... Patricia Levesque, executive director of the Foundation for Florida's Future, a non-profit founded by former governor Jeb Bush to focus on education issues in Florida. Levesque, also a member of the state Taxation and Budget Reform Commission, talked about two of the measures she's promoting for voters to consider - one relating to private use of public money and one regarding education vouchers.
My interest is in your effort to try and do something about vouchers within the realm of the constitution. I read an article in the Palm Beach Post ... and wanted you to be able to explain a little bit about what you're trying to accomplish.
First, I've only submitted the one amendment, Constitutional Proposal 20. The amendment that I've submitted really is not a voucher amendment. ... I am still working on a voucher amendment. I'm still trying to formulate the language. ... The amendment that I did submit is important to me because it impacts all kinds of programs in the state. It impacts foster care programs, social service programs, juvenile justice programs, educational programs also. But much broader, it impacts Bright Futures scholarships and need-based financial aid and things like that.
Many, many years ago this individual named James Blaine tried to get an amendment into the federal constitution. It was really a discriminatory provision. It was discriminatory against Catholics. And when he didn't have success at the federal level, he started going state by state. My desire as a member of the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission, we're charged with looking at policies over a 20-year horizon. What are the needs of the state? What are the taxing policies that need to fund those needs? What are other provisions that impact state and local spending that would prohibit or limit the Legislature or local governments in dealing with the needs of the state?
And so there is a provision in our constitution, in Article I, Section 3, that truly will have an impact on the future. It will have an impact in that its recent interpretation would essentially eliminate entities just because they have a faith-based background, just because they're religious, they wouldn't be able to participate in public programs.
You don't think that's fair?
No. It's discriminatory to have a provision in the constitution that just because an organization, you know, you have two foster care organizations or name the public service that is being provided. Homeless. And just because one has a religious background, to say that the state is going to discriminate and not allow that group to provide homeless services, or not provide foster services, that's wrong....
So your proposal would be to do away with it?
Let me read it to you, because it's really simple. My proposal basically adds language that says individuals or entities may not be barred from participating in public programs because of their religion. I think that is something that the general public would believe in. The federal constitution (says) you cannot discriminate against someone because of their religion, but that is what is happening in our state constitution. So I think it should be reversed.
How would this affect things like Bright Futures?
To include evolution as a key idea, or to allow for "alternatives"? That is the question that heated up during the end of the year as the State Board of Education neared a decision on how to revise Florida's decade-old science standards. This one could be the gift that keeps on giving, story-wise, for another month or two. Main postings: BOE member: "I want God to be a part of this"; Future speaker, intelligent design believer and In support of intelligent design.
How about those UF sorority girls? The antics of Zeta Tau Alpha members and their dates at Ybor City's Columbia Restaurant drew all the catcalls you'd expect, especially after the post link found its way to FSU sites. UF sorority's raucous night at The Columbia.
FAMU factions kept their fight alive online, with enough blame to spread around on exactly who was responsible for shredding the once-lauded university's reputation. The debate got even hotter as the Rattler Nation blog closed shop. Main postings: FAMU Law 'traumatic and disheartening'; FAMU, public records, patience; FAMU grade changes under investigation.
