In 1993 the NH Supreme Court discovered a “hidden-in-plain-sight” constitutional “duty” of our State “legislators” to “cherish,” i.e, fund, an “adequate” education in “public schools.” Historically public schools were locally funded.
Despite two ongoing lawsuits disputing the amount of State funding necessary for this obligation, legislators now propose to expand taxpayer obligations to fund both public and private schools. Does this make sense? Why assume second obligation before resolving the magnitude of the first?
Doesn’t this at least merit a ballot question before obligating taxpayers to fund Universal Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs) of $5,000 or more for every student who wishes to attend private school? It’s a new tax, not something that folks have been paying since 1784.
Every time “school choice” has been put to a vote of the people, they’ve rejected it, mostly by 2 to 1 margins.
State legislators wish to go against the will of the people. It’s only one small step from State funded EFAs (vouchers) to State funded building aid for private schools:
In an Unprecedented Move, Ohio Is Funding the Construction of Private Religious Schools:
“The state is giving millions in taxpayer dollars directly to private schools to help them renovate and expand their campuses. It may be the next frontier in the push to increase the use of school vouchers, proponents say.”
With public schools, there are locally elected representatives of the people. With private schools, it’s taxation without representation soon to be State regulated.
Looks like taxpayers are in for a wildly expansive ride, funding all sorts of schools. Buckle up!
