U.S. Senator Kyl Statement on Supreme Court Ruling in Favor of Parental Choice

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl today issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling supporting the Cleveland school-choice program:

"Today's decision is the most important decision for America's schoolchildren since Brown v. Board of Education. For too long, defenders of a system that has failed millions of American children have hidden behind pseudo-constitutional arguments to keep alternatives at bay. Now we can and must have an honest debate about whether parents should be entrusted with choosing the best schools for their children.

"The Supreme Court handed a great victory to parents seeking the best possible range of choices for their kids, and for impoverished schoolchildren trapped in failing schools. It is also a victory for states such as Arizona that are working to provide alternatives to an educational monopoly that works for some children, but fails too many of our most disadvantaged youth."

The Supreme Court handed a great victory to parents seeking the best possible range of choices for their kids, and for impoverished schoolchildren trapped in failing schools.

This is very important. Please, freepers, do not lose sight of what the ruling allows. This does not mandate vouchers in any way, shape or form, and many states will not pass voucher programs. Current voucher programs ONLY allow for students in impoverished schools - no one else. I understand Arizona, and maybe some other states, may have some other proposals that would help more children, but this ruling simply allows for voucher programs already in place. Its a start, thank God, but its not the savior of this nation.

This is the biggest kick in the teeth the evil donkey has taken in a long time. The end of democrat controlled government schools can't be far off. It's great to listen to reds at the people for the American way cry.

I usually support Senator Kyl and most conservative causes, but I'm against school vouchers.

No, not for the same stupid, socialist reasons the NEA and liberals are against them.

I'm against them because they will do the exact opposite of what you say. Oh sure, at first it will appear the parents have greater freedom of where to send their children to school. But one invented crisis after another and soon more and more regulations will be enacted which will serve as the standards under which vouchers are allowed to be used for certain schools. Curriculum content requirements, sex ed/AIDS prevention content, political correctness, evolution theory, etc. etc. If a school doesn't meet these government-imposed requirements, vouchers won't be able to be used to send kids there.

Schools don't want to lose their students and will become dependent upon the voucher funds to meet their budgets. Most will kowtow to the regulations in order to continue to receive the funds. This will not lead to freedom and diversity of schools, but will lead to homogenization and more government control of a wider set of schools that were not previously controlled.

This is the camels nose under the tent for more control of charter and private schools. Just wait and see once vouchers enjoy wide availability. If I didn't homeschool and I was selecting a school to send my children to, it would be the one that refused to take vouchers - kind of like Hillsdale College refuses enroll students who are on government student aid grants and such - those schools will enjoy the most freedom.

Dear President Bush, With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.