Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Vouchers -- Steve Urquhart's Proposal

On Steve Urquhart's blog he has laid a couple of proposals in overcoming the confusion with the 2 voucher bills. Basically his proposals are this:

1 - Hold a Special Session and through HB148 and 174 out the window.
2 - Pass a new HB1001 with basically the same language as HB174 (the bill that was created as a compromise between voucher advocates and foes)
3 - Hold implementation of HB1001 until after June 2008, with a provision that HB1001 is repealed or implemented depending on the outcome of the November vote.

I like the proposal. It provides the citizens of this state with one law that can be voted on up or down. I don't know that it will keep the two loudly opposing voucher lobbying groups from taking the results of the November vote to the courts, but it at least settles the ambiguity of having two virtually identical bills not being subject to the same referendum voting requirements.

All this would have been helpful when the legislature was originally considering vouchers. But it is better late than never.


Too Loudly said...

The problem here is the referndum is for HB 148. So what happens if you can't pass HB1001?

Let it go to the courts where this bull (bill) will be found unconstitutional.

Is that loud enough for ya?

Stacey said...

And what happens if you pass HB1001?

Any vote the Legislature authorizes is going to be a non-binding vote. And the vote on 148 will be void because it would no longer exist.

I suggest a special session that contingently repeals 174, contingent on the vote on 148. If the people repeal 148 then 174 is also repealed, if the people leave 148 then 174 also stays.

pramahaphil said...

The problem is HB 148 isn't the bill that should be put to a vote. HB 174 was the bill that was developed via compromise, and it is the clearer of the two bills.

HB 1001's implementation would hinge on the outcome the November vote. A nay vote voids the law, and a yea vote ratifies the law.

Stacey said...

If the outcome of the vote could be made binding on the new bill, then yes go HB 1001. Unfortunately, I worry about some legislators (on either side) being willing to follow the will of the people.

pramahaphil said...

I don't worry about legislators as much as I worry about the courts. The more vauge and unclear what people are voting on -- the more likely the November vote will be decided in a protracted battle rather than by the will of the people