Quality of Education vs Funding

[CNHT]

http://www.norcalblogs.com/post_scripts/

Interesting Quinto research data on this site.

[CNHT]

Note the 'collective arrogance' of this writer...who doesn't sign his name. Fire up your word processors please!


New Hampshire Views

Those who defy courts always have a 'theory'
The Valley News
April 28. 2007 8:00AM

For years, they have ignored their tax obligations, defied the courts and concocted increasingly bizarre theories to justify their behavior. Now they are holed up in the house, hoping for a miracle.
Yes, New Hampshire's elected officials do have a lot in common with Ed and Elaine Brown of Plainfield. The main difference is that the Browns have now each been sentenced to serve more than five years in prison. No one has yet called the Legislature to account.

The Browns have contended all along that there is no law that requires them to pay federal income taxes, a hypothesis they tested over the past decade while earning an estimated $1.9 million. A U.S. District Court jury decided in January that the Browns had persisted in this risky experiment despite receiving ample notification that the theory was without merit. The result was convictions for conspiring to defraud the federal government and, in Elaine Brown's case, income tax evasion as well.

The Browns failed to appear for sentencing this week, apparently intent on implementing another shaky theory - that the legal system has no jurisdiction over them. For the moment, they remain secluded at their home while U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier waits patiently for them to surrender.

Meanwhile in Concord, members of the New Hampshire House are soon to take up Gov. John Lynch's proposed constitutional amendment on education funding, which has already been approved by the Senate.


The purpose of this amendment is to evade the state's constitutional obligation, as laid out in a series of rulings by the state Supreme Court, to define what constitutes an adequate public education for New Hampshire schoolchildren and to pay for it with statewide taxes that are fair and proportional.
On one level, it's a little hard to figure out why a constitutional amendment is necessary now, since the Legislature and a succession of governors have flatly ignored the court's directives in Brown-like fashion for more than a decade. Perhaps Lynch and legislative leaders fear that the game is almost up, given that last year the Supreme Court indicated that its patience was at last wearing thin and hinted that it might impose a judicial remedy unless the Legislature complied.

The amendment is also necessary to sustain the state's continued evasion of taxes. If an adequate education were defined honestly in New Hampshire and its cost calculated fairly, a broad-based tax certainly would be required to pay for it under the current court order.

Lynch's answer is to enshrine in the New Hampshire Constitution the right of schoolchildren to an inadequate education by obligating the state to pay for only 50 percent of its costs, while presumably shifting the remainder onto the archaic local property tax. The rationale for this is that it would permit the state to "target" more aid to needy communities - a right it already has as long as it fully funds its obligation to provide an adequate education for all.

There's good reason for backers of this bizarre amendment to be concerned about whether it will win approval in the House or, if it does, ratification by the state's voters eventually. It's a tough sell to amend the constitution to permit unequal treatment of school kids.

In its time of trial, perhaps the Legislature should adopt another expedient to which the Browns have already turned. A mysterious bearded holy man from Hawaii who dresses in white is said to have visited them recently and apparently has convinced the couple that all law comes directly from the Bible. Perhaps this is the type of spiritual adviser whom the Legislature will consult while examining its collective