BREAKING: FLORIDA SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN SCHOOL VOUCHERS

AP

[Ma3lst0rm]

We need to open up the courts to liability in such cases. The government should not be beyond the reach of the "rule of law".

[Born Conservative]

[evilC]

>>>
but do not mind a chunk of my property taxes going toward our (very good) school system.
<<<

That "chunk", is about 75% of your property taxes and 40% of state taxes.

In other words without the public education boondoggle you could cut property taxes to one quarter of their present size and abolish the state income or sales taxes (the average state raises about 40% of its revenue from each of the income and sales tax).

Education is important, far too important to be left to the people who run the DMV or Amtrak. Public education is simply andother wealth transfer, welfare program and should be treated as such.

[8mmMauser]

There is something about Florida judges....at least some. Pinged from Terri January Dailies

8mm

[Magnum44]

It looks to me like Floridians will have to amend their constitution to remove the adjectives 'public' and 'uniform' from the requirement to provide for uniform public education to get around this. But I am no lawyer...

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

School vouchers is one of the more critical issues and opportunities that we are fortunate enough to have presented to us.

First of all, it is not the government's money. All taxes belong to the taxpayers. We must overcome the Leftist indoctrination that 'the government is providing for us.' They are not. They are taking our funds (property) and redistributing it as they see fit (usually to protect special interests and their own interests).

A school voucher, at least in its pure concept, is not money given to us by the government, which they therefore maintain a vested 'constitutional' interest in overseeing (usually the fabricated 'separation' issue). The voucher is the government giving the citizens formal approval to use X amount of money -- that would be confiscated for the public schools -- to use as they wish so long as it is for education purposes.

Not only is this an important issue for those of us who want to see a more limited government, who don't view sending our children to a parochial school as a constitutional violation (which it certainly is not), and who want to empower individuals in the face of both the NEA unionist thugs and their mouthpieces in the legislature, this can also be one of THE defining issues in freeing the black vote from the Democrat party. This is an issue that allows all citizens who want greater freedom to improve their own lives and those of their children to ban together to vote for those representatives that truly represent us as lovers of liberty and who understand that freedom is the fulcrum between economic success and failure.

This would help to send a large majority of Democrats and, unfortunately, a significant portion of Republicans, to the want-ads section of their local papers.

[Benkei]

The retention vote occurs every 6 years, not every 4. Not one single judge has ever been booted out by the retention vote - including that psycho Barkett, and it cost $4 million to actively campaign for her ouster.

Government relies on such doctrines as 'sovereign immunity', more specifically prosecutorial and judicial immunity, as well as life-time appointments or mechanisms such as the retention vote that are almost impossible to enforce. They are quite literally above the law. Congress exempts itself from many of the onerous regulations it imposes on we lowly unwashed masses. Why? Supposedly, when asked this question about why Congress exempts itself from laws it claims the rest of us must follow, a Congressman protested 'why, WE have to get things done!' Priceless.

If Congress, judges, courts, cops and prosecutors could suddenly be sued by the ambulance chasers, want to bet tort reform and lawsuit restrictions would suddenly become a number one priority?

The problem with all of the judiciary is their unchecked usurpation of power. How to fix it? Forget Constitutional amendments to counter this decision or that. Simply pass one amendment: judicial decisions can invalidate a law - IF a specific legal argument (not 'penumbras' or 'commerce clause' BS) based on a specific text can be cited. Otherwise, the legislature can vote to force the court to reconsider ad naseum. THEN, if the court manufactures a 'decision' that affects one citizen in any way or costs one dime - then the people must vote on whether or not to enforce it.

This process means that the courts have to prove the validity of their argument to strike down a law - rather than the legislature having to prove the validity of a law to the court so they get not only to agree or disagree but make up some so-called 'remedy' and force everyone to abide by it at a whim. Something as obvious, say, as a law that would make every adult stand on their head in the middle of the nearest intersection on alternate Tuesdays and chew nails would not pass the obvious test of being unconstitutional - 8th amendment if nothing else. Something such as disallowing school vouchers because the Court doesn't like them and attempting to rationalize it with thin sophistry involving the 'right' of government to control schools in the name of 'uniformity' simply doesn't cut it.

