As a rising senior at BRHS, I am asking the BRHS administration, the school board, and Maine elected officials to make school safety a priority by funding reinforced doors, secure entryways, and other protections for students.

The primary purpose of government, as outlined in the U.S. Constitution, is to protect citizens from serious threats to life, liberty, and property. That raises an important question: how should public money be prioritized between military conflict and the needs of children?

The Trump administration’s education cuts did not simply reduce school budgets; they removed the specific services that allow schools to function, including before-and after-school care programs, tutoring, English-language support, teacher training, and student enrichment programs. In total, roughly $6.2 billion in Congressionally approved education funds across 30 funding streams were withheld. Of that amount, at least $2.2 billion is expected to be permanently lost in future funding due to expired programs and disrupted multi-year funding (Education Week). This sparked court challenges, including some that succeeded in reversing cuts and more that are ongoing, showing that the administration has little interest in scaling back funding disruptions, even though federal law explicitly prohibits the executive branch from overriding Congress.

The issue is not that money is being physically taken from school budgets and moved to the Pentagon. Rather, my concern is that the values reflected in the national budget do not always align with classroom needs. When billions are available for war and military operations, but school safety still struggles for support, is it reasonable to ask whether our priorities are aligned with the people we are meant to protect?

In recent months, the conflict with Iran has cost an estimated $29 billion, despite no clear evidence of an imminent threat to the United States (Reuters/Defense News). At the same time, domestic projects like the White House Ballroom, initially described as donation-funded, have grown to $400 million and will be taxpayer-funded (Reuters), following the April 25th shooting during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner. Despite Republicans arguing that the ballroom was necessary for security purposes, the project was ultimately rejected due to the disputes over the cost and who would pay for it.“The provision didn’t comply with the strict rules governing what Republicans can put in their filibuster-skirting bill because it funded activities outside of the Judiciary Committee’s Jurisdiction,” stated Elizabeth MacDonough, Senate Parliamentarian (Politico).

Schools across the country continue to face challenges to fund safety improvements, security upgrades, and other protections for students. The contrast between these numbers suggests that military spending far outweighs the federal investment in school safety.

This is not only a financial issue, but also a question about what our nation considers essential. A national budget reflects public values. If the government can devote billions to conflict abroad, then it should also be able to make meaningful investments in the places where U.S. children learn, grow, and feel protected.

That contrast becomes even clearer when large sums are assigned to security and luxury in other settings. For example, taxpayer-funded security upgrades for the White House Ballroom have been estimated at around “$200 million to 'something less than 400’” for White House bunker upgrades, showing that the government is willing to place a high price tag on protecting those in power when it chooses to do so (Time). If that level of investment could be justified, then it is fair to ask why schools aren’t treated with the same urgency.

Some may argue that security measures alone cannot solve this problem, and that is true. But they can still make a big difference. Bullet-resistant backpacks at BRES and BRHS were one response to this problem, funded by an anonymous $23,635 grant from Chief Doug Snyder (The Portland Press Herald). However, stronger doors and secure entryways could provide a more lasting solution for protection. Students cannot fully learn when they do not feel safe. My survey results show that 86 BRHS students support my concern: 77.4% said additional safety measures like bulletproof doors would benefit our school community, and 80.2% said bulletproof doors would make them feel safer at school, showing that this issue is real for many students.

Across Maine and other small districts, schools have responded with controlled entrances, cameras, emergency tools, and reinforced doors, showing that even rural communities can take concrete steps to improve safety. Readfield’s Maranacook school district, for example, received a $40,500 grant to reinforce school security (CentralMaine).

As a student, this issue is a part of my daily reality. We are told that schools are safe sanctuaries for learning, yet the reality is that the threat of violence hangs over our heads. Police Chief Doug Snyder emphasized that access is the most important part of security because “if there’s a delay of you getting in here to cause harm, that delay makes it faster for us to get here,” showing that even a small delay can make a major difference in an emergency. Dave Benner, the director of facilities management for the CSD campus, noted that our fire doors are designed for fire but not bulletproofing. Dr. Tricia Campbell, BRHS principal, added that the back doors are a “more vulnerable area in our building because they are more out of sight.”

At BRHS, there is still limited protection against a hostile intruder. According to Dr. Campbell, the school has added protective film to the glass on the back doors of the school using grant funds as a test for possible future use elsewhere. Dr. Campbell stated, "If there's more that we can have in the physical building to make students feel safe at school, I want to look into that."

However, cost remains a major barrier. According to Mr. Benner, replacing all exterior doors would cost about $131,000, while securing key entrances would cost around $49,000. Each bullet-resistant door would cost roughly $2,500, and bulletproof glass is about $500 per square foot. These costs explain why upgraded entry points have not yet been implemented.

When the government can spend hundreds of millions on White House security, the issue is not that school safety is too expensive, but it’s not treated with the same urgency. 

The safety of a select few in the White House ballroom should not outweigh the safety of millions of children in our nation. We need to ensure the safety of our schools for students and staff so they can learn, thrive, and grow. A secure classroom should be the foundation for learning, not an afterthought. There is no price tag on the lives of our future generation. As a taxpayer, I do not support using my public revenues for this.