Come Together to Inspire, Interact, Influence, and Impact.

x
Notifications
Log Out? Are you sure you want to log out?
Log Out

Ending income tax would give Missouri families room to breathe

Amy Hunt is a wife, mother of three boys, and a member of Independent Women’s Network. She lives in St. Charles. Originally appeared in St. Louis Post-Dispatch.


Do you ever check out at the grocery store and look at your cart thinking, “That’s it?”

This level of unaffordability is the most pressing issue for women today. We run our households, making most of the spending decisions. Over half of homes have women as de facto CFOs of the family.

Too many families are treading water and fearful of an unexpected expense. Even with pay increases now outpacing inflation, we still have years of hardship to recoup. Women who land a better job, receive a bonus, or land a promotion will feel the sting of their merit in the form of income taxes.

That disparity hits hard. But there’s hope for Missouri families who can consider eliminating state income taxes, which would unlock hundreds of dollars of their own income to curb the strain in their budgets, giving them the ability to save, invest, or just catch up.

Missouri voters face an opportunity to boost tax relief even further for all paycheck earners and make it permanent. We could join the growing number of U.S. states also phasing out their income taxes to pursue strong economic growth and attract new residents.

Earlier this month, the Missouri House of Representatives decisively passed a proposed constitutional amendment (HJR 173) to let voters decide to eliminate the state income tax by phasing it out.

The White House Council of Economic Advisors finds that Missouri workers could see average wages rise by about $2,800 per year, creating a massive financial cushion. This could also lead to a nearly 15% increase in business startups, a recipe for a thriving economy that could outpace neighboring states.

Income tax elimination is good for both tax payers and the state’s economy.

Analysis of Tax Foundation data found that non-income tax states accounted for 25% of the economic growth of the United States between 2010 and 2019. Typically, economies of states that never taxed income grew faster than those of states who had one. Conversely, states that adopted an income tax in the last six decades — including Illinois, New Jersey, and Connecticut — experienced slower growth than the rest of the country. Even U-Haul has identified a “discernible trend” of one-way customers moving out of high-tax states to low-tax states.

Any good constituent would ask, “But how will we pay for services?”

Currently, Missouri has a virtual flat income tax with the top rate around 4.7% on income over $9,436. The income tax comprises over half (about 60%) of the state’s general operating budget. Phasing out the income tax requires a reasonable revenue replacement plan to prevent disruptions to critical government services—such as roads, schools, and social safety net programs.

The bill under consideration would do so by expanding the sales tax and use tax base to tax more services and goods purchased in Missouri. The tax repeal won’t occur all at once though. A new revenue trigger allows the state to automatically phase out the income tax over time, with full elimination expected to happen around 2031.

While an almost foreign idea to some, state income tax elimination is actually popular with over half of Missourians. Some 52% of voters prefer sales taxes to individual income taxes to raise revenue, compared to 29% who prefer income taxes to sales taxes, according to a Saint Louis University/YouGov poll in February.

It is now our state senators who will need to heed the public support for income tax elimination and consider the good outcomes other states enjoy by passing HJR 173.

Place the final decision in the hands of voters this fall and give Missouri women more freedom to decide how best to use their household’s hard-earned dollars.

Fairfax County again scheduled to sacrifice academics for wokeness

Stephanie Lundquist-Arora is a contributor for IW Features, The Federalist and the Washington Examiner, a mother in Fairfax County, Virginia, an author and the Fairfax chapter leader of the Independent Women’s Network. Her articles have also appeared in National Review, Fox News Digital, The Daily Signal and Townhall. Originally appeared on The Washington Times.


The love of everything trans couldn’t be more visible among Fairfax County’s Democratic leadership. The district’s school board members are set to pass another transgender proclamation at their meeting this week.

In 2024, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors voted to observe Trans Visibility Day when it coincided with Easter — likely to insult Christians on their holiest of days. The alphabet people demand it every day, even Easter, apparently.

The transgender cult is arguably the most narcissistic group and certainly doesn’t need more proclamations for “visibility.” Entire months are dedicated to its pride and history. There’s a week for transgender awareness and health and days dedicated to transgender remembrance and pronouns.

Adding insult to injury, men pretending to be women have taken women’s sports, beauty pageants and awards ceremonies by storm. It’s not enough to be free to make personal choices; they demand that the public honor and applaud them for it, even when it comes at the expense of others.

