine in Omaha, said that some medical students were dissuaded to pursue openings in certain areas, in particular obstetrics and gynecology, if they are against abortion.

“There are a lot of residences, but many of them are – they are pro -abortion. Almost all Obgyn residences are pro-avoort. And so they have the impression that they may not have to enter the fields in which they have been called to enter, because they will be victims of discrimination and they will be ridiculed, “she said.

Opposing the bill of the Nebraska Hospital Association, Dr. John Trapp said that federal law already requires reasonable developments for highly detained beliefs. Trapp said the addition of the bill could affect patient services. He gave the example of someone who wants a recharge of his prescription of oral contraception.

“This objection could occur at seven o’clock in the evening, and we may have already established the day program, or you could be the person on appeal and take this phone call from the patient who says:” I need A recharge of my medication ‘for any reason. And this person could say: “Well, I oppose. I can’t do that. I will have to ask someone else to make this call. There is therefore nothing of this bill which says that they must let us know days or weeks before these objections can be, so that this can have an impact on our workflow ”, -It declared.

The committee has not taken any immediate measure on the proposal.