Correction: The original version of this story misidentified the genre of a publication from Marnie McAllister, the editor of The Record, as well as her role. The relevant lines have been corrected, and we apologize for any confusion this may have caused–LINK nky editorial, Oct. 14, 2024.
One thing is clear about Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 2, which would add language to the state’s constitution that could enable the General Assembly to provide public funding for non-public education: Everyone has opinions about it.
Marketing and advocacy both for and against the amendment has arguably taken up more media and discursive space than any other issue on the ballot. LINK nky’s own opinion page is overwhelmed with letters from people sharing their thoughts on the matter.
Any vote that affects the commonwealth’s children is likely to induce strong emotions in the minds of Kentuckians, but there are some peculiarities to the situation that make it distinct from other issues, some of which go to the very heart of the ballot question’s public versus private tension.
The ballot question asks voters if “the General Assembly may provide financial support for the education of students outside the system of common schools. The General Assembly may exercise this authority by law, Sections 59, 60, 171, 183, 184, 186, and 189 of this Constitution notwithstanding.”
The sections mentioned in the latter parts of the ballot question currently place limitations and mandates on the General Assembly’s ability to move money away from public schools. For instance, section 186 states that all accrued school funds shall only go to the maintenance of public schools, while section 189 effectively prevents public funds or taxes from being appropriated to, used by, or in aid of any church, sectarian or denominational school.
The ‘notwithstanding’ clause serves as a way of preempting a legal challenge down the road, effectively nullifying the sections of the Constitution that prevent the funding of private and parochial institutions. If passed, the amendment eliminates these funding boundaries, giving the Republican supermajority in Kentucky’s General Assembly the power to change the law in future legislative sessions. It does not automatically create or enable a voucher program or fund charter schools. While changing the constitutional language won’t directly lead to any tangible change this year, it would effectively set up the legal environment to do so in the future.
Catholic schools, of which there are 38 in Northern Kentucky, stand to benefit from freeing up public money for private education, and the local Diocesan schools have openly encouraged their students’ families to vote in favor of the amendment by distributing flyers with talking points in school newsletters. The Diocese has sent letters from the Bishop encouraging parishioners to vote yes on the amendment, and publications from the Diocese frequently publish articles featuring proponents of the amendment, such as this one from Marnie McAllister, the editor of The Record, the newspaper of the Archdiocese of Louisville.
Public school leaders, on the other hand, have already begun characterizing Amendment 2 as a straight-up voucher amendment, even if the ballot language itself doesn’t establish any such program.
“They [the General Assembly] don’t like the Constitution because they want to implement their voucher system, and the Constitution strictly prohibits that,” said Kelly Read, an English teacher at Boone County High School and sitting president of the Boone County Education Association, Boone County’s teachers union. “And so the way around that is to do away with the Constitution.”
Vouchers refer to government-issued certificates families can redeem with private schools. This moves tax funding that would typically go to a local public school into the private institution the family’s student attends.
Laura Keener, the communications director for the Diocese of Covington, was critical of how opponents to the amendment assumed it would take a particular form, like vouchers, and said that it’s unclear what the changes might actually look like if the amendment passed.
“They’re quick to assign some kind of program,” Keener said.
Still, the open-ended nature of the ballot question has been a point of contention.
“The way it’s written, you can’t evaluate what it’s going to do,” said Beechwood Independent Schools Superintendent Mike Stacy. “I can’t evaluate what it’s going to do. So it’s the first time in history, that I can remember, that there’s no piece of legislation that’s driving the constitutional amendment, nor any specific outcome.”
Vouchers are one of several forms of school funding reform that have taken root throughout the country. Other forms include tax-credit savings accounts and tax-credit scholarship programs. In 2021, following the passage of House Bill 563, Kentucky experimented with tax-credited donations to organizations providing scholarships to private school students, but the Kentucky Supreme Court struck down the law in 2022 as unconstitutional.
The church’s advocacy highlights another peculiarity of the situation–private schools and institutions can openly endorse policy on official channels, whereas public school employees have to do it off school grounds as individuals because Kentucky law prohibits tax money and public resources from being used for political advocacy.
This has already come up elsewhere in the state. In August, posts advocating against Amendment 2 appeared on official social media for Pulaski County Schools, which led to backlash among conservatives, including U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY4), whose district includes Boone, Kenton and Campbell counties.
The Kentucky Attorney General’s office released an advisory for public school districts “to remind those entrusted with the administration of tax dollars appropriated for public education that those resources must not be used to advocate for or against the Amendment.”
Pulaski County Schools later took down their posts.
Then this month, the Attorney General’s office issued a cease and desist letter to Augusta Independent Schools after anti-Amendment 2 messaging appeared on their social media channels. Attorney General Russell Coleman’s team declined to comment further on the situation to LINK nky.
“It creates an imbalance in what can be said, and there’s a reason for that,” Read said. “It’s obvious that the deck is stacked against our speaking out against this.”
Still, Read said, he wasn’t necessarily in favor of curtailing Catholic schools’ rights to speak.
“They can do whatever they want, but what they can’t do, and what they shouldn’t do, is take public funds for private education,” Read said, adding that he’s a lifelong Catholic.
When asked about this tension, Keener simply replied, “That’s just the law.”
But Keener argued that the goal of Amendment 2 wasn’t to undercut public resources.
“We want strong public schools,” Keener said, adding that “it doesn’t have to be either, or.”
Public officials and teachers speaking out about the amendment is only one aspect of the conversation, however. Both right-leaning and left-leaning think tanks have furnished reports in favor of their side.
One such report comes from the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, a think tank that’s self-proclaimed as nonpartisan but has a history of supporting progressive policies.
Called “The Impact of Diverting Public Money to Private School Vouchers in Kentucky,” the report models hypothetical financial losses in Kentucky based off of policies already implemented in Florida, which has served as a trial ground for a variety of educational funding reforms. It offers projections for both the state as a whole as well as particular districts.
“For Kentucky, establishing a program proportional to what Florida, the largest state program, has in place would cost $1.19 billion annually from the Kentucky state budget,” the report argues. “That equals the cost of employing 9,869 Kentucky public school teachers and employees.”
The report was cited heavily by several Northern Kentucky school superintendents at an event in Erlanger earlier this week.
Proponents of Amendment 2 fired back with their own report, called “Fiscal Effects of School Choice: Doomsday Speculation Versus Reality.” The report was penned by John Garen, an emeritus professor at the University of Kentucky and scholar with the Bluegrass Institute, a Kentucky-focused member of the State Policy Network, which was founded by Thomas Roe of the Heritage Foundation, at the urging of Ronald Reagan.
Garen’s report argues the center’s report is flawed in two ways in that it “exaggerates the fiscal cost of potential school choice programs by assuming 100% eligibility and 100% participation. The first is sometimes true and the second never has been.”
Secondly, Garen argues, the report “ignores the fiscal benefits of educating a child via a school choice program at less expense than in a public school.”
“It’s partisan politics,” said Walton-Verona Independent Schools Superintendent Matt Baker when asked about the public-private dichotomy to the discourse. “It’s simply partisan politics. That’s all it is.”
Read both the full reports from the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, the Bluegrass Institute as well as McAllister’s letter in the The Messenger at the links below.
Local residents can also attend LINK nky’s Community Conversation on Amendment 2 on Monday, Oct. 14 at 6 p.m., both in-person and online. The event is free and open to the public, but we ask that you please RSVP before hand. Learn more about the event here.