Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (18614)	12/4/2003 12:13:11 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793818

Another setback for Vouchers. I fought for them for a long time in California. I now think the best way is to go directly at the Bureaucracy and break the Teacher's Union. December 4, 2003 Colorado's New Voucher Law Is Struck Down in State Court By TAMAR LEWIN New York Times Denver judge struck down Colorado's new school voucher law yesterday, ruling that it violated the state's Constitution by stripping local school boards of their control over education. "The goals of the voucher program are laudable," wrote the judge, Joseph E. Meyer III of District Court. "However, even great ideas must be implemented within the framework of the Colorado Constitution. By stripping all discretion from the local district over the instruction to be provided in the voucher program, the General Assembly has violated Article IX, Section 15." The Colorado voucher law, enacted in April and scheduled to take effect with the next school year, would have made vouchers available to low-income, low-achieving students in school districts with eight or more low-performing schools. Other districts would have had the choice of participating or not. But the ruling blocked the carrying out of the plan, known officially as the Colorado Opportunity Contract Pilot Program. Gov. Bill Owens, a Republican, said he would appeal the ruling. "Securing school choice for the children of Colorado was a long legislative struggle," Mr. Owens said in a statement, "and there was always the likelihood the struggle would extend to the courts as well. Children from low-income families should not be facing a dead end if they are in a school that is below par. They deserve a choice, and that is why we will appeal the court's decision." The lead plaintiff in the challenge to the voucher plan was the Colorado PTA, which was represented by lawyers from the Colorado Education Association and the National Education Association. Other religious and advocacy groups were also plaintiffs, along with several individuals. Opponents of the voucher plan, which budget officials estimated would ultimately take $90 million a year out of the participating districts, argue that the loss of that money and the departure of so many students would undermine the public schools. The Colorado Education Association, which represents 37,000 teachers in the state, hailed the ruling as an important victory for local control. "Today's decision reinforces our long-held belief that our statewide system of public education is rightly founded on the principle of local control," the association said in a statement. "We will continue to reject all attempts to bring vouchers to Colorado. They are an unproven scheme that diverts attention, energy and resources from efforts to provide every child with a great public education." Most previous voucher litigation has centered on the constitutionality of using public money to pay for students to go to religious schools. But in June 2002, the United States Supreme Court upheld Cleveland's voucher program, 5 to 4, even though the majority of the nearly 4,000 students in the program used their money to attend parochial schools. The Colorado challenge raised religious questions under the state constitution, but the religious issues were separated before the case went to trial last month, and had been scheduled for trial later this month. In yesterday's ruling, the judge addressed only the issue of local control, and a claim, which he rejected, that because the voucher plan would have required the participation of only 11 districts in the state it was illegal "special legislation." "Colorado's one of only six states with this kind of local-control provision in its Constitution," said Chip Mellor, president of the Institute for Justice, the conservative Washington public interest group that intervened on behalf of parents who wanted vouchers, "and even though Florida, which has a voucher plan, is another of those six, the issue hasn't been raised anywhere else." He added, "The state's role in setting the agenda for education has expanded so much in recent years that there's been all kinds of intrusion on the old idea of local control." nytimes.com