Can’t Vouch for Proposition 174 : Voucher proposal gets an A only for confusion and vagueness

If you like confusion, have we got a proposition for you.

Proposition 174 is the voter initiative that would supply parents with taxpayer-supported vouchers that could be used at private or parochial schools. But its supporters--who are many and varied, including conservatives, libertarians and poor and minority parents who are desperate for better schooling for their children--deserve a lot better than this.

A majority vote is all that is required to pass Proposition 174 in the statewide special election Nov. 2. But changing it afterward would require much more than that. Too much, in fact.

Adding a single new voucher regulation would take no less than a three-fourths majority vote in the Legislature, or a two-thirds majority vote of the local government enacting the regulation plus approval by a majority of registered voters. To further dampen the chance of any modification, the proposition provides that a body seeking to enact new rules would have to prove they are “essential”--a vague but daunting standard.

The initiative says that the “State Board of Education may require voucher-redeeming schools to choose and administer tests reflecting national standards. . . . “ Maybe the state will, maybe it won’t. And there aren’t any national standards yet and may not be for some time.

In the initiative’s language, the “Legislature may award supplemental funds for reasonable transportation needs” of poor or disabled students. Well, it may offer none at all, or too little. And if down the road 174 did save money (and no one knows if it would), future legislatures and governors could use it for the public schools--or for anything else.

Other problems include the provision that “A student who is deriving no substantial academic benefit” can be dismissed from a voucher school. Does that mean “Slow students, close the door on your way out”?

“Such scholarships shall not constitute taxable income,” the measure says. One legal analysis, however, suggests that your voucher might indeed be subject to federal taxes. Whether or not that is so is just one of many questions that make Proposition 174 far too vague to support.