Sponsors of HB290 (the Universal Voucher Bill), Long on Feel-Good Rhetoric, But Short on Constitutional Validation
HB290 was heard in the House Finance Committee on February 15. One sponsor declared HB290 is not an attack of the public school system, while the other sponsor asserted a litany of flaws in the public school system; thus, the implication: vouchers are necessary.
Sponsors made the assertion that HB290 is pro-child, pro-parent and pro-family. But, they didn’t identify which children, parents and families would benefit. Certainly, the families associated with public school districts are not benefited by the loss of resources endured by school districts due to the voucher drain of funding from the public common school system.
The sponsors repeated the usual rhetoric in defense of vouchers—one size does not fit all, parents’ right to choose, competition is good for everyone, etc.—but provided not even a hint that the Ohio Constitution permits the State to fund the EdChoice voucher scheme.
The fact is, there is no constitutional seal of approval for EdChoice vouchers.
Learn more about the EdChoice voucher litigation