And - forget lifetime appointments and retention votes. It is time to stop pretending judges are or should be beyond 'politics'. What they are beyond is control. Remember 'we the people'? We need to put that giant voting booth shaped boot back on our foot - including recall elections - and get to kicking some overfed, arrogant black-robed butts.

[RonF]

The Constitution requires a "System of public education" - not "A system of public schools". Once the vouchers are defined as part of the "system of education" - they are by definition part of the "system of public education".

I went back and re-read the introduction to the decision, and also read through to what appears to be a more complete text of that article on page 15. The parts of the Florida Constitution that they reference there does not use the phrase "system of public education". It does use the phrase "free public schools". Can you point out to me where the phrase "system of public education" appears?

[RonF]

The intention of the wording in the Constitution is that the state is responsible for a system to educate the public. Not that the state is responsible for a system of public schools.

The wording that I see in the introduction and on page 15 is:

It is, therefore, a paramount duty of the state to make adequate provision for the education of all children residing within it's borders. Adequate provision shall be made by law for a uniform, efficient, safe, secure and high quality system of free public schools ....

It seems to me that this wording quite explictly does mean that the State of Florida is responsible for a system of public schools, and sets forth requirements for them as well. How do you interpret the above wording as not requiring the State of Florida to maintain a public school system?

Note, too, that this puts the State of Florida on the hook to educate any child resident in Florida, regardless of the legality of their presence.

[XR7]

Further, if my taxes go to a religious private school, Jefferson's words would apply to my taxes, as well...

You are right.
The gubbamint has no business running schools.
If people wish to voluntarily contribute funds to form schools for the propagation of opinions which they deem important enough to inculcate their children with, so be it.
But don't hold a gun to my head and say it is my duty as a citizen to contribute.
Jefferson did not bifurcate religious from other opinions. Opinions are just that - opinions.

[Mr. K]

take it to federal court

it'll get there when Alito is confirmed

:D

[satchmodog9]

You also run into a little equal protection problem.

[davidosborne]

Note, too, that this puts the State of Florida on the hook to educate any child resident in Florida, regardless of the legality of their presence.

Hmmmm... and people wonder why we have so many constitutional ammendments in FLORIDA... God HELP the State of FLORIDA !!!

[VRW Conspirator]

Good point- Florida voters can turn this around by voting for vouchers in a constitutional referendum - game, set, match

[BigSkyFreeper]

The same reason as the bastard Dover ruling, perhaps?

What does intelligent design have to do with school vouchers?

[BigSkyFreeper]

Yeah I know. I hate that I pay school taxes when I home schooled and my grandkids go to private school.

If you hate paying the school taxes in your school district, then you should be for school vouchers.

[BigSkyFreeper]

What if the school is private and not connected with a church, religious, or sect? Does it still apply?

God only knows....

Sorry, I couldn't resist

:)

[CindyDawg]

Maybe I should be but I'm not. Mine go to private school. I hear what some say about the money belongs to the tax payers. That's the way it should be but it's not. Government has shown over and over that once an organization accepts our money, that they will slowly start telling them how to run things. There is a reason mine are where they are. Poor kids can go to private schools. Trust me on this. It may not be easy but that's life. If a parent really wants it to happen it will. Sacrifice is not a dirt word.

[CindyDawg]

f people wish to voluntarily contribute funds to form schools for the propagation of opinions which they deem important enough to inculcate their children with, so be it. But don't hold a gun to my head and say it is my duty as a citizen to contribute.

My exact feelings about public schools.

[Archer24]

The answer to why they teach to the test is that they do NOT teach kids how to THINK.

Archer24