Indeed, on pretty much all these “holidays,” Fairfax County’s leaders spend hours delivering soapbox speeches at public meetings about their commitment to this small, very visible group of people. The hour or two preceding community participation at the board’s upcoming meeting will be just another rerun.

In 2024, 1.9% of Fairfax students who took the Fairfax County Youth Survey identified as transgender. That was a decrease from the 2.3% the year prior, when it was trendier to be transgender. In neighboring Loudoun County’s school district this year, about 51 students (0.1%) identified as “nonbinary” (which, by the way, sounds like a body piercing from the 1990s).

While a small number of students are experimenting with claiming a transgender identity, a large number of students in both districts, particularly those from low-income families, are having an actual problem: They are failing their Standards of Learning tests.

According to data from the Virginia Department of Education, 41% of students enrolled in Fairfax County Public Schools — about 74,200 students — are labeled economically disadvantaged in the 2024-2025 academic year. Of those, 42% failed their English reading Standards of Learning tests, 95% failed English writing, 41% failed math, 46% failed science and 70% failed history.

In other words, the county’s equity warriors are focusing large amounts of resources — especially considering their expensive legal fight with the Department of Education to allow boys in girls’ bathrooms — for a few transgender-identifying students, most of whom are likely affluent.

The county’s leadership is making a clear choice, and it’s not for academics. While thousands of students, particularly those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, struggle to meet basic standards in reading, writing, math and science, the school board continues to devote time and attention to symbolic proclamations that have no measurable impact on student success.

Public schools exist to educate, not serve as platforms for political signaling. When nearly half of vulnerable students are failing core subjects, every hour spent on ceremonial resolutions is an hour not spent confronting the district’s real and growing academic challenges.

Parents are right to ask why leadership appears more focused on statements than solutions.

Until Fairfax County’s leaders refocus on improving classroom outcomes — raising test scores and supporting struggling students — their proclamations will ring hollow. Students don’t need more symbolism; they need results.

More Money, Fewer Students: Fairfax Schools’ Trust Crisis

Stephanie Lundquist-Arora is a contributor for IW Features, The Federalist and the Washington Examiner, a mother in Fairfax County, Virginia, an author and the Fairfax chapter leader of the Independent Women’s Network. Her articles have also appeared in National Review, Fox News Digital, The Daily Signal and Townhall. Originally appeared on EdNews Virginia.


There has been a significant decline in enrollment in Virginia’s largest public school district. Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) experienced the largest drop in student enrollment of any district in the state from 2015 to 2025, according to the University of Virginia Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service. While neighboring Prince William County Public Schools — the state’s second-largest district — grew by 3,970 students, FCPS saw a decrease of 6,894 students during the same period.

It’s not that the number of school-aged children in Fairfax County is declining — in fact, the opposite is true. From 2019 to 2025, the population of school-aged children increased by more than 9,000. But families with greater financial means and/or flexibility are seeking alternative educational options as concerns grow about the performance and outcomes of the district’s public schools.

As FCPS leaders request $4.1 billion in the proposed fiscal year 2027 budget, many taxpayers are also expressing frustration. Critics rightly argue that increased spending has not translated into improved student outcomes. From 2019 to 2025, average per-pupil expenditures rose by more than $6,000, while average SAT scores declined by 35 points over the same period.

Not surprisingly, FCPS stopped publishing SAT scores on its website several years ago. In response, the Fairfax County Taxpayers Alliance regularly submits Freedom of Information Act requests and shares the results publicly.

Year# in FCPSFCPS Budget$ Per PupilAvg. SAT
2019187,521$3.0B$15,9981218
2020188,355$3.1B$16,4581211
2021179,748$3.4B$18,9151201
2022178,421$3.3B$18,4951185
2023180,527$3.5B$19,3871181
2024181,153$3.7B$20,4241178
2025177,007$3.9B$22,0331183

Many families in the county appear to recognize these trends and are choosing to withdraw their children from what was once considered a high-performing public school district. Consequently, the percentage of school-aged children in Fairfax County not attending public school increased from 8.6% in 2019 to 17.4% in 2025.

YearFCPS EnrollmentPrivate SchoolHomeschooledTotal Students% Not in FCPS
2019187,52114,5003,247205,2688.6%
2020188,35517,0005,912211,26710.8%
2021179,74820,0004,504204,25212.0%
2022178,42125,0003,795207,21613.9%
2023180,52728,0003,727212,25414.9%
2024181,15331,0003,749215,90216.1%
2025177,00733,4353,968214,41017.4%

Whether driven by concerns about academic outcomes, school climate, transparency, or broader policy decisions, the data suggest that public confidence in the district is eroding. If FCPS hopes to reverse its enrollment losses and rebuild trust, district leaders will need to do more than request larger budgets. 

