The radical right and their allies claim they are strict constructionists of the Constitution. They don’t feel the same way about State Constitutions. Even when the State Constitution explicitly says that public money is to be used only for public schools, the far-right celebrates when the Legislature passes a voucher program that violates the State Constitution.
This is the case in Nevada, where the Constitution is very clear about where public money should go: to public schools only. Yet Nevada passed the most sweeping voucher legislation in the nation, and the allegedly strict constructionists have thrown their principles to the wind. The fact is that they care more about free markets than about the State Constitution.
Here is the complaint that was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs challenging Nevada’s sweeping voucher law.
“EducateNevadaNow” is the organization that is leading the charge against vouchers. Here is its question-and-answer sheet about the lawsuit:
On September 9, 2015, a group of parents whose children attend Nevada public schools filed a lawsuit challenging the State’s new voucher law. The lawsuit, Lopez v. Schwartz, has generated media attention and interest from parents, educators and taxpayers.
Today’s frequently asked questions focus on what the parents hope to achieve and next steps in the process.
Q: Are the parents suing for money damages?
A: No. The parents are only suing to stop the voucher program and keep it from taking away funding from the education of their children in the public schools. They are not asking for any money. Additionally, the attorneys representing the parents are providing their legal services for free or “pro bono.”
FACT: The Nevada Constitution states that the funding provided for public schools can only be used to operate those schools and not for any other purposes.
Q: What are the next steps in the parents’ lawsuit?
A: The case has been filed before Judge James Wilson in Carson City, Nevada. The parents will be asking Judge Wilson to declare the voucher law unconstitutional and to block the State Treasurer from implementing the voucher law.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
But if the student would be home-schooled, the money still does not come to the public school.
So what’s the difference?
LikeLike
Rudy,
Have you looked up and read what the state constitution says about public education and its funding?
From said document on funding public education:
“Section 2. Uniform system of common schools. The legislature shall provide for a uniform system of common schools, by which a school shall be established and maintained in each school district at least six months in every year, and any school district which shall allow instruction of a sectarian character therein may be deprived of its proportion of the interest of the public school fund during such neglect or infraction, and the legislature may pass such laws as will tend to secure a general attendance of the children in each school district upon said public schools.
Section 6. Support of university and common schools by direct legislative appropriation; priority of appropriations. [Effective through November 21, 2016, and after that date unless the provisions of Senate Joint Resolution No. 8 (2013) are agreed to and passed by the 2015 Legislature and approved and ratified by the voters at the 2016 General Election.]
1. In addition to other means provided for the support and maintenance of said university and common schools, the legislature shall provide for their support and maintenance by direct legislative appropriation from the general fund, upon the presentation of budgets in the manner required by law.
2. During a regular session of the Legislature, before any other appropriation is enacted to fund a portion of the state budget for the next ensuing biennium, the Legislature shall enact one or more appropriations to provide the money the Legislature deems to be sufficient, when combined with the local money reasonably available for this purpose, to fund the operation of the public schools in the State for kindergarten through grade 12 for the next ensuing biennium for the population reasonably estimated for that biennium.
3. During a special session of the Legislature that is held between the end of a regular session in which the Legislature has not enacted the appropriation or appropriations required by subsection 2 to fund education for the next ensuing biennium and the first day of that next ensuing biennium, before any other appropriation is enacted other than appropriations required to pay the cost of that special session, the Legislature shall enact one or more appropriations to provide the money the Legislature deems to be sufficient, when combined with the local money reasonably available for this purpose, to fund the operation of the public schools in the State for kindergarten through grade 12 for the next ensuing biennium for the population reasonably estimated for that biennium.
4. During a special session of the Legislature that is held in a biennium for which the Legislature has not enacted the appropriation or appropriations required by subsection 2 to fund education for the biennium in which the special session is being held, before any other appropriation is enacted other than appropriations required to pay the cost of that special session, the Legislature shall enact one or more appropriations to provide the money the Legislature deems to be sufficient, when combined with the local money reasonably available for this purpose, to fund the operation of the public schools in the State for kindergarten through grade 12 for the population reasonably estimated for the biennium in which the special session is held.
