Judge rules voucher funding is unconstitutional

Advocate staff photo by LIBBY ISENHOWER --  Scott Richard, executive director of Louisiana School Boards Association, center, speaks to media Friday outside the 19th Judicial District Courthouse in Baton Rouge about District Judge Tim Kelley's ruling, finding the state's school voucher program unconstitutional. Richard is accompanied at left by East Baton Rouge Parish School Board Vice-President Tarvald Smith and at right by Louisiana Federation of Teachers President Steve Monaghan and Louisiana Association of Educators President Joyce Haynes. Show caption
Advocate staff photo by LIBBY ISENHOWER -- Scott Richard, executive director of Louisiana School Boards Association, center, speaks to media Friday outside the 19th Judicial District Courthouse in Baton Rouge about District Judge Tim Kelley's ruling, finding the state's school voucher program unconstitutional. Richard is accompanied at left by East Baton Rouge Parish School Board Vice-President Tarvald Smith and at right by Louisiana Federation of Teachers President Steve Monaghan and Louisiana Association of Educators President Joyce Haynes.

Program ruled unconstitutional

A Baton Rouge judge ruled Friday that Louisiana’s expanded voucher program, and another key legislatively approved piece of Gov. Bobby Jindal’s plan to overhaul public schools, “unconstitutionally divert” public funds to private and parochial schools.

Attorneys for the state and school-choice advocates pledged a swift appeal of state District Judge Tim Kelley’s ruling and stressed that the judge’s decision will not have an impact this school year on the nearly 5,000 public school students statewide who qualified for vouchers to attend private or parochial schools.

“Today’s ruling is wrong-headed and a travesty for parents across Louisiana who want nothing more than for their children to have an equal opportunity at receiving a great education,” Jindal said in a news release. “That opportunity is a chance that every child deserves, and we will continue the fight to give it to them.

“The opinion sadly ignores the rights of families who do not have the means necessary to escape failing schools,” he added. “On behalf of the citizens that cast their votes for reform, the parents who want more choices, and the kids who deserve a chance, we will appeal today’s decision, and I’m confident we will prevail.”

Kelley’s ruling came at the end of a three-day trial of consolidated lawsuits, filed by Louisiana’s two largest teacher unions and the state’s school boards association, challenging the legality of Act 2 and Senate Concurrent Resolution 99, both of the 2012 legislative session.

Act 2 is the so-called voucher bill, and SCR 99 is the Minimum Foundation Program resolution. Public school aid in the state goes through the MFP formula. This year, it provides $3.4 billion in basic state aid for school operations and students statewide.

Under Act 2, students who attend public schools rated C, D or F under the state accountability system and who meet income rules can apply for state aid to attend private or parochial schools. The vouchers provide aid to cover tuition and mandatory fees at private and parochial schools. Those schools collect an average of $5,300 per student from the state.

The new expanded program began with the start of the school year in August. Before the new law, the state offered vouchers only to certain students in New Orleans.

Kelley, who issued a 39-page written ruling, said from the bench that Act 2 and SCR 99 unconstitutionally divert to nonpublic entities “MFP funds that are constitutionally mandated to be allocated to public elementary and secondary schools.”

The judge also said in court that the act and concurrent resolution unconstitutionally divert to nonpublic entities “local funds included in the MFP that are constitutionally mandated to be allocated” to public schools. Local funds refers to tax dollars.

“While the Court does not dispute the serious nature of these proceedings nor the impact and potential effects on Louisiana’s educational systems, vital public dollars raised and allocated for public schools through the MFP cannot be lawfully diverted to nonpublic schools or entities,” Kelley wrote in his ruling.

“This Court does not propose to foreclose the State from establishing educational programs that are funded outside the constitutional limitations of the Minimum Foundation Program,” he added.

The lawsuits by the Louisiana Federation of Teachers, Louisiana Association of Educators and Louisiana School Boards Association were filed against the state Department of Education and the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

“We strongly disagree with the ruling,” Education Superintendent John White said in a prepared statement. “We are optimistic this decision will be reversed on appeal.”

BESE President Penny Dastugue said in a news release that “this legal battle attempts to prevent children who have been assigned to persistently failing schools the opportunity for a better education at the school their parents have determined is in their best interest.”

LFT President Steve Monaghan, in an interview Friday outside the courthouse, stressed that the case involved a constitutional challenge and said, “It isn’t a battle over who loves children the most.”

“We want to do what’s right for our children,” LAE President Joyce Haynes added. “It’s not vouchers that’s going to do it.”

LSBA Executive Director Scott Richard, also outside the courthouse, said Kelley’s decision “was made in the best interest of all students statewide.”

LFT attorney Larry Samuel, also speaking outside the courthouse, said because Kelley declared Act 2 and SCR 99 unconstitutional, any appeal would go directly to the Louisiana Supreme Court.

