Friday, May 25, 2007

Read Senator Scott McCoy's


What the heck does that mean?

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Scott,
Well said!
Even the legislators that voted for vouchers are confused about the language of the law and how to implement it. This has to be the worst piece of legislation ever passed by our Republican led Legislature.

Anonymous said...

I am so tired of this crap. Let's be clear; we are in this voucher mess because of the "Education Coalition".

The Republican-led Legislature ran a bill (HB 148) to implement vouchers. They were able to get the votes in the House, Senate and Governor's office.

The Education Coalition, a group comprised of the State Board, the UEA, the PTA, etc., asked for some minor amendments to the voucher bill. Some of the changes were clarifications and others were needed and reasonable. They approached Rep Brad Last who agreed to run the changes. He opened a bill (HB 174) and ran the changes. The bill passed the House, Senate and was signed by the Governor.

After the session, as we all know, the Education Coalition decided to file a referendum against HB 148 and got the signatures. However, since they couldn't referendum 174 they got the signatures on 148 and have been whining about the confusion ever since.

This is all a ploy because the Education Coalition knows that the more confusion the better because the referendum question needs a no vote in order for it to be overturned. The confusion is being created by the Education Coalition not the pro-vouchers supporters.

Furthermore, the whole concept of repealing HB 174 is not possible. Each legislative session concepts are put into bills and numbered accordingly. HB 222 in 2005 is different than HB 222 in 2006 and HB 222 in 2007. If a Legislature decides to change a law that was passed in a previous session they open a new bill but are actually repealing actual state code or statute.

Herein lies the fallacy: HB 174 is now Utah State Statute 53A-1a-80x. Why should this language be repealed? What if the pro-voucher side wins? Do we not want criminal background checks for teachers in private schools? Furthermore, the language in 174 cannot be repealed or it does away with the voucher language and takes away the need for a referendum vote. That may be what the anti-voucher crowd wants but it is disingenuous.

The pro-voucher crowd played by the rules and passed voucher legislation. I have no problem with the education coalition pushing a referendum but they asked for 174 and the unintended consequences that came from it will have to be resolved by a court.

Let’s not forget that the confusion concept continues to be pushed by the education coalition. Just today, Sheryl Allen filed an emergency action with the State Board. What’s the purpose of this? More confusion!!

What’s more amazing is that no one is asking why all of the fear from the Education Coalition. 16 million dollars from the general fund to see if a concept can improve our education system; it reminds me of a time when we were all deathly afraid of light rail. We even voted against a funding mechanism but some folks decided to keep pushing the concept and now we can’t vote fast enough for a tax increase for light rail.

It’s not that scary people!!

Brett Garner said...

Chris doesn't understand that we are not "trying a concept" in implementing vouchers in Utah. This is not a trial or a test program, this is the whole shebang. This is the largest, most expansive, most expensive voucher experiment in the nation. When vouchers have not been proven to work anywhere (or disproven, for that matter), and when the Utah version continues the trend of having a zero-accountability, apples-and-oranges vouchers versus public schools comparison, we should have such trepidation with our tax dollars.

Unknown said...

"Chris" is spraying his inaccurate and ill-informed message across the Utah bloghive.

Good luck with your propaganda exercise, "Chris".

Anonymous said...

What is inaccurate or ill-informed Craig?