The House Committee of the Whole advanced Senate File 98 on a party-affiliation label for school board candidates, approving amendments that require party names to appear on the general-election ballot while carving out space for unaffiliated candidates.

Supporters said the change would give voters an additional cue in low-turnout local contests; opponents said it risks injecting national partisan conflicts into local education governance. The committee passed a standing committee amendment and a committee-of-the-whole amendment to clarify registration timing and to allow an "Independent" label for unaffiliated candidates.

Proponents argued party labels help voters. Representative Andrew, who explained the bill to the body, said the proposal responds to low turnout and limited voter knowledge in school-board contests and noted that "having a party affiliation printed on the ballot helps people know a little more about the views that each candidate for these positions are aligned with." Opponents warned that listing party affiliation could discourage independent or nonaligned community members from running. Representative Chesty, who offered the committee-of-the-whole amendment to protect unaffiliated candidates, warned that the bill "compels speech" and said candidates who are independent "should be allowed to run for school board." Representative Yen pressed technical questions about when party affiliation would be locked for the ballot, and the bill was amended to make clear that party affiliation appears on the general-election ballot only and that registration/blackout-period rules determine which affiliation is printed.

Key changes adopted in committee included: a standing committee amendment to conform form and timing language so community college trustee forms remain nonpartisan while school-board forms show party; and a committee-of-the-whole amendment inserting the phrase "if any" and directing that independent candidates be listed as "Independent". A recorded vote on the standing committee amendment was taken by division and the amendment passed 32–8. The Committee of the Whole later approved the committee-of-the-whole amendment and then reported the bill as passed by the Committee of the Whole (committee tally announced as 27–25).

Lawmakers who spoke in favor included representatives who said party labels provide useful voter information and encourage ideological balance on local boards; lawmakers opposed emphasized local variation across districts and the risk that party labels would deter qualified candidates in some communities. Several speakers noted legal and practical implications—Representative Provenza pointed to federal employment rules that can bar some federal employees from participating in partisan races; Representative Harrelson and others emphasized that the bill affects only the general-election ballot and does not place candidates on primary party ballots.

What’s next: The Committee of the Whole forwarded Senate File 98 with the adopted amendments to the full House for further action.

Votes and formal actions recorded in the transcript:
- Standing committee amendment number 1: adopted (division recorded) 32 yes, 8 no.
- Committee of the Whole Amendment number 1 (added language protecting independents): adopted (recorded as passed).
- Final Committee of the Whole report on Senate File 98: reported as passed by committee of the whole, tally read as 27 yes, 25 no.

Speakers quoted or paraphrased in this article spoke during debate on Senate File 98 in the Committee of the Whole session and are listed in the article’s speaker roster.

Ending: The bill’s supporters said it aims to provide ballot transparency for voters in low-profile races; opponents said it risks importing partisan dynamics to school governance. The House will consider the committee-reported bill with its adopted amendments in a subsequent floor action.