Friday, January 6

Florida School Vouchers - Denied!

From PointofLaw.com Ted Frank wrote:

Unfortunately, as I anticipated in June (in a now-defunct Haloscan comment), a 5-2 decision of the Florida Supreme Court has struck down a school-voucher program by manufacturing a nonsensical interpretation of a state constitutional clause out of thin air.

OK, here's somebody that's gunning for school vouchers.

Because the decision was on narrow state constitutional grounds, there is no basis for appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. (Or, perhaps better phrased as "To avoid appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the decision was on narrow state constitutional grounds.") The only remedy for Floridians is to amend their state constitution.

Now from this, I see that Mr. Frank is the Director for the American Enterprise Institute Liability Project. The only thing that seems to qualify him for this is his Reform Proposals, which actually doesn't tell me squat. And since the AEI is based out of Washington, DC, I'm assuming that Mr. Frank is living in or around that part of the country, and is not currently living in Florida. I don't consider what the SCOF did manufacturing anything nonsensical. I will admit my bias that I am against school vouchers, especially if they are used for private religious schools. Sorry, but arguments about how it's the parents' tax money and they can spend it how they want is nonsense. Because I would be making damn sure that none of my income tax is being used for the war in Iraq, using the same argument Pick your own cause, it's the same problem. They are free to send their kid to any school that they want. Do they have the right to claim "their" tax money to help defray the cost? Not in my book.

Yes, I live in a great area of the state for schools, as the schools my kids have gone to are either A or B schools according to the grading that the state does. And Mr. Frank has put how many kids through Florida schools?

The other issue that I have is that the voters of Florida have already passed constitutional amendments such as the one limiting class size, and the fscking legislature puts all of its efforts towards trying to thwart that amendment. Hell, it only takes a simple majority (I think, that may have changed in the last elections) to get an amendment passed in Florida, so what is the big deal if it does take a constitutional amendment?

I would have left a comment about it, but that blog doesn't allow comments. Otherwise, he would be getting an earful from me.

So instead, I blog it myself, and maybe, just maybe, he'll see this in a search result when he goes ego surfing.

Update 1/8:

Mark Lane from the Daytona Beach News-Journal gives a little more detail on this that I didn't know about.

Florida has, since 1868, had some kind of constitutional requirement for quality public schools. But since 1885, the constitutional language has been weak and vague enough that nobody in the Legislature ever lost sleep over it.

Then, in 1998, voters made this mandate more emphatic.

Until now, many smart people dismissed this new language as mere constitutional happy talk. The legal equivalent of graduation day oratory. That changed last week.

The court ruled this new mandate for a strong, well-funded public school system forbids moving public school money to private schools.

The court said the state is in the public school business and the public school business only. Private schools are good and useful, but the state constitution doesn't say the state may fund them.

Particularly if funding private schools means de-funding public schools.