<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=192888919167017&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">
Thursday, March 28, 2024
March 28, 2024

Linkedin Pinterest

In Our View: Education Case Looms

Legislature unlikely to get good grade on its report to high court in McCleary case

The Columbian
Published: July 18, 2016, 6:03am

Even as Washington lawmakers take time off from legislating or busy themselves with re-election campaigns, the specter of the McCleary v. Washington decision looms over them.

In 2012, the state Supreme Court ruled that the Legislature had failed its constitutionally mandated “paramount duty” of providing for basic K-12 education in the state. Since then, there has been a not-so-merry-go-round of recriminations between lawmakers and the court, with the justices last year imposing a $100,000-a-day fine until the state lives up to its duty.

Now, as the Supreme Court prepares to weigh in on the Legislature’s most recent efforts regarding school funding, lawmakers should expect another ruler-rap across the knuckles. Yes, they increased funding during both the 2013 and 2015 budget-writing sessions; no, they did not demonstrate progress this year while accomplishing little more than planning to make a plan. Along the way, they have kicked the can of figuring out how to ease school districts’ reliance upon local property taxes to pay for such basic items as teacher salaries.

Justices are expected to release in the next couple weeks a report card on the Legislature’s progress, and that assessment should include an even more forceful push to get lawmakers going in the right direction. The Seattle Times has editorially recommended the appointment of a mediator to help hammer out an agreement, even suggesting former Gov. Chris Gregoire as the right person for the job.

While such an idea deserves consideration, it also is problematic. Among the issues from the time of the 2012 McCleary ruling has been a question about the court overstepping its bounds. Many Republican legislators have complained about the court violating the separation of powers, to which Justice Debra Stephens wrote in the original decision: “The court is not concerned with whether the state has done too much, but whether it has done enough. Positive constitutional rights do not restrain government action, they require it.”

In other words, the issue of school funding is different from most that face the court, in which it typically is tasked with limiting government power. Ensuring that the state lives up to a constitutional requirement is much different, which is why the Supreme Court deemed it necessary to retain jurisdiction over the issue. In assessing the Legislature’s progress two years ago, Chief Justice Barbara Madsen wrote, “It is incumbent upon the State to demonstrate, through immediate, concrete action, that it is making real and measurable progress, not simply promises.”

The fact that Washington students, parents, teachers, administrators, and taxpayers are still waiting for more than promises speaks poorly to the credibility of the Legislature. It also speaks poorly to the leadership of Gov. Jay Inslee, who has failed to effectively prod lawmakers toward a solution that benefits all necessary parties.

Some of that is due to the intransigence of conservatives in the Legislature, who insist that the state can metaphorically search under the couch cushions to find the $3 billion to $4 billion that is needed. Some of it is due to a desire of many lawmakers to thumb their nose at the Supreme Court and insist upon adhering to their own timetable.

Either way, the fact is that the McCleary ruling was issued more than four years ago, and lawmakers have made only middling progress since then. Because of that, they likely will not be happy when the Supreme Court hands out report cards.

Loading...