5. Any appropriation of money enacted in violation of subsection 2, 3 or 4 is void.
6. As used in this section, “biennium” means a period of two fiscal years beginning on July 1 of an odd-numbered year and ending on June 30 of the next ensuing odd-numbered year.
Sec: 9. Sectarian instruction prohibited in common schools and university. No sectarian instruction shall be imparted or tolerated in any school or University that may be established under this Constitution.
Section Ten. No public money to be used for sectarian purposes. No public funds of any kind or character whatever, State, County or Municipal, shall be used for sectarian purpose.”
Seems rather clear cut to me. How couldn’t vouchers not be unconstitutional?
LikeLike
Rudy,
You sir have a lot of courage to state the obvious in this blog. I agree with you. Great to see someone able to explain this simple analysis. Unless you can force all children to attend public schools only (using some form of penalty or punishment), the funding does not come to public school. So what is the difference?
LikeLike
Simply because just because the school would have gotten more money, it is now indeed getting less. Perhaps the funding system hinges on some people making this choice (in that an adequately funded system would plan for every child to attend the local school) – but part of what keeps taxes lower is that schools have not needed to give that funding to every family with any given number of children.
Also, given that the funding system is not designed to accommodate this, schools that were hardly running a surplus before, are now receiving even less funding because those home schooled children are getting “their share” of the taxes.
Common schools means that the schools are subject to certain public controls on costs, selection of what the public is paying for (what kids need to know), and that there are certain efficiencies that can be brought into play (sharing teachers, for instance).
With paying for homeschooled children, there’s nothing common about the services they are given. Aside from the point of the funding system is simply not taking them into account right now. To adequately fund public schools plus this, taxes need to go up a whole lot.
LikeLike
There is a civic obligation to support public schools, plain and simple.
LikeLike
When “public education” as we know it in 2015 has issues, why should I support something which fails to do what is is intended to do?
Whether you agree or not, many of the non-public schools have delivered better results – all the way before there EVER was a NCLB around. One of the reasons is the strict discipline (when used with common sense!!!) and the expectation for students to excel. That expectation is no longer obvious. From my perspective, it all started with this, “Everyone is a winner…” Might I refer to a current KIA commercial – a trophy is handed out to the winning team, “Participant Trophy.” Why bother?
When “social promotion” became popular (You cannot let a child redo a grade! That would make him/her feel terrible), something was lost.
When there are rules about participation in school sports (Like a specific GPA, and Districts decide to lower that expectation – “at least they will come to school…” something was lost.
When we have the lower performing group, and the higher performing group getting all the attention, what happens with the rest of the group? Something was lost.
When the only drive was to get kids academically ready for college, and vocational schools were done away with, something was lost. We push all kids into the same mold, under the motto, “College and Career Ready” and fail in both!
A professor I had when I was in college quit teaching. At the time, he was head of the department. Almost 20 years later, he thought about starting to teach again. When I asked him after the first semester what he was going to do, his response was, “Rudy, I’m not ready to teach freshmen how to study…” And that was BEFORE NCLB came around.
I know, I’m just an immigrant, so what do I know?
LikeLike
“When ‘public education’ as we know it in 2015 has issues, why should I support something which fails to do what is is intended to do?”
Well, then! I want my tax dollars returned to me for the failed Iraq adventure of 2003, and for Viet Nam, too!
LikeLike
Rudy,
As a rhetorical tool, ending one’s argument with the teenage equivalent of “Whatever” and an eye roll (“so what do I know”) weakens one’s position and gives the feeling that one isn’t prepared to entertain any further conversation on the subject. This may be among the reasons why your comments here have roused the ire of others, who really are trying to have a conversation. You might as well have dropped the mic and left the room, and it would have been just as effective — which is to say, not at all.
LikeLike
Thank you for pointing out what is wrong with funding “following the child”. Didn’t think you understood that point.
LikeLike
Rudy. Why are you here?
LikeLike
Obiously has nothing to do with his time but look for ways to annoy serious people…
LikeLike
Some say I’m a troll – whatever that is. Who knows, I might be paid to sent these posts to increase traffic on this blog…?
Or I just might be someone who is trying to get a grip on education in this country because I have three young granddaughters who are starting through this process of being education. And I want them to be the best possible education in this country.