U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said in a news release that it was “no surprise” that Kelley declared the “unnecessarily aggressive and overreaching statewide voucher program unconstitutional.”

“A strategic use of state-funded vouchers could be appropriate, but this diversion of public education dollars was a step too far and diminishes resources for meaningful reform efforts already under way at the local level,” she said.

Karen Carter Peterson, who chairs the Louisiana Democratic Party, called for an “immediate halt” to Jindal’s voucher program and a return of all funding and students to local public school districts.

“We urge the Governor not to appeal this decision and to refrain from inflicting further needless harm on the public school system by pursuing this unconstitutional program,” she said in a prepared statement.

The Black Alliance for Educational Options, the Alliance for School Choice and several parents intervened in the case on the side of the state defendants.

Bill Maurer, an attorney with the Institute for Justice, which represents the families using the voucher program, said there are strong grounds for an appeal.

“There are clear precedents that allow this program, and many others like it that already exist, to be funded through this means,” he said outside the courthouse. “Simply put, the trial court’s ruling is inconsistent with Louisiana precedents, with the state’s laws and with its Constitution.”

BAEO President Kenneth Campbell, also outside the courthouse, called Kelley’s ruling a “violation of civil rights” that will “yield damaging effects on the lives of thousands of children.”

“As a result of this decision, hope and opportunity have been taken away from families who are only trying to escape failing schools and gain access to better educational options,” he said. “No one was a winner today.”


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (76)


1) Comment by joey.esposito - 03/12/2012

Moderator, please remove my comments regarding Tarvald Smith. Jay Augustine is/was employed by the Louisiana Workforce Commission.

2) Comment by Mildred Citizen - 03/12/2012

As has been mentioned, the ruling was only against the funding thru the MFP. The MFP is funded by House resolution. Funds can be separately allocated for the voucher program and less allocated to the MFP. No problem.

3) Comment by redstickhornet - 02/12/2012

As I understand things, no one in East Baton Rouge Parish is forced to attend a failing public school!!! According to the following website, EBR schools are mandated participants in a school choice program for failing (F graded) schools.http://federalprograms.ebrschools.org/explore.cfm/nochildleftbehin d/academicchoice/ Students attending one of 4 alternative schools (schools selected by parent choice?), 8 elementary schools, 5 middle schools, 2 high schools, and 2 failing charter schools (selected by parent choice???) were mailed letters on August 30th, 2012 giving them the opportunity to transfer to another school of the parent's choice. According to the EBR schools website, in 2011-2012, over 4,000 students were given the choice to transfer last school year and a little over 400 took the district up on their offer? Why are our parents not transferring their kids out of F schools? http://federalprograms.ebrschools.org/eduWEB1/1000132/docs/ebr_2nd_q uarter_implementation_report.pdf

4) Comment by redstickhornet - 02/12/2012

This ruling is not about whether or not vouchers are a good or bad thing.The ruling is about the funding of vouchers. I really suggest voucher supporters: 1.) Get a constitutional amendment on the ballot to create funding for the program. Why not let the voters decide? 2.) Since this is so important, find a stable and recurring revenue stream to fund the program through the state's general fund. Since this is of the utmost importance right? I want to believe that voucher supporters care about children, but some of the comments on here make me wonder...

5) Comment by Grannee - 02/12/2012

Jindal has endorsed Hughes for the La. Supreme Court and will expect him to rule in his favor concerning vouchers if he wins. Please make sure you vote accordingly because if Hughes wins, Jindal will extend his control all the way to Louisiana's highest court on this issue.

6) Comment by NewsFreak - 02/12/2012

Currently listed on Redemptorist RHS website under tuition and fees: $7471 - 9th-12th non catholic tuition $500 - registration fee $200 - instructional material charge $1450 - dyslexia fee (STAR) lab $400 - graduation fee $20 -For every Saturday school detention (fee)

7) Comment by Being_Stupid - 01/12/2012

This will be overturned on appeal.

8) Comment by NewsFreak - 01/12/2012

If the Catholic Diocese Schools Office of Baton Rouge under Dr Verges supports the voucher / scholarship program wholeheartedly, why is it that the three other catholic high schools in Baton Rouge: Catholic High School, St Joseph's Academy, St Michaels High School do not accept or support the vouchers? I believe St Michaels might have one or two voucher students. Food for thought.

9) Comment by 1ryben - 01/12/2012

Wow, what happened to Redemptorist? Using John White's logic, looks like Redemptorist is a failed school. Why are we allowing them to accept vouchers?

