Nevada’s Voucher Breakout
内华达州的教育券突围
Unions and the ACLU fight universal statewide school choice.
工会正和美国公民自由联盟一起反对全州普适择校
The hullabaloo over Common Core is obscuring some major school choice flashpoints in the states. Consider Nevada, where the union for the public school status quo is suing to block revolutionary education savings accounts.
围绕“公共核心”的喧闹，盖住了各州主要的择校热点问题。看看内华达州，为公立学校现状发声的工会，正在通过起诉来到达封锁革命性的教育储蓄账户的目的。
Earlier this summer Nevada Republicans established universal education savings accounts (ESAs), which allow all parents who withdraw their kids from public schools to spend state funds on private school tuition, textbooks, tutoring fees and special services. Jeb Bush last month praised Nevada’s ESAs as a model for “total voucherization,” which is scaring the unions silly.
今年夏初，内华达州的共和党人建立了普适教育储蓄账户（ESAs)， 允许所有家长，在把孩子从公立学校退学之后，可以用州立基金来给孩子交私立学校的学费、书本费、家教费和特殊教育服务费。上个月，Jeb Bush称赞这是个”教育券全面化”的典范，这可把工会吓傻了。
Starting next year, parents who opt out of public schools can receive between 90% and 100% of the statewide average per-pupil allotment ($5,100 to $5,700) depending on their income. Unused funds can be rolled over for future expenses including college. According to the Friedman Foundation, ESAs will cover between 60% and 80% of the median tuition at private schools, many of which provide additional financial assistance.
自明年始，选择让自己的孩子退出公立学校的家长们，根据收入不同，可以拿到全州学生平均拨款的90%到100%（即5100 至5700美元）。未用完的资金可以结转为将来使用，包括上大学的费用。据Friedman基金会说，教育储蓄账户可以覆盖私立学校中位学费的60%到80%，且这种私立学校大多会提供额外的助学金。
Twenty-three states have enacted 48 private-school choice programs, but nearly all include income and eligibility caps. Four states other than Nevada—Arizona, Florida, Tennessee and Mississippi—offer ESAs that are limited to special needs or low-income students.
有23个州已经立法实施了48个私立学校择校方案，只是几近所有的方案都包含有收入和资格限制。与内华达州不同，有四个州——亚利桑那，佛罗里达，田纳西和密西西比——要求教育储蓄账户限用于特殊需求或低收入家庭学生。
Unions are desperate to prevent Nevada’s model from spreading. They argue that giving all parents these educational options will destroy public schools, but the real point is to break up the union monopoly. Universal ESAs give all low and middle-income students the ability to escape failing schools, while providing enough funding to seed alternatives.
为阻止内华达州模式的蔓延，工会已不顾一切。他们认为，赋予所有家长以教育选择，这对公立学校将是毁灭性的，但真正的要点是它会打破工会的垄断。在提供足够资金扶植替代选择的同时，普适教育储蓄账户会使所有低收入和中等收入家庭的学生有能力避开不合格的学校。
The American Civil Liberties Union last week took up the union water cannon. It argued in a lawsuit that ESAs violate the Nevada constitution’s ban on “public funds of any kind or character whatever, State, County or Municipal” being used for a “sectarian purpose” and undermine “the public school system that the State is constitutionally required to support.”
美国公民自由联盟上周拿起了工会的水枪。在一起诉讼中，它辩称，教育储蓄账户违反了内华达州宪法禁止”任何种类或性质的公共基金，无论是州立、县立或市立”被用于”宗派目的”的规定，并从根本上破坏了”宪法规定州必须支持的公立学校系统”。
This is a legal Hail Mary. Dozens of state constitutions include these so-called Blaine amendments, which are a legacy of the anti-Catholic bigotry of the 19th century. Most state courts and the U.S. Supreme Court in its landmark 2011 ruling, Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn, have interpreted these prohibitions narrowly. The High Court ruled that tax credits to nonprofits that fund private school scholarships aren’t government expenditures.
这真是个法律上的孤注一掷。数十个州的宪法包含有这类所谓的布莱恩修正案，这是19世纪反天主教偏执狂的一份遗产。在2011年亚利桑那州基督教学校学费组织诉Winn案中，绝大多数州法院和美国联邦最高法院在其具有里程碑意义的裁定中，都已狭义地解释过这些禁令。高等法院裁定，给予旨在资助私立学校奖学金的非营利组织的那些税收优惠，不属于政府支出。
Last year the Arizona Supreme Court upheld an appellate decision that ESAs are constitutional because they are “neutral in all respects toward religion” and direct “aid to a broad class of individuals without reference to religion.” What’s more, “the specified object of the ESA is the beneficiary families, not private or sectarian schools.”
去年，亚利桑那州最高法院维持了一项上诉判决，认为教育储蓄账户符合宪法，因为它们是”在各方面对于宗教均属中立”，并且“直接帮助了大量与宗教无关的个体”。更重要的是，”教育储蓄账户指定的对象是受益家庭，不是私人或者宗派学校”。
The Institute for Justice, which helped defend Arizona’s ESAs and craft Nevada’s, notes that it is “the independent decision-making by parents that severs any link between church and state.” ESAs give “parents a genuine choice as to how to spend the money.” If ESAs are unconstitutional, then so are state Medicaid reimbursements to religiously affiliated hospitals.
帮助保卫亚利桑那州教育储蓄账户并帮助精心构建内华达州教育储蓄账户的“正义协会”指出，教育储蓄账户是”家长们的独立决策，切断了所有政教关连”。它给了”家长们一个真正的选择机会来决定如何花这些钱”。如果教育储蓄账户是违宪的，那各州给宗教附属医院报销的国家医疗补助也同样是。
It’s both a shame and reflection of modern liberal politics that the ACLU is teaming up with the teachers union to squash educational freedom.
美国公民自由联盟与教师工会结盟，一起压制教育自由，这不仅是一种耻辱，也是对现代自由派政治面目的一个真实写照。
翻译：淡蓝
校对：沈沉（@你在何地-sxy）
编辑：辉格@whigzhou