You decide…
LikeLike
Rudy, shelly, shelliekins, michelle = Let me wish for you that all your grandchildren go to charter schools, because where they live there become no other choices, and all their teachers are from TFA. Then, you can have some real world experience. As my friends say, “good for you” – or GFY – which means something else all together. And this might get me banned, but I really, RHeely, can’t tolerate your idiotic and inflammatory comments. So, mission accomplished, troll.
LikeLike
So much for teaching critical thinking skills. The moment someone disagrees with you, you get offensive and foul mouthed.
Shame on you.
LikeLike
At least I can form a full sentence with proper grammar, Michelle, Shelly, Rude-y. May your grandchildren be better educated, so they can teach you.
LikeLike
Tell you what, Donna. I don’t know how old you are, nor do I care. But you make a life changing move from one culture to another, from one language to another, and then we will see how well you do, okay?
At that time you may feel free to correct my grammar without me wondering…
LikeLike
Rudy: The money to give to home schoolers has to come from somewhere. Unless additional funding is being given to public schools to make up for the money being taken to give to home schoolers (which would raise taxes or take money from some other budget), then money IS coming out of the education budget.
I, for one, do not want my tax money to go to schools where I can’t see how the money is being used, which includes home schools, private schools, and charter schools.
LikeLike
Now there is an argument that speaks. Thank you.
Home schooled kids do not get paid from tax money – but are paying their property tax.
Private schools do not get paid from tax money -but are paying their property tax AND very high private tuition.
Some charter schools are part of public schools and do get tax dollars – and are accountable (maybe. What accountability is available??)
LikeLike
Rudy, we have public libraries, and some people never use them but still pay taxes for them. Should the state pay for everyone’s private library?
LikeLike
I’m one of those who does not use the library. On the other hand, if it was not for me the local Goodwill store would not exist anymore.
I pay property taxes but have no kids in the system. But I have no issue with vouchers. Provided the educators are both qualified and accountable.
LikeLike
Rudy, in some states, teachers at voucher schools do not need certification. Just the right religion. How about a generation of creationist scientists?
LikeLike
Having read the current favorites of the Evolution defense team (Gould and Dawkins), I hope the next generation will be a little lower on the “maybes, could bes, possibles and other vague expressions. And, for that matter, a little less faith in extra terrestrial beings…
I think that if kids are taught to think critically, they should be able to work through the difficult questions in life. And yes, I think that teaching both sides of the argument rather than ridiculing either side makes a lot more sense than what is happening now.
Personally, I happen to disagree with the evolution theory (Not because of religious reasons, but factual). But I am also against those who say that the earth is but 6,000 years old, the Bible teaches that. Knowing from having read that book too, a time or something, I know that is NOT the case.
Teach kids to think, but honestly. Give them both sides of the argument, show arguments from both sides, and let them argue it out.
And in answer to your question about creation scientists – there is a respectable group of scientists in all branches who have done their professions proud; same as with evolution scientists. Their outlook on origins should not have anything to do with their scientific results.
Just because a scientist has found the arguments for evolution wanting (as every critical thinking person should, btw – you cannot prove a theory by using the vagueness as found in both authors – and many others – mentioned above) does not make them less of a scientist.
That is like Phyllis Schafly yelling at a Republican Convention that all Democrats are for abortion!
LikeLike
The modern neopol (= neoconlib, not the ice cream) is just plain evil. Their philosophy is “all’s fair in war and making a buck” and nothing could be finer than combining the two. If democracy gets in the way of making war and making a buck then democracy must be destroyed.
LikeLike
“. . . and nothing could be finer than combining the two.”
Except adding in a bit of xtian religion.
LikeLike
IF I have the choice to teach my children at home, what is the problem with that? From what I have seen/read, they are often better educated then kids going to public schools…
I know there will be a lot of boos and hisses, but that fact remains…
Not quite sure what xtian thought has to do with that – other than there is some deeper thinking, more critical thinking being taught… I went to public schools, and was taught along the way by my parents not to accept everything I was taught. I passed that same thought on to my children when they were in public school. None of us were damaged…
LikeLike
Rudy,
Xtian thought added here is meant to show that usually that the combination is a trio and not a duo. Nothing more, nothing less. And it certainly doesn’t have anything to do with your first question. See below for a comment directed to you. Gracias.