10) Comment by NewsFreak - 01/12/2012

Here is the question that myself and numerous others have regarding the voucher or scholarship program: What makes John White and the other powers believe that the private schools that have accepted voucher students are better than the failing schools? Redemptorist Schools of Baton Rouge accepted 143 voucher students for the 2012-2013 school year according to the Advocate. Redemptorist Elementary RES had 100 and Redemptorist High School RHS has 43. According to the LA HS Athletic Association LHSAA information published on their website a couple of weeks ago, it was published that RHS is now rated 1A but has opted to play up to 2A. The LHSAA also listed enrollment (numbers provided by the Dept of Education) for this school year as 228 for Redemptorist. This is approximately 100 less children than last school year. Since the principal coaches and the wonderful dedicated teachers left Redemptorist after last school year, the school is struggling under the current headmaster Brian Menard and Dr Verges with the diocese. I know of at least 50 families that have enrolled their children from RHS to public schools this school year. It was brought to my attention recently that RHS has teachers that are not certified to teach in LA according to the Dept of Education website this school year, and that all the teachers in public schools are certified??? None of these families left to my knowledge due to 3 head football coaches (Vice, LaBorde, Roane) this year alone that have left RHS. Way too many have left RHS this year due to administrative changes and demographics. If private schools accept public school students (vouchers) then why aren't these same private schools tested using same test that failing schools used???? Why don't the teachers have to be certified?

11) Comment by 1ryben - 01/12/2012

"Regardless of where one stands on this issue, this ruling is a triumph for the American democratic process." Truer words rarely spoken here.

12) Comment by NearBarbarian - 01/12/2012

FACT 1: Mr. Jindal, Mr. White, et al intentionally forced a purposefully vague and incomplete proposal through the legislature. FACT 2: The legislature--as a whole body, Republican and Democratic--FAILED to fulfill its constitutionally-mandated role to thoroughly and responsibly vet the proposal. Legislators hid behind legislative technicalities in order to draw attention away from their tacit and active acquiescence to the administration. FACT 3: The State Department of Education, under the dictates of the governor, made it practically impossible for education professionals and citizens to inquire about or protest the legislation--not to mention what has proved to be a corrupt legislative process. FACT 4: Mr. Jindal and his allies have cynically exploited parents with legitimate concerns, making them a collective wedge to divide communities and to desiccate public education, thereby creating a situation in which "bad" schools can only get worse and money can be funneled to schools that in many cases are just as bad or worse. FACT 5: The court's ruling simply but boldly uncovers the scheme for what it is: a theft of public education money by non-educational interests (PACS, ALEC, Creationists, etc.), outside "reformers" (e.g., Bloomberg), and political and economic opportunists (i.e., Jindal and many of the charter schools' CEOs). MOREOVER: The court's ruling demonstrates why it's crucial to have three independent braches of government. Regardless of where one stands on this issue, this ruling is a triumph for the American democratic process.

13) Comment by DMJ - 01/12/2012

TommyRucker's upset. Good. That usually means something good happened. In this case, it did. Score one for the good guys. Sorry, Piyush...

14) Comment by 1ryben - 01/12/2012

Hi Phil, we actually agree on something, we should celebrate! Maybe we can be bff's. what you think?

15) Comment by 1ryben - 01/12/2012

TommyRucker, you sir are a donkey. I only state that because I can't say the other word. Totally clueless and way off the mark. What Jindal and his gang did was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The people of Louisiana think highly enough of a public education that they protected its funding from goons like Jindal. They created a constitutional amendment. The only way to change that is by another vote of the people. You know, this new thing called democracy. Have you heard of it. Let me guess you whine and moan about any tome Obama is perceived to have violated the U.S. Constitution, that its the law of the land, but when your guy doesn't follow it, it's a stupid judge. C'mon man, you can't possibly read the article of the state constitution dealing with MFP and come away with any other ruling. Judges can't rule how they wished, they are bound by the law. In this case, the law is clear.

16) Comment by cbelse1 - 01/12/2012

TO THOSE WHO GENERALIZE THAT ALL TEACHERS ARE NOT DOING THEIR JOBS, PLEASE COME JOIN US AT SCHOOL FOR A WEEK AND TELL ME IF IT'S ALL OUR FAULT. I AGREE THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE TO FIX PUBLIC EDUCATION IN LOUISIANA, BUT CAN WE AT LEAST MAKE SURE THAT SOLUTION IS LEGAL. . .