Clear accountability, measurable academic improvement, and genuine engagement with families will be essential to restoring the district’s reputation as a destination for educational excellence. Until then, throwing more money at the problem is futile.

Virginia’s Largest Public School District Is Unraveling

Stephanie Lundquist-Arora is a contributor for IW Features, The Federalist and the Washington Examiner, a mother in Fairfax County, Virginia, an author and the Fairfax chapter leader of the Independent Women’s Network. Her articles have also appeared in National Review, Fox News Digital, The Daily Signal and Townhall. Originally appeared on The Daily Signal.


Fairfax County Public Schools is no longer a district in quiet decline—it is a system in visible retreat.

Fairfax Schools experienced the largest decline in student enrollment of any district in the state from 2015 to 2025, according to University of Virginia’s Weldon Cooper Center for Public Policy. While neighboring districts such as Loudoun County Public Schools and Arlington Public Schools grew by 8,315 students and 3,429 students, respectively, Fairfax Schools saw a decrease of 6,894 students during the same period.

Declining enrollment in Virginia’s largest public school district doesn’t show signs of slowing. From 2025 to 2030, Weldon Cooper further estimates that the district’s student enrollment will decline an additional 6.6%.

While district leaders, especially the superintendent, Michelle Reid, continue to invoke Fairfax Schools’ past reputation as a beacon of public education and academic excellence, current priorities and indicators tell a different story. In 2025, Virginia Department of Education’s data show that roughly a quarter of students in Fairfax Schools failed their reading, math, and science Standards of Learning exams, compared with about 20% of students in the neighboring district of Loudoun.

Additionally, in December 2025, the state’s department of education reported that 40 federally identified public schools in Fairfax County need support—meaning that 20% of the district’s 199 public schools are underperforming.

Children in public schools have not fully recovered from prolonged pandemic school closures. When mismanaged districts like Fairfax locked children out of their classrooms for over a year, homeschooling and private school enrollment unsurprisingly rose across Virginia. Northern Virginia’s affluent districts—including Fairfax County—were no exception.

As it became clear that public school leaders were prioritizing teachers unions at the expense of their children’s basic academic development and mental health, more parents began permanently withdrawing their children from public schools. According to the Virginia Department of Education, 66,000 students in the state are homeschooled this academic year, up from 38,000 in 2019.

Private school enrollment in Fairfax County has also surged since the pandemic. In 2025, there were about 33,500 students (16%) enrolled in Fairfax County’s private schools—more than double 2019’s number, 14,500.

The high cost of Fairfax County’s private schools suggests that affluent families are most likely the ones fleeing the sinking ship. For the 2026 school year, the average annual tuition cost at one of the county’s 191 private schools is $19,391.

Ironically, the district spends $22,644 per student in fiscal year 2026—far more than the average private school tuition—yet its classrooms cram 25 students per teacher while private schools manage just 10:1.

Adding insult to injury, Fairfax schools eliminated 275 teaching positions this year to address its so-called budget shortfall, despite a year-over-year budget increase and declining student enrollment. Meanwhile, 44 central office administrators each earn more than $200,000 annually, including the superintendent at $445,353 and her chief of staff at $306,154 this academic year.

Fairfax Schools’ strategic plan emphasizes equity and equal outcomes within the public school system. Based on its priorities and decisions, however, that appears to mean eliminating teaching positions to sustain high salaries for central office staff. “Equity” also seems to imply that declining student achievement and school performance are acceptable, so long as sufficient lip service is paid to the concept.

Rather than addressing the reality that students from higher-income families are leaving Fairfax Schools for higher-performing private schools, district administrators appear more focused on ensuring that failure and disciplinary outcomes are distributed equally across demographic groups in public schools.

Shrinking enrollment, declining performance, and misplaced priorities are not abstract trends—they are warning signs. Families are voting with their feet, and the data make clear that Fairfax Schools can no longer rely on its once-sterling reputation to sustain confidence. A district that spends more per pupil than many private schools while delivering larger class sizes and weaker outcomes must confront hard questions about leadership, accountability, and academic focus.

