VOUCHER RULING WILL NOT STOP LAWSUIT IN FLORIDA

Tallahassee Democrat ^ | June 28, 2002 | Nancy Cook Lauer

[FreeTally]

This shall be interesting. Some quick commentary:

The ruling is one of the most significant in court history because it dramatically expands the right of parents to demand money from the state to choose the education they want for their children and further blends the legal lines between government and religion.

The ruling does no such thing. It allows other States to enact voucher programs.

[FreeTally]

I searched th Florida Constitution trying to vereify the claims I have bolded. This was the best I could come up with:

SECTION 6. State school fund.--The income derived from the state school fund shall, and the principal of the fund may, be appropriated, but only to the support and maintenance of free public schools.

I could find no explanation as to what the "State School Fund" is, but my assumption is that since "vouchers" are a state law, those filing suit claim the money comes from this "State School Fund" or that you can not distinguish between money rasied by the counties for education or money given by the State.

This shall be interesting. If anyone else can find the reference in the Florida Constitution to what the plantifs claim, please post it.

[FreeTally]

Bump

[summer]

Very interesting article. Thanks for posting, FreeTally.

[summer]

In addition, there is a far more relevant in the FL Constitution, requiring that education provided by the state be what is called an "equal" education. And, it follows logically, that when a student is in a failing school for example, the state is violating its own obligations as expressly stated in the aforementione clause. Consequently, I think FL will prevail here in FL on this issue, due to the specific description mentioned above. The teachers union president seems unaware of this part of the state constitution.

[summer]

In addition, there is a far more relevant clause in the FL Constitution, requiring that education provided by the state be what is called an "equal" education. And, it follows logically, that when a student is in a failing school for example, the state is violating its own obligations as expressly stated in the aforementione clause. Consequently, I think FL will prevail here in FL on this issue, due to the specific description mentioned above. The teachers union president seems unaware of this part of the state constitution.

[summer]

BTW, I read the article before you posted to me! :)

[summer]

Gentlemen, this article gives one a good idea of just how many obstacles exist here in FL for Gov Bush and all the voucher programs he enacted on a statewide basis. Not that you should admire him for trying or anything... :)

[summer]

Please note I emphasize my smile above, because I do understand now the points you two were making to me. It's simply that in addition to now understanding your points, I do have to acknowledge how far ahead Gov Bush is from everyone else. That leadership on his part is something I thinkk deserves to be recognized, IMO.

[summer]

thinkk = think

[summer]

FYI.

[EllaMinnow]

Another fair, unbiased piece of reporting from Nancy Cook Lauer, who gained fame by not standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[Kryptonite]

Aren't there several "teachers of the year" that support Florida's voucher program? It is articles like this that make me cringe about the Florida Kangaroo Court.

[sharkdiver]

"but only to the support and maintenance of free public schools". Free public schools. What a farce. What a joke. It sure as hell is not free to me. I pay thousands of dollars a year in property taxes to support "free public schools".

[=Intervention=]

Of course, the FEA shill doesn't seem to understand that the money does not originate from the state. When I pay my taxes, it's MY MONEY they're taking, and if I can use it to pay for public schools or to pay for a private school, it is my right, because I earned that money. She seems to believe that once the state takes my money, it belongs to the state and we, the contributors, have no say. That is why the whole NEA, FEA, and all of the government dependencies they support need to be extirpiated. They exist merely to argue that we have no say in how we spend or how others spend our money.

[Rome2000]

I think the US Supreme court ruling trumps whatever the State Constitution says, and the shrill idiots from the Florida Education Association and the Kangaroo court in Tallahassee can't do anything about it.

If they could, Gore would be President.

[vanna516]

When will people realize that lawsuits like this are a tremdous waste of taxpayer dollars. Lawsuits against the state deplete money that could be used for other things. If they were really concerned about the children, they would drop the lawsuit and save the state millions that could go for education.

But then again, it's not really about the children - it's about teacher job security.

[B4Ranch]

And, it follows logically, that when a student is in a failing school

That's what was happening nationwide during the 70's, so they lowered the national standards. Problem corrected without spending hundreds of billions, just hundreds of millions. Dumbing down has and will continue to be successful as long as we have the NEA in charge.

A comparison of the education being taught in 1970 with 2001 is the saddest review I ever read. I wish I had retained the link.

[WriteOn]

Expect more local fights than ever before, nationally. The NEA and related organizations won't give up until the last air is choked out of them. They are quite effective at the local level -- the stage off-year battles where they can get out the teacher and PTA vote quite effectively.

[FreeTally]

I think the US Supreme court ruling trumps whatever the State Constitution says, and the shrill idiots from the Florida Education Association and the Kangaroo court in Tallahassee can't do anything about it.

I'm not sure, which is partially why I posted this. I searched the Florida Constiution, but could not quite find the explicit language that said what the plantiffs claim.

However, if the State Constitution did say something like, "Revenue collected for the purpose of education can not be spent on private schools", I think that would stop vouchers dead in their tracts, unless an amendment is proposed to change the language. The SCOTUS ruling was on Federal issues, and, IMHO, does not disallow verbage in State Constitutions explicitly stating how tax money is to be spent on education.