17) Comment by RODEO CLOWN - 01/12/2012

Obviously, some people simply miss the point--totally miss the point. This ruling does not address the issue of where the monies are spent but where the monies spent are derived from. Judge Kelly's ruling did not make the use of vouchers illegal or unconstitutional. His ruling addressed the origination of the funds. In as much as the voucher payments, under Jindal's system, was funded with monies dedicated to the Minimum Foundation Standard, and in as much as the state constitution prescribes, i.e, dedicates(a word we don't hear much of anymore)such funds are dedicated only to public education, then Jindal's voucher system is in violation of the state constitution and therefore illegal. It's not a question of education, nor a question of who receives the vouchers, nor was/is it a question of personalities, but, simply a question of the legality of the voucher system as placed into effect under Jindal. The state can still have a voucher system, provided the funds financing the system do not originate from/nor diminish the funding required under the 1974 State Constitution, i.e, the Edwards Constitution, to fulfill the Minimum Foundation requirements. All Jindal has to do is pass a statue creating the voucher system with funding derived from areas other than the Minimum Foundation. Of course, such a course of action would not produce the necessary effect sought by Jindal and his "lap dogs". The entire administration is to busy "reinventing" the wheel without having idea one of whether the wheel is even turning or if the wheel is turning, which direction it is headed in.

18) Comment by TommyRucker - 01/12/2012

Don't tell me taxpayer money is not used every day in private institutions, businesses, etc. Taxpayer money is used in all sort of private places-hospital, security firms, private consultants, private universities, etc. Government grants to all these private beauty salon schools. etc. etc. If this is unconstitutional then so is a lot of medicare, etc. etc. This is a ridiculous ruling. I bet this judge's kids are not going to the same type public schools that some of the poor people getting these vouchers are having to send their kids. He and the other people the photo ought to try send their kids to some of these schools and 'maybe' they would have a different attitude.

19) Comment by TommyRucker - 01/12/2012

These are the people who work for the government and will do anything to expand the 'voter mass'. They see a alternate system as a threat to their 'little play house' and will do anything to eliminate the 'threat'. Look at the smile on the faces of some of the people in the background as they are pleased to be able to force families to do something against their will and 'give the children over to the government' as they 'know best'. Do you think these people know what is best for your children, Do you trust them?? Unfortunately they desire to deny a very valuable opportunity to many poor families and their children. No wonder we have so many problems and they seem to be getting worse.

20) Comment by TommyRucker - 01/12/2012

I wonder if the judge would have ruled as such if he lived in some of the areas where some of these poor people live and did not have the fat taxpayer salary of a judge which would allow him to send his kids to a private school. The people who are against vouchers need to send their kids to the schools some of these poor people are having to send their kids to and maybe then they would get a better understanding of how painful it is to see what happens to your kids in our present modern public educational system. A system that has been created over the years by the same people standing with their lawyer at the press conference. They need to be ashamed of themselves for what they are doing to these poor people and their kids.

21) Comment by TommyRucker - 01/12/2012

These people are showing why many people are disgusted with the modern educational system. They are spending and have spent all sorts of time and money trying to destroy poor people's desire to give their kids a quality education as these people can see what the public system is doing to their children and only want an opportunity for their children whom they love dearly. It is hard to believe that these people who claim to be advocates of children would actually do something to FORCE people to leave the voucher system and go into these cesspools. Even Obama's kids go to private schools (paid for by taxpayers) and most of these so called leaders of the public education system would and probably do send their kids, grandkids to private schools but they are denying the opportunity to poor people out of selfishness.

22) Comment by TommyRucker - 01/12/2012

Pathetic! These public education people need to spend more time trying to fix the horrible mess they have created in pubic education rather than attacking and destroying some poor families opportunity to move their kids out of the destructive mess they found their kids in while in the public education system. It is a telling sign when you see people unite to attack and destroy but cannot unite to build something positive. They do seem to get together with their 'on going' and 'never ending' demand for more MONEY from the taxpayers. Their greed becomes more evident every day as they make the demand for more money in spite of a poor economy. These are the most self centered people I have ever seen, no wonder kids are getting the short end of the stick in public education today. The present system in public education is a proven failure and the system's only solution is self preservation and more money. They don't want accountability and besides money, they demand guarantee job security in spite of on going poor performances. The public wants an alternative system as the present one has been poor for a long time and is getting worse. What are they so afraid of?? They need to focus on the greater good rather than their self serving wants. This is an example of what happens when socialism becomes so dominate it makes self preservation first and foremost but manipulates the society to achieve its wants and eliminates any better but different system. system.

23) Comment by badcomedy - 01/12/2012

Trust me-this criminal regime will do whatever they want.

24) Comment by Doll2000 - 01/12/2012

Teachers are looked upon as some of the lowest forms of human life it seems. The way it looks there won't be too many of us for the future. Who would want to do it. I am glad Judge Kelly saw the light! I can't wait to see what will happen to some of these private schools that have accepted voucher students. Many of them have severe behavior problems is why the parents want them in a private school!! Everybody talks about the so called low performing public schools but most of you have probably never been in one! If you want to know the truth about what is going on in the F schools! Go visit ONE and see for yourself!! It is not a teacher's fault!!

