Conservatives sure are hell bent into twisting themselves into chocolate covered pretzels in their quest to destroy public schools. In the late 1990’s, the New Hampshire school funding system was found to be unconstitutional by the NH Supreme Court. The governor and legislature were ordered to define the sections of a constitutionally adequate education, figure out the cost of doing so and pay for it with taxes that were equal across the state. We are now at the end of 2024 with members of far-right extreme conservative groups having infiltrated our legislature and local town governments, doing all they can to put an end to public education.
An amicus brief was filed in early October to the NH Supreme Court, alleging the court incorrectly ruled on the Claremont cases way back in the 1990’s and would like that ruling overturned. As a refresher (and at the risk of being redundant), the NH Supreme Court had ruled the state must put into effect its constitutional duty to provide its students with an adequate education and come up with a school funding system that fairly taxes its citizens in order to do so. In the meantime, while the state and public schools are still waiting for the results of that ruling to take effect, more than thirty Republican legislators signed on to the brief.
The two current lawsuits, Contoocook Valley School District et al. v. State of New Hampshire and Steven Rand et al v State of New Hampshire say the state has failed to meet the obligations imposed by the court in 1997, that taxpayers in different towns do not pay equal rates of taxes for education, and that students do not have equal access to quality public education.
Let’s try to follow along with this seemingly never-ending litigious mess:
- the NH Attorney General’s Office is defending the school funding system by claiming it is constitutional and the plaintiffs haven’t proven the state to be distributing less for an “adequate education.”
- the AG’s Office has additionally stated the courts are prohibited from requesting legislators to disburse particular amounts on schools under the separation of powers doctrine.
- -the extremist legislators are now asking the NH Supreme Court to overturn the Claremont decisions, whereas the AG’s Office is not.
- the extremist legislators claim in 1993 and 1997 the NH Supreme Court incorrectly interpreted Article 83, part 2 as granting the duty to provide education to the state.
- the extremist legislators feel that Article 83 be read in connection with Article 6, part 1 which states: “As morality and piety, rightly grounded on high principles, will give the best and greatest security to government, and will lay, in the hearts of men, the strongest obligations to due subjection; and as the knowledge of these is most likely to be propagated through a society, therefore, the several parishes, bodies, corporate, or religious societies shall at all times have the right of electing their own teachers, and of contracting with them for their support or maintenance, or both. But no person shall ever be compelled to pay towards the support of the schools of any sect or denomination. And every person, denomination or sect shall be equally under the protection of the law; and no subordination of any one sect, denomination or persuasion to another shall ever be established.”
- But no person shall ever be compelled to pay towards the support of the schools of any sect or denomination. Just wanted to repeat that.
- the argument from the extreme legislators is for the constitution to be understood as to require an education for all students while giving local control on how to pay for and provide that education.
In the event the Claremont cases are overturned, the state would no longer be obliged to finance the adequacy formula. This is what gives extra help to towns who can’t raise enough funding for their schools through just the statewide education property tax (SWEPT). That decision would grant legislators the ability to considerably lower or eliminate altogether, state spending on education.
Muddy up the waters, then take another step closer to getting rid of public schools. Be careful who you vote for, you just might get what you didn’t want.