|
| |
|
The Siren Song of Judicial
Activism |
 December
31, 2004
- Just as the Sirens’ song was supposed to lure
sailors to their death, thus is the effect Judicial Activism will have on
our Constitution. No matter what form it takes, legislating from the bench
violates the intentional separation of the three branches of government and
threatens the integrity of the rule of law.
That being said, school districts have discovered that the judiciary leans
sympathetic toward their cries of unfunded mandates. Many have sought court
rulings to
require acting legislative bodies to dispense with what has been determined
by "educrats” as a sufficient dispensation of money to produce a quality
education, with varying degrees of success or failure.
That the judiciary branch of government has found a means to disregard their
clearly defined role is something that should be addressed by those in
power. One only needs to contemplate the damage that can be done by
egotistic judges who purport to know the best use of taxpayer dollars to
understand the urgency; case in point, Kentucky.
A massive infusion of funds does not necessarily solve underlying causes of
a poor education. The Kentucky Education Reform Act, in response to the
Supreme Court's mandate in the (1989) Rose v. Council of Better Education
decision, increased per pupil revenue from $3,360 to $7,533 per student over
a ten year period. However, ACT scores remain flat and student enrollment
decreased. Ironically, enrollment in independent schools has increased
faster there, than anywhere else in the country.
Because
the glass ceiling has been broken, more and more judges act in what they
feel are in the best interests of their constituents and aren’t bound by
their office –with very few exceptions; State District Judge Duke Welch of
Baton Rouge, La., for example, ruled on the basis of precedents that judges
don’t have a right to decide how the legislature allots funds.
Earlier this year (2004), in Massachusetts, the court decided in Hancock v.
Driscoll, what must be included in an adequate education. Those familiar
with educational theories and practices, who actually research solutions to
public education, would find plenty to disagree with its finding.
Even though in Kentucky, increased funding didn’t correct poor performance,
the New York school system, looks to that state as its model.
In Texas, it’s been decided by the courts that the Texas school system isn’t
provided with adequate funding to meet the educational requirements of that
system. Astoundingly, four court cases there resulted in Robin Hood
financing of the poorer school districts by redistributing the property tax
revenue of wealthier districts. Not only that, the judiciary gave itself the
power to review whether the legislature has made proper policy choices as
denoted in the Texas Constitution.
I advocate that parents be put in charge of where and how their children are
educated and that they be given financial incentives to pursue the most
appropriate education for their child. The cost of choosing alternative
education should be refunded through tuition tax credits. Under no
circumstances should judicial activists funnel more tax dollars into the
current monopoly of public education, especially money that has to be
embezzled by strip mining the Constitution of it’s mandate to protect life,
liberty, and property; and leaving it open for a socialist interpretation.
The Ghost of Claremont future
http://www4.citizen.com/December_2004/12.23.04/comment/commentary_12_23_04b.asp
Reminder from the Big Apple
http://www.kypost.com/2004/12/08/kedita120804.html
Judge tosses suit over Louisiana school funding
http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=2689653
A shift in the educational wind
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/10338766.htm
Money's no fix
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/258925p-221789c.html
|
|
