vouchers struck down in CO (again)

the colorado supreme court ruled today that the proposed voucher program is unconstitutional. while that's a good thing, for now, i'm not ecstatic about it. why? because they struck it down for the wrong reasons, much like the doomed Roe v. Wade ruling.

of course, Owens v. Colo. Cong. of Parents is on much more solid ground than Roe v. Wade, becuase local control of schools is something americans - especially conservatives - have felt strongly about historically. but i wouldn't bet on that always being the case. people are starting to realize, and rightly so, that local administration of education doesn't always yield the best results.

why did the plaintiffs (backed by the AFT, the CEA, the ADL, and PFAW, among others) choose to argue that the program violated the CO constitution based on local control of schools? they couldn't use the church-state issue, because that question has already been resolved by SCOTUS.

what's left? the real constitutional problem with vouchers: they violate the equal protection clause. they ensure that some kids will remain in a school system suffering from insufficient funds, inadequate teaching staff, and an unfavorable public perception, all of which will be greatly exacerbated by vouchers. they ignore the fact that poor kids need more resources, not less.

it was smart to go the local-control route, but ultimately not beneficial. it's a trap. local control is as much a threat to poor kids' education as vouchers are.