Commentary

Eshelman: Let’s Go, Superintendent Millington

Solution for growing school tyranny is universal school choice

by Jay Eshelman

There is only one fix with regard to the PK through Grade 12 educational chaos currently being levied on Vermonters and their children. Be it any assigned curricula, or Orange Southwest Unified School District Superintendent Layne Millington’s unilateral decree on the ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ disciplinary judgment, these actions are explicitly unconstitutional. As the Liz Cady circumstance clearly shows us, constitutional resolution cannot be achieved by replacing one school board, administration, or teacher with another. Tyranny is tyranny, no matter how it’s assigned.

Superintendent Layne Millington

What is that ‘one fix’, need I repeat it over and again? It is universal School Choice – Period. No other form of educational governance can resolve this chaos, short of eliminating governmental education support entirely.  

So, what about eliminating educational support altogether? Is this a viable alternative? I submit to you that it is not. At least not without opening the door to a profound constitutional debate on what the 1997 Brigham v. State decision, and its reference to the 1954 SCOTUS decision on Brown v. Board of Education, gives us.

“When we consider the evidence in the record before us and apply the Education and Common Benefits Clauses of the Vermont Constitution to that evidence, … the conclusion becomes inescapable that the present system has fallen short of providing every school-age child in Vermont an equal educational opportunity.  This duty was eloquently described in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 493 (1954):

[E]ducation is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. . . . It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities . . . . It is the very foundation of good citizenship.  Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment.  In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education.  Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.”

Please note that these landmark decisions define that it is the ‘opportunity’… that… ‘must be made available to all on equal terms.’ There is no reference as to what that opportunity involves. And the Brigham decision goes on to say that “[t]he distribution of a resource as precious as educational opportunity may not have as its determining force the mere fortuity of a child’s residence.”

Currently, approximately 90 Vermont School Districts provide Tuition Vouchers to parents, allowing them to choose the school (both traditional public and independent) they believe best meets the needs of their children. The only way to satisfy the Education and Common Benefits Clauses of the Vermont Constitution, is to provide Tuition Vouchers to all parents – and there are several pending cases in Vermont’s Superior Court arguing this point.

Let the free market determine educational methodology. For those wanting the progressive, ‘woke’, point of view – let them choose their poison. For those wanting traditional values and academic curricula, let them choose theirs. Unless and until universal School Choice is legislated, the current disagreements voiced throughout the State will be the standard fair… guaranteed. Again, there are several lawsuits pending against various Vermont school districts and the Agency of Education for breaching these constitutional precepts. Here’s the legal logic in a nutshell:

Brown v. Board of Education.

“In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education.  Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.”

When the VT Supreme Court decided the Brigham v. State case in 1997, it made the following citation.

“The distribution of a resource as precious as educational opportunity may not have as its determining force the mere fortuity of a child’s residence.”

Again, using our judicial system to demand universal School Choice, short of reasonable legislative action, is our only recourse. And, as always, I welcome comment and debate on this issue and will endeavor to address as many alternative points of view as I can. 

The author is a business owner and former River Valley Tech Center school board member living in Westminster.

Categories: Commentary

3 replies »

  1. Correction: The author is a business owner and former River Valley Tech Center school board director.

    • Of course, I agree. But on TNR, for example, several commenters continue to simply reiterate the injustices. We all know about the injustices. They are extensive. But as I responded to John Klar:

      Yes, John. We know what ‘factions’ do, be they legislative or executive. This is why we have a third branch of governance, the judiciary, as you well know.

      In fact, in Vermont, parents are suing the state over the unequal access to education Residency restrictions on historic Town Tuitioning system that violate the state constitution.
      https://libertyjusticecenter.org/media/vermont-parents-sue-state/

      “Vermont’s Town Tuitioning system works well for the favored few who happen to live in a location where it is available,” said Brian Kelsey, senior attorney at the Liberty Justice Center. “Unfortunately, only 17 percent of Vermont school children are afforded some form of choice under the present system. Those who are ineligible are at a distinct, and unconstitutional, disadvantage.”

      We need the parents of these students, who are finally figuring out they and their children are being discriminated against, to take action. The link cited above references advocates like the Institute for Justice and the Liberty Justice Center that are leading the charge.

      Simply reiterating the injustice in TNR and VDC commentary does nothing to further the cause. We know what’s going on. The question is – what are we going to do about it?

      I say, sue the b – – – – – ds.

Leave a Reply