LikeLike
“…they are often better educated *then* kids going to public schools…” [Emphasis added]
Or not.
LikeLike
“OFTEN – many a time, on many/numerous occasions”
“ALWAYS – at all times; on all occasion”
By using the term “OFTEN,” it is obviously realized that it is not “ALWAYS” the case…
LikeLike
There IS no problem with homeschooling your kids. However, my tax money shouldn’t be doing to home schools where there is no guarantee that students are receiving a sufficient education. I have had many home school students transfer into my school, and only once was a home school student even near grade level. All of the other home school students I have had have been well below grade level.
LikeLike
@Rudy S. You absolutely have the choice to educate your children at home, or to send them to a religious or nonsectarian private institution for an education. What you _don’t_ have, under this constitution, is the right to divert any portion of your or anyone else’s tax revenues from supporting common schools because you wish to do this. You are not buying education for your child, you are maintaining an institution believed to be crucial to the common good.
LikeLike
Cross posted at
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Nevada-Lawsuit-Seeks-to-O-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Diane-Ravitch_Education_Education-For-All_Education-Funding-151026-164.html#comment568966 with a comment with embedded links to here.
Go to my quick link series here at oped and see how fast the legislatures are taking over public education and wrecking the road to opportunity for our citizens.
or go to the Ravitch blog and put it privatization or legislatures, and get the TRUTH… IT IS HAPPENING AT LIGHTENING SPEED, AND SOON IT WILL BE TOO LATE!
LikeLike
It’s a shame when the entire state focus becomes ed reform experiments because public schools become a distant second in lawmaker priorities.
I’m to the point where I’m not sure that’s a bad thing for public schools since the only thing they seem to get when they DO garner some attention from ed reformers is unfunded mandates and punishment schemes. It becomes a choice between neglect and abuse.
LikeLike
I’m almost to the point where it might be better for public schools to go “money follows the child”.
If they do that, can they drop the duty to serve as a backup to the “choice” sector? They might actually come out ahead in the wholly privatized system ed reform wants.
Right now they have the worst of both worlds- they have all the duty for the public system but none of the benefits.
LikeLike
Money follows the child though only works when you can select the children. We KNOW that special ed kids are by and large underfunded (except if you’re a cyber charter in Pennsylvania). So if money follows the child, we end up with what we have now anyway except that now everyone with children can “cash in” because SOMEONE has to be willing to take high needs special ed and ELL kids – that will end up being the public schools.
This emphasizes the points that schools are not businesses, and we do not pick and choose our kids (the Blueberries analogy, basically which I could never say better).
LikeLike
What if public schools just called their bluff, though?
“Okay, money follows the child and we’re just a portfolio option. Agreed. We want the same rules as private schools as far as ability to pick and choose students”
The voucher schools could not exist without the public system. Why should public schools serve that role? If “public” just means “publicly funded” then why doesn’t that also apply to public schools?
We can be the “public option” in the marketplace of school services, but not without the same advantages private schools are afforded. Otherwise public schools will always be at a competitive disadvantage. If they love markets so much let’s set up a real one, where the rules are the same for everyone.
LikeLike
They’d love that – because then they’d get exactly equal funding while carrying no legacy costs as well as being able to make teachers work for pennies compared to their counterparts, and reduce their healthcare to free up enough money.
Right now, Public schools don’t have excess to use in such a manner and could only compete if labor was willing to take huge concessions on working conditions, working times, and pay scales.
Nevermind that they would love that concept – because then NOONE has to teach the highest needs kids which flies in the face of both Title 1 and IDEA.
Bottomline is we do need a school system willing to accept anyone, and a system of choice encourages and permits a form of segregation that is bad for society and will create a permanent underclass that cannot get a good education, and their parents will likely be a drain as well as they struggle to care for them with their own stagnant wages.
In a stand up free market fight, the way the budgets are structured, public schools cannot win and the only way we can is to contort ourselves in the shameful ways we find that charters do to juke their stats – which has a very human cost (burned out teachers, children with no playtime, lack of creative thinking, opportunity cost etc).
