While Florida's legislature is attempting to undo its constitution's "no aid to religion" provision (the move passed a Senate committee yesterday), Nevada's is considering a move that would merely strip the measure of any impact. SJR 10 amends the state's constitution to "clarify" that the "no aid" restriction does not apply to education, clearing the way for a school voucher program.
The Nevada News Bureau reports on yesterday's Senate committee hearing on the proposed change, including some on the panel who spoke against the idea.
Craig Stevens, representing the Nevada State Education Association, said private schools can and should exist, but they are private to keep government regulation out of their classrooms. Why should a private school receive tax money if it is not going to be accountable to the taxpayers, he asked.
Nevada has choice, with magnet schools and charter schools, but they are all public schools that are accountable to taxpayers, Stevens said.
Also testifying in opposition was Allen Lichtenstein, a Las Vegas attorney representing the ACLU of Nevada, who said in his prepared remarks: “SJR10 attempts to do away with the wisdom of the early founders of our state, and a mechanism used to insure religious harmony for well over the past century, for a new scheme that in the name of furthering education, is, in fact, designed to aid religion with our tax money.”
Is it much better to leave the "no aid to religion" protection technically in place, but leave it toothless, than to repeal it altogether? Why would taxpayers deserve this historic safeguard any less when it comes to education, a primary purpose and expenditure of local government?