Like many districts across the nation, if Fairfax Schools is to reverse its downward trajectory, it must return to fundamentals: prioritize classroom instruction over bureaucracy, measure success by student achievement rather than rhetoric, and rebuild trust with families who feel unheard. Without meaningful course correction, enrollment will continue to fall, performance will continue to lag, and the district’s reputation will continue to erode.

The choice facing Fairfax Schools is simple—reform and refocus on students or continue down a path of decline.

Fairfax County School Board’s Bloated Staff

Stephanie Lundquist-Arora is a contributor for IW Features, The Federalist and the Washington Examiner, a mother in Fairfax County, Virginia, an author and the Fairfax chapter leader of the Independent Women’s Network. Her articles have also appeared in National Review, Fox News Digital, The Daily Signal and Townhall. Originally appeared on WMAL.


In 2025, as Fairfax County Public Schools’ (FCPS) leaders eliminated 275 teaching positions, school board members voted in a closed meeting to add “staff directors” to the payroll in addition to their “staff assistants.”

Given that school board members are supported by district administrative staff, a total of 10 school board–specific staff members likely would be sufficient to assist the 12 part-time board members in carrying out their duties. Instead, the school board employs 28 other support staff. Including board members’ earnings, total annual expenditures for board-related salaries—excluding benefits—amount to $3.7 million.

School Board Members and Staff (2025-2026)

NamePositionSalary
Anderson, Sandra BSchool Board Chair$49,999
Lady, RobynSchool Board Vice Chair$47,999
Anderson, Ricardy JSchool Board Member$47,999
McElveen, Ryan LSchool Board Member$47,999
Moon, IlryongSchool Board Member$47,999
McDaniel, Robert KSchool Board Member$47,999
St John-Cunning, MarciaSchool Board Member$47,999
Frisch, Karl VSchool Board Member$47,999
Meren, Melanie KSchool Board Member$47,999
Dixit, SeemaSchool Board Member$47,999
Dunne, Mateo OSchool Board Member$47,999
Braddock District TBDSchool Board Member$47,999
Brown, Nelda NSchool Board Staff Aide$133,063
Cuda, Gilman PSchool Board Staff Assistant$79,647
Azar, Tamara CSchool Board Staff Assistant$106,512
Fischer, Liam SSchool Board Staff Assistant$76,954
Chavez, Ana CSchool Board Staff Assistant$90,956
Rubin, Eric DSchool Board Staff Assistant$79,647
Holmes, Maria EsperanzaSchool Board Staff Assistant$82,435
Bennett, Caitlin ESchool Board Staff Assistant$85,320
Goodell, Sarah LSchool Board Staff Assistant$106,512
Setlow, Christina KClerk to the School Board$152,291
Ko, Yee ChungAuditor General$257,593
Brown, Janet MDeputy Clerk to the School Board$96,846
Jackson, Kevin A Jr.Deputy Clerk to the School Board$96,846
Sheppard, Tiffany LAdministrative Assistant I$87,126
Day, JeremySupport Tech 1$68,214
Wunderlin, DesireeSupport Tech 2$76,069
Gipko, Mary EDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Park, Sarah KDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Flis, Barbara KDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Stokes, Laura EDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Srinagesh, DivyaDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Biliter, Wendy MDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
O’Connor, Jessica NDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Harrer, Jacob HDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Sedgwick, StephanieDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Sheridan, Stephanie RDirector, District Board Operations$127,612
Coffey, CristySenior Executive Admin. Asst.$122,788
TOTAL$3,652,927

Source: FOIA Request

In addition to school board staff, FCPS employs 1,532 additional district administrators (totaling 1,572 central administrative staff members). The total fiscal year 2026 expenditure for central staff salaries is $187 million. The scale of support staff dedicated to part-time school board members and central administration more broadly is symptomatic of corruption and poor leadership within the district.

Saundra Davis, an independent candidate running for the open school board seat in Fairfax County’s Braddock District, believes that FCPS leadership needs to refocus on its main mission—education. She said, “Fairfax County School Board members and their staff should be focused on serving students and schools.”

It seems that some of these staff members, however, are not simply focused on their performing their job duties. Complaints have alleged that Stephanie Sedgwick, Gille Coda, Laura Stokes, and Liam Fischer, (staff members for Rachna Sizemore Heizer and Kyle McDaniel) were working on Heizer’s campaign for the Board of Supervisors during work hours. Davis said, “It’s critical that public resources are used efficiently and focused on serving students and schools, not political campaigns during school hours.”