25) Comment by valencia33 - 01/12/2012

Judge Kelly did what was right by following the law, it is not hard to come up with other education options for students who are in failing schools, implementing nother options is the problem, Charters was one option along with magnet and gifted, but with limited spots in those program than what is the next choice for parents? It seems like a loss for parents who were simply trying to do whats best for their children....touchy subject!

26) Comment by gvm - 01/12/2012

@CBCS: I stand corrected.

27) Comment by gvm - 01/12/2012

This ruling is a shot across the bow of the Jindal juggernaut. I am hopeful that others will follow. I have no concern over his national aspirations. However to the extent that realizing those aspirations comes at the expense of the citizens of this state, including his unwitting supporters, then I think he needs to be challenged and stopped, as appropriate, every step of the way.

28) Comment by phil - 01/12/2012

I believe the voucher system is about making profits and money and is not about education. Besides, what about all of those students who are left behind in the failing schools? If we are going to have EQUAL treatment of ALL students in public schools, then let's really have it. The voucher system seems to do the opposite to me.

29) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 01/12/2012

yes gvm, interrogation quotas..white parents and their children were interrogated by the school board, as too where they lived, when they just wanted to stay in their neighborhood schools and not be transferred to the ghetto.

30) Comment by gvm - 01/12/2012

@CBCS: "interrogation" quotas??? CBCS = CountryBoysCan'tSpell. Oh, the irony...

31) Comment by gvm - 01/12/2012

@Duckyluve: or meth perhaps...

32) Comment by Duckyluve - 01/12/2012

Cbcs.....exactly the problem. You could provide one on one tutors in the home and some of these kids would still fail. The parents only have kids as a source of income. They do not care about an education. Now if they sell weed and pay the light bill that's OK.

33) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 01/12/2012

Attention! There are no failing schools, only failing students. There will always be failing students as long as their parents don't care. All that moving these kids will accomplish, is to bring down these students in the schools they are moved to. Teachers will have to lower teaching standards to accommodate them just like in the 60's when neighborhood schools were done away with and kids were bussed all over creation to meet interrogation quotas.

34) Comment by KilgoreTrout - 01/12/2012

JIndal is not Jesus and Cousin Dave is not the voice in the wilderness unless that wilderness is in his own mind. There are many policies of this state administration which smack of hypocrisy when Christianity is used as an analogy and it would be self-defeating to attempt it when considerable evidence of Phariseeism and worse exists. Humans are always their own worst enemies.

35) Comment by spqr - 01/12/2012

Good night, Piyush. Good night, John-boy.

36) Comment by gtinla - 01/12/2012

Jindal can threaten legislators to get them to ignore the law. A judge is another thing: Kelley ruled on the constitutionality of the law, not the desirability of the law. Even Jindal has to follow the law the courts, if not in the Legislature.

37) Comment by KilgoreTrout - 01/12/2012

Cousin Dave's perverted attempt to equate Jindal with Jesus is offensive and demonstrates the warped thinking driving this whole mess.

38) Comment by swinham - 01/12/2012

Judge Kelley has made another courageous decision firmly grounded in law. If Jindal had taken the appropriate step of attempting to get a constitutional amendment passed, this suit would have never arisen. As with most of Jindal's "reforms", this one was based solely on ideology.

39) Comment by gary - 01/12/2012

Squiggly hit the nail on the head. Those commenting that Judge Kelley should be voted out in the next election - he is doing his job as a judge - using the state constitution to make a ruling - that is what he is suppose to do.

40) Comment by squiggly - 01/12/2012

Why is it so difficult for people to get that the state constitution says that the MFP money is to be used for public schools? This law is taking the MFP money and giving it to private schools. Therefore, the voucher law is unconstitutional. It's not about should kids be allowed to go to private schools. Appealing this matter will not do any good because the constitution is crystal clear. There is no way around it. If Jindal and White want to pay for low income kids to go to private schools, they will have to get the constitution changed or find another way to fund the program.

41) Comment by nolalawyer - 01/12/2012

The use of public funds to support religious educational institutions (and in many cases, the term "educational" barely applies to some of these schools -- for example, those who teach children that evolution is a myth) is one of the holy grails of the far-right agenda in this country. Jindal's pursuit of the voucher program had little to do with his desire to educate the children of Louisiana's low-income families -- our governor has made it clear how he feels about poor folks. Jindal doesn't care if Louisiana's poor can't get quality healthcare, and is turning down federal Medicaid dollars for no apparent reason. If he doesn't care about the health of lower-income citizens, why would you believe that he cares about the education of the children of lower-income families? Instead, Jindal pushed this absurd program because he believes it serves his goal of personal political advancement -- his press people were already touting the voucher program as the ultimate right-wing achievement (not so much here -- Jindal knows his national ambitions don't depend on his support in Louisiana which is why he's so quick to throw our people under his canmpaign bus). It is beyond ridiculous to ask taxpayers to fund private religious institutions. All Judge Kelley did was to render a proper holding which recognized that MFP funds can't be used this way -- there are other fundamental reasons why this program cannot stand, including the use of public funds to advance a religious agenda. We're on the brink of being the only state in the country where a child can receive a publicly-funded education which includes fun facts like "men and dinosaurs were alive on the planet at the same time." As an attorney, I also find it very interesting that the same right-wing crowd that rails against "activist judges" is now calling for Judge Kelley's head because he applied the law and their side lost -- clearly, you would rather that Judge Kelley ignore the law so that a particular result can be achieved, which is the definition of judicial activism. Farewell and good riddance to an ill-conceived program which had everything to do with advancing the political career of one empty suit, and nothing to do with educating Louisiana's children.

