Huntsman, Valentine hope top court will act on vouchers
"It's premature" for Huntsman to call a special session, said Senate President John Valentine, R-Orem. "Let the courts have their constitutional responsibilities fulfilled first."
"In the short term, the governor wants to wait for the courts," said Lisa Roskelley, spokeswoman for Huntsman. Thus, Huntsman's consideration for a special session "is not imminent."
However, if the high court doesn't soon provide "clarity" on the voucher referendum vote, both the governor and Valentine say the executive and legislative branches will have to act.
"We believe the (Supreme Court) is on the fast track" to make a decision, said Roskelley.
But, actually, it may not be on the "fast track" to make a broad voucher decision that adds "clarity."
That's because to get before the high court the question of whether the Nov. 6 referendum would really install or repeal vouchers in Utah, a State Board of Education decision last week not to implement vouchers via HB174 must be appealed.
And so far leaders on the pro-voucher side say there has been no movement to challenge the board.
That leaves the high court to just decide whether the ballot language written for Nov. 6. is proper or not — a separate suit that has nothing to do with the state board's refusal to implement vouchers now.
Ultimately, that very limited issue of proper ballot language may not be broad enough for the Supreme Court to rule on whether the Nov. 6 vote is a clear up-or-down decision by citizens on vouchers — something Huntsman and GOP legislative leaders all say they want.
The high court will hear oral arguments Friday on the ballot language question. There is no scheduled hearing on the issue of whether HB174 would implement voucher law if voters repeal the original voucher bill — HB148 — on Nov. 6.
"I would be very antsy if we don't have" a broad voucher clarity decision from the high court by September, said Valentine.
Rep. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George, is the original sponsor of HB148. That is the main voucher law that would give parents who send their children to private schools a taxpayer-funded tuition payment of between $500 and $3,000 a year, based on family income. That's the law that anti-voucher groups gathered enough voter signatures to put on the Nov. 6 ballot.
You can be the first to comment on this story.