Taken together, these decisions reveal a troubling misalignment of priorities within FCPS leadership. At a time when classrooms are absorbing the impact of eliminated teaching positions and increasing student needs, the school board has expanded its own staffing footprint far beyond what is reasonably required for part-time governance. The scale and cost of board-dedicated personnel—layered on top of an already expansive central administration—undermines public trust and raises serious questions about fiscal stewardship, transparency, and accountability.

Fairfax County parents and taxpayers deserve a school system that puts students first, not one that appears to prioritize political ambition and bureaucratic self-expansion over educational outcomes. Restoring confidence will require more than rhetoric; it will require a renewed commitment to ethical governance, responsible budgeting, and a clear focus on the core mission of public education. Without meaningful reform, FCPS risks continuing down a path where resources flow upward to administrators and political staffers, while students and teachers are left to do more with less.

No date? No worries; why friends are the real Valentine’s lifesaver

Stephanie Lundquist-Arora is a contributor for IW Features, The Federalist and the Washington Examiner, a mother in Fairfax County, Virginia, an author and the Fairfax chapter leader of the Independent Women’s Network. Her articles have also appeared in National Review, Fox News Digital, The Daily Signal and Townhall. Originally appeared on Fox News.


My friend recently told me that her favorite Valentine’s Day was a few decades ago in second grade, when her playground crush called to say he loved her. 

“It’s been all downhill from there,” she joked.

Another friend said her most cherished memory was when her fifth-grade love interest bought her a bracelet. “And nothing positive since,” she told us, in jest, during the same conversation.

While Valentine’s Day can be a meaningful reminder to celebrate a cherished romantic relationship — even after elementary school — it can also be fraught with dread, obligation and the letdown of unrealistic expectations.

A male friend once told me he refuses to celebrate Valentine’s Day because he resents being told by a calendar when to be thoughtful. Instead, he programs his phone to remind him to buy his wife flowers every 45 days. He admits the irony without hesitation but insists it’s different because his wife doesn’t know about the alerts and is genuinely surprised every time.

He might be onto something. If his wife is genuinely surprised — and actually enjoys flowers — research suggests the unexpected treat triggers a stronger dopamine response. Husbands and boyfriends, however, are often stuck navigating the delicate balance between the joy of surprise and the risk of disappointment when flowers or gifts are expected and fail to appear.

On the other hand, people not in romantic relationships might dread the heart and candy day, when grocery store aisles are overrun with pink and red chaos because it’s a not-so-subtle reminder of their singleness — and, for some, a pang of loneliness.

But there’s hope. Celebrating Valentine’s Day — or any festive occasion — with good friends can boost your well-being and even increase your longevity. In an article last month, oncologist and former Obama White House Special Advisor for Health Policy Ezekiel Emanuel argued that the key to living longer is close friendships. Citing the Health and Retirement Study, he noted that people with the most close friends — an average of 7.8 — had a 17% lower risk of depression and a 24% lower risk of death than those with fewer close friends, who averaged just 1.6.

When I was in high school, my father told me I’d be lucky to have five real friends over the course of my lifetime. I thought he was completely out of his mind and assured him I had dozens. Now it turns out he wasn’t pessimistic. He was practically doing longevity math. Five may be fewer than 7.8, but it’s close enough to feel medically reassuring.

One of my favorite memories is celebrating Valentine’s Day with close college friends a few years before I married. We went to dinner, where we very publicly unwrapped unexpected — and absolutely humiliating — gifts from my friend, who would later become my maid of honor. Then we danced like fools until the club kicked us out. By the time we returned home, my sides hurt from laughing so hard I thought I might cry. I’d like to think we can bank that kind of happiness and draw on it during life’s duller phases.

I can’t imagine my husband, father or brother ditching their, ahem, better halves to grab dinner and go dancing with their buddies on Valentine’s Day. Still, the freezing, midwinter Hallmark holiday offers a perfect excuse to pick up the phone and tell friends how much they matter.

Maybe that’s the real gift Valentine’s Day has to offer — not roses on demand or perfectly timed romance, but a reminder to notice the people who show up again and again, the friends who make us laugh until our sides hurt, who know our embarrassing stories and who stick around long after the candy is gone. 

Romantic love can come with pressure and high expectations, but friendship — including the kind we share with our spouses — has a way of surprising us quietly, reliably and over a lifetime.