42) Comment by Mildred Citizen - 30/11/2012

Hopefully, Governor Jindal can get this in front of the Supreme Court quickly, citing emergency need, while Kitty Kimball is still chief justice.

43) Comment by coachblades - 30/11/2012

Your right cousin dave we should just all hail Jindal! after all look at all the great things he has done for louisiana. We have 2 cities in LA that have the highest AIDS/HIV rate in the country. We are one of the fattest states in the union. Our state budget is in shambles. Crime statewide is rising. Per capita LA has more prisoners than any COUNTRY in the world. Teen pregnancy in LA is on the rise. Remember those sand berms that Jindal blew money on. I say "blew" because many of them were blown away with the next storm..What about the company that he gave a multimillion dollar grant too to move to LA, the business took the money then filed bankruptcy and never made it here. What about all the important time Jindal spent out of state not only promoting himself but also Mitt Romney only to turn on Romney after the election like a cowardly monday morning quarterback. What about the time he spent trying to campaigning against a judge in another state. The whole time he was out we taxpayers were paying for his security. I know your gonna say that Jindal isnt to blame for all that I just listed. But remember you and others like you are more than willing to put ALL the blame for a students lack of achievement on the teacher, a teacher that may only see a child one hour a day. And before you go accusing me of being a leftwinger, I am a registered republican but unlike many I dont drink the Jindal Kool Aid. Many repubs in our state legislature are starting to notice the bad taste in the Kool Aid too!

44) Comment by dashwood - 30/11/2012

Judge Kelly certainly can and should enjoy his final two years in office, since now he won't need to worry about whether he will be a viable candidate for reelection in 2014.

45) Comment by Cousin Dave - 30/11/2012

You people are fools to try and crucify Governor Bobby Jindal and his progreesive educational reforms. "Lord, forgive them for they know not what they do." History will prove who was right and who was self-serving and wrong.

46) Comment by joey.esposito - 30/11/2012

My apologies. Moderator please remove my comment.

47) Comment by pooroldman - 30/11/2012

I don't agree with all of the voucher plan, but it starting to get really hard defending the teachers (I know that it is not all of their fault) that are in the 2nd to last state in the last nation on the planet. It it most likely a parenting and cultural problem, but I don't see the status quo getting any better.

48) Comment by ovation - 30/11/2012

A vast number of teachers DO NOT belong to unions in Louisiana. What teachers want is fairness. The passage of these two law was done unconstitutionally and was ram-rodded through the legislative process. I was ashamed of my Republican legislators for playing the game. If you want to really impact and help public education you don't abandon ship and send the 'chosen' out leaving the rest to sink. You get involved and make real changes.

49) Comment by taxedtodeath - 30/11/2012

This is a sad, sad day in Louisiana.

50) Comment by ovation - 30/11/2012

Did you know that if a child is accepted into the voucher program and gets into a private or parochial school, that child can continue to attend that school until graduation even though the public school in which that child would normally attend raises it school rating to a B or even an A. Once in…always in. Info received from BESE

51) Comment by Whatchange - 30/11/2012

Sad, sad day, teachers won't do their jobs and count on the unions and lawyers to protect them. We have failing schools and parents have no where to turn, when they are given a choice, here comes the union and lawyers to take it all away.

52) Comment by Tarvald Smith - 30/11/2012

Kenneth Campbell calls the ruling a violation of civil rights? Someone tell me what or whose rights have been violated. Is BAEO trying to make this a "Brown v. Board of Education" case? I will gladly provide Mr. Campbell or any member of BAEO a copy of "Brown" or any true civil rights case on education to read and study.

53) Comment by Tarvald Smith - 30/11/2012

Dear Joey.esposito, I do not and have never worked for the Louisiana Workforce Commission. I am an attorney in private practice working for myself. I have never been on the payroll of LWC and was attending the trial in my capacity of a member of the Louisiana School Boards Association. Please get your facts right before posting something on a newspaper's website. Thank You.