LikeLike
The Nevada constitution is quite clear. Apparently some folks just do not understand clear English language.
LikeLike
Rudy S,
Again:
Have you looked up and read what the state constitution says about public education and its funding? (now you have no excuse to not have read the pertinent parts)
and
After reading the wording, how couldn’t vouchers not be unconstitutional? Or how could one declare that they are constitutional?
LikeLike
Watching Treasurer Dan Schwartz being interviewed by Jon Ralston a few days ago, this super voucher becomes a free check to almost everyone – no strings attached.
For example, a family lives in Nevada but sends their child to school in Utah or California – Schwartz would give them a check.
Parents are supposed to “self-regulate”.
This voucher is not going to go for education. It will be a check to any family, anywhere for the length of a child’s life without any formal regulation.
LikeLike
The irony is that the extremist’s who control the Treasurer’s office claim they are all about the “free market”.
Nevada doesn’t have a significant market for private schools.
There are only a few private schools. And most of these of these private schools are religious.
This super voucher was not supposed to go to home-schoolers. Home-schoolers claimed they did not want the voucher in legislature testimony.
Now all of a sudden anyone can apply for these funds for any reason – and any sort of educational thing is acceptable. So “choice” apparently means anything – does it include buying a cadillac to travel with your child while they “study”. I bet Schwartz would say that qualifies too – even if you are in another state.
And we now have to spend government money attracting educational corporations to come to Nevada.
Nothing about this is “free market”. This is about promoting fraud and scams.
LikeLike
And don’t get me started about these information sessions – where rich white people scream for their cash.
This super voucher is discrimination on steroids.
There is nothing good or decent about this plan. And the extremists or should I say anarchists implementing it are crazy and eager to pass out checks to friends as fast as they can.
LikeLike
http://watch.knpb.org/video/2365588263/
This is Treasurer Dan Schwartz.
LikeLike
http://watch.knpb.org/video/2365588263/
You cannot make this up.
Let me try to summarize . . .
It will cost Nevadans half a million dollars to hire 5 people to distribute the super voucher checks to 3,500 families. They plan to pass out checks in February instead of April.
The super voucher has two rules – 100 days of attendance in public school and two standardized tests.
The Treasurer is encouraging people to write the Governor if they want to “get around” the rules – especially military families and Kindergarten families. Special education families, not so much – those families can wait 15 months and convince the legislature they are worthy of an exception too? Watch the video if you do not believe me.
If you watch to the end of the interview, Treasurer Schwartz tries to defend hiring MacDonald who is accused of embezzlement while serving as a Republican Party Leader.
I cannot believe the continued mismanagement.
Previously the Treasurer rolled out this first-come-first-serve program in a fashion that calls the entire super voucher into question. I would personally love to see the first 20 applicant names since it seems some were considered to have applied before the applications were available to everyone. Since the roll-out, the Treasurer’s office and associated NPRI events have been a continuous campaign to undermine the only two requirements – most especially the 100 day rule. Promoting the super voucher checks for a variety of families up to and including “Nevada” students attending school in other states? Now the Treasurer apparently draws the line at special education students? Wow.
If I ran my classroom like this Treasurer runs his office, I would be fired.
Extremists like Treasurer Schwartz and company really cannot connect with reality or function fairly.
In my cash strapped state which does not adequately support at-risk learners, this crazy dysfunctional and financially irresponsible behavior is the ultimate crime against the community.
No rules for some – hold your hand out for your tax payer funded check? Where is the accountability?
Complete and utter fiasco.
How can anyone claiming to be a conservative support any or all of the above?
Mismanagement.
Angie.
LikeLike
I appreciate what Rudy has to say, even if I don’t agree with all of it. As with many things in this society, polarizing and denigrating those who disagree is negative and counter-productive. We need to find common ground.
As a teacher of some years at my wits’ end with behavior issues, ever-increasing illiteracy among my students, a system that might best be described as “nuts,” and so on, I wish to bring together those who believe in public education and find practical solutions in both short- and long-term.
Right now, I am anti-corporatist, but I believe charters may have a place. Balance, moderation, transparency, and lack of corruption would be keys to a system where charters can function as a positive alternative for some.
Please, listen to those who don’t share your views.
LikeLike