54) Comment by NearBarbarian - 30/11/2012

This is a significant victory. But teachers, administrators, school boards, and the LFT/LEA, please do not squander it. In the midst of all the chaos Mr. Jindal and his wrecking crew have intentionally created to destroy public education, this ruling gives you a brief window of freedom through which to jump in front of the troubles facing public education--the troubles that serious educators have highlighted and tried to address (in and out of the classroom) for at least two decades. As you teachers know, it's one thing to call down a bully (in our case, Jindal) and suspend him, but he and his fellow bullies will return. What actually stops bullying is when the educators alter the environment, making it so that the bully cannot flourish and cannot gain control. Show the state that you are professionals with the best interests of the students and their communities, that universal public education is one of the most important institutions in America, and that you know better than politicians, opportunists, and charlatans. To that end, also send the John Whites, Rahm Emanuels, and Arne Duncans of our country packing. Those are the kinds of guys who're cooking up and facilitating these "state-funded laissez-faire" schemes for education. Education is not a factory; students are not raw materials; and intelligence is not a product.

55) Comment by Noel Hammatt - 30/11/2012

I made a mistake in the calculation of the per-pupil funding. Either that or a change was made in the chart I used. When I went back to double-check my numbers, the per-pupil amount for vouchers is actually around $5,100. I usually don't do the math "on the fly" and this is why! I will try and figure out how the $7,100 figure was derived in my earlier comment. Just wanted to set the record straight. As for as other comments.... I will have them when I actually have the decision in my hand, so to speak. @TommyRucker et al, your vitriolic hatred of the public schools is showing. Cesspool? Come on, get real. As for the "better outcomes" claimed by supporters of sending students to the private and parochial schools? Doesn't hold up in the research. Largest studies consistently show no real differences between outcomes for similar students (By social-economic indicators) between public and private schools show a minor advantage help by private schools in higher grades, and math scores higher in the public schools for both elementary and secondary. Why do you think the public schools fought to have no real accountability? And why do you think the Department of Education is fighting to hard to hide information? They KNOW the truth about this... and don't want you to know!

56) Comment by joey.esposito - 30/11/2012

Tarvald Smith works for the Louisiana Workforce Commission. Is he on the LWC payroll while attending the trial on our dime?

57) Comment by Chucky - 30/11/2012

Wiser Judges will correct Kelley’s mistake, to think he wanted to “move up the ladder” and pretend to be one of those judges.

58) Comment by bettergovt - 30/11/2012

@ JeffShadow, When will the written opinion be available? I am anxious to see how passing a law with 51 votes out of 105 is constitutional. The House Clerk testified he was clear that the bill needed 53 votes to pass when he spoke with Klecky during the seesion.

59) Comment by TommyRucker - 30/11/2012

The democratic party mob is getting cranked up and is starting to exercise its political power. You are going to see more politicians, etc. jumping on the bandwagon as if there is one thing a politician loves, it is POWER. These teachers want guaranteed jobs along with high wages and benefits for doing less and the quality of what they are doing is extremely poor. People who love their children and can find a way to get them out of this chronic mess in public education are trying to do everything they can to do it. These vouchers are helping poor people who love their children and only want them removed from the public school cesspool. Why are these teachers so against the the children of these poor people? These vouchers help many children of lower income families finally get a decent education. Why do these teachers want to keep these children in the cesspool of public education which is a massive failure?? Apparently just because they are poor they will be penalized and harmed and the big reason besides greed is these voucher supported schools DO NOT heed the Big Brother line of the government.

60) Comment by baxterdogg - 30/11/2012

What Judge Kelley did was simply to speed up the process of ultimate resolution. Because he declared a state law unconstitutional, it now goes directly to the Supreme Court without having to go to the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court review does not give any weight to his decision.

61) Comment by TommyRucker - 30/11/2012

Greed, corruption, poor outcomes, resistance of accountability, self serving, dishonesty and the forces of continuing deterioration of the education of our young people has won this round. Billions of dollars of taxpayer money is not enough for these school teachers and administrators-they want trillions. Why has taxpayer support for parochial schools in Louisiana been OK for decades (school buses, textbooks, etc.) and then suddenly because the teachers, administrators, unions apply political pressure to a judge, they are suddenly NOT OK???

62) Comment by jeffsadow - 30/11/2012

What the article doesn't point out is that the procedural matters were ruled constitutional. All that has been ruled out is the use of MFP dollars for the program. This allows the program to continue and, depending upon the vagaries of stays and appeals, continues funding from the MFP past this school year and beyond. It also leaves the door wide open for funding from other sources, such as was done for the program when limited to Orleans. As such, while it's not a complete victory at this stage for reform, it's a substantial one. See http://jeffsadow.blogspot.com/2012/11/split-decision-on-contested-law.html.

63) Comment by TommyRucker - 30/11/2012

The teachers and administrators in the public education system have this on going battle to focus on themselves as they have managed to make public education very costly to the taxpayers and very poor and now they are going to punish the poor people who love their children so much that they don't want to see them destroyed by the public school system and need help to send them into much better private schools. The public schools cannot compete so they are determined to eliminate the private schools, home schools and charter schools. These teachers are contributing greatly to the decline of this country and they want to be paid more and be given MORE BENEFITS to do this sort of destructive work.

64) Comment by 8point6 - 30/11/2012

All of my "progressive" friends/teachers unions are sooooo happy! Now, they can get back to keeping public education substandard. How about cancelling my seven property taxes for public education that I have been paying for years, and letting me decide how to spend my money.

65) Comment by Traveler - 30/11/2012

How refreshing to see Steve Monaghan of LFT and Joyce Haynes of LAE standing side-by-side in harmony, if only for a few moments. If only these two groups could REALLY join forces, think what could be accomplished for the educators of Louisiana! They would stop squandering their limited resources on competition for members and instead focus their energies on defeating the enemies of public education.

66) Comment by Raven72 - 30/11/2012

Points can be moot, not mute. Mute: lacking the ability to speak. Moot: open to discussion or debate; debatable; doubtful: as in a moot point.

67) Comment by Sandy - 30/11/2012

And to think I almost voted for Judge Kelley. Glad I came to my senses. Actually, any child in a failing school CAN get a voucher. That is unless their parents are evil rich folks who can afford to pay for private school on their own.

68) Comment by Attila - 30/11/2012

I can't believe that I actually agree with Grannee on something.

69) Comment by DMJ - 30/11/2012

Good.

70) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 30/11/2012

If you people would research it, government indoctrination camps didn't rear their ugly heads until the mid 1800's. It was downhill from there.

71) Comment by RODEO CLOWN - 30/11/2012

Bottom line, this is not a question of cost but a question of legality-can the state spend monies DEDICATED to the public school system via constitutionally, the Louisiana constitution, mandated, i.e, dedicated, appropriations? The answer is a resounding NO! One can quote and cite all the statistics one cares to comparing private versus public cost of administering education, however, the two are simply not comparable....it is like comparing the apples to oranges. First, and perhaps most important, private school systems--in particular parochial systems-do not experience the same level of overhead public schools are subjected to. Typically, school administrators in private schools are religious or retired personal. So, the level of expense associated with administration is typically on par lower than that of public schools systems. Second, when one examines the cost of private education, typically, one discovers the cost of the books(all provided by the state), transportation(many private systems use public school buses to transport their students) and a number of other services are provided by the state for the benefit of private/parochial students without the state receiving renumeration for such services. However, all such points are mute. In essence, the state court in the form of Judge Tim Kelly, has said such payments, i.e, vouchers, are not legal....of course, this is only round one. I thoroughly anticipate Jindal and his "lap dogs" will appeal the decision, ultimately, costing the state more monies which, by coincidence, Jindal proclaims the state does not have.

72) Comment by BRmoderate - 30/11/2012

Amen Grannee! We need strong COMMUNITY based schools! Education is not a private capitalist enterprise. The very nature of a capitalist system is that it is a "zero sum game" meaning for every winner (voucher recipients) there will be a loser (kids left behind)

73) Comment by Noel Hammatt - 30/11/2012

Actually, using simple math, the cost of the vouchers for 4963 students comes up to more than $7,100 per pupil! Doubt this? Go to http://www.louisianaschools.net/lde/uploads/20486.pdf and do the math. The Advocate will likely just explain this away by saying they got it from the state. The state, apparently, lies. By the way, the chart I referenced, is theirs!

74) Comment by Grannee - 30/11/2012

If ALL children in these failing schools can't be provided with a voucher to go to a private school, NONE should be provided. How do you account for the proper education of those who are left behind? At the end of the day what has the state accomplished? There are model public schools in this state, Zachary and Ascension that have set the example for the state's model. This is just a part of Jindal's and ALEC failed policies when it comes to education. No kid should be left behind in a failing school to promote the agenda of an inspiring presidential candidate who will never be.

75) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 30/11/2012

Maybe it would be wise if every Louisiana statist read about Davy Crockett and farmer Bunce. Who knows, they might actually learn something.

76) Comment by Being_Stupid - 30/11/2012

By Louisiana Law, the cost of a voucher cannot exceed 90% the cost the state would spend educating that child in a public school which averages about $8,800 a year in Louisiana. Private Schools often charge as little as $3,000 to $5,000 a year. The average cost per voucher was more like $4,100 for 2011, not $5,300 as stated in this article. Even so, that is far less than the average $8,800 that is currently spent per student through the Government Micromanaged Public School System.