|
The Truth About the Freedom of Conscience Bill By Forest Thigpen If all the things being said by the opponents of HB 1523 were true, I would be against it as well. But they are not. Some opponents of the "Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act," including Clarion Ledger Executive Editor Sam Hall, make the outlandish assertion that this bill would allow a person to be "refused service at a restaurant, not allowed to shop at a grocery store," and other sweeping generalizations. Sam says these are in "specific, detailed language" in the bill, but the words "restaurant" or "grocery store" appear nowhere in the bill, nor does any provision for those businesses to keep people out. HB1523 does not create any protection for businesses that deny service to a person based on sexual orientation. The bill is confined almost exclusively to wedding-related services that may be declined, and only under certain circumstances. Here's why that's in the bill. Many merchants, such as bakers, and many professionals, such as attorneys, have said they gladly serve their customers regardless of sexual orientation, but they draw the line at assisting in a wedding ceremony, which they consider a sacrament or act of worship, if that ceremony would violate their beliefs about God's design for that form of worship. Newspaper Guilty of Denial of Service? Let's look at another form of denying service to a person seeking to exercise a Constitutional right. Should I be able to sue the Clarion-Ledger if it chooses not to print my comments? That's a "denial of service" for my right to free speech - a right which is explicitly stated in the Constitution. If you oppose HB1523 - and if you want to be consistent - you would have to believe that I could sue, or the government could punish the newspaper for denying my right to express my views. Other distortions about what HB 1523 supposedly does concern foster care and adoption. The bill clarifies that a religious organization like Catholic Charities does not have to abandon its faith in order to continue providing foster care services in Mississippi. Some states and cities have banned such groups for politely declining to place children with same-sex couples. I'm not saying you have to agree with that stance by those organizations. But given that no one was forced to use their services, and there were other providers that would make those placements, was it really worth it to ban them from participating in the program? There are two employment provisions in the bill. One would allow businesses, schools, and religious organizations to set dress codes and to keep men out of women's bathrooms, dressing rooms, showers, etc. The bill does not require those restrictions; it merely says you can't be punished by the government for choosing those policies. The other is a protection for public employees who express their views about marriage on their own time. This protection would apply to a situation like the one in Atlanta, where Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran was fired because he wrote a Bible study on his own time that briefly referenced the Bible's views on sexual morality. Who is Forcing Whose Views on Others? After the Roe v. Wade decision, many states enacted conscience protections for health professionals whose deeply-held beliefs would not allow them to assist in performing an abortion. HB1523 is a similar response to a Supreme Court decision on another issue that created potential conflicts for people of faith. President Obama's own Solicitor General, when arguing the same-sex marriage case before the Supreme Court, said that respecting rights of conscience of those who disagree "is going to depend on how States work [it out]... and how they decide what kinds of accommodations they are going to allow under state law. And different states could strike different balances." Our society, I hope, would never be alright with the government forcing an African-American t-shirt shop to design and print shirts for a Klan parade, even if that parade is legally organized. We would never think of forcing a Jewish baker to make a swastika-adorned cake for a neo-Nazi wedding, which is also legal to hold. Why would we think it's OK to force a religious business owner to assist in a wedding ceremony that violates his or her deeply-held beliefs, simply because it is now legal to hold such events? HB1523 is not forcing anyone's views on anyone else. On the contrary, it is protecting people from having someone else's views forced on them to violate the tenets of their faith regarding marriage. Some have said the bill pits one person's religious views against another, but consider the effect of each: a person who "denies service" is not preventing a same-sex couple from exercising their right to get married.* But if the couple prevails, it is preventing the objector from exercising his or her freedom of religion. HB1523 is a narrowly-tailored measure that provides a reasonable balance for those competing rights. If we head down the road of having the government force us to abandon our religious beliefs, especially when reasonable alternatives are available, where will it end? What will be left of the freedom of religion? * A Circuit Clerk will not be protected under this bill if a license is not provided to a same-sex couple "without delay." The Clerk may "seek recusal," but one of the conditions of that recusal is that the Clerk "shall take all steps necessary to ensure that the...licensing...is not impeded or delayed..." Thus, if the license is delayed, the Clerk has not met the conditions for protection under this bill. |
Proponents of spending more money on education say, or at least imply, that "fully funding the MAEP formula" will produce better results for students. But will it?
Most people probably think that if public school funding is increased, most of it will be spent on increasing teacher salaries. But will it?
Obviously, money is necessary for educating children. But the truth is that almost all the top-spending districts are among the lowest-achieving districts. The inverse is also true: almost all the lowest-spending districts are among the highest-achieving.
As you can see for yourself on our new website, SeeTheSchoolSpending.org*:
The 20 highest-spending districts yielded these grades from the Mississippi Department of Education, based on state-administered tests: 5 Fs, 6 Ds, 8 Cs, 1 B, and no As.
The 20 lowest-spending districts achieved 6 As, 10 Bs, 1 C, 3 Ds, and no Fs.
Of the 19 Districts with an A grade, none are in the top 20 for spending, and only 4 are in the top 90.
Of the 15 Districts with an F grade, none are in the bottom 20 spending districts, and all but 2 spend more than the state average.
The highest-spending districts spend more than twice as much per student as the lowest-spending districts.
When education funding is increased, where does it go?
A recent report by the legislative accounting watchdog, PEER (Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review), found that from 2005-2014, school districts' spending in the "Instructional" category, when adjusted for inflation, decreased by approximately $75 million, while spending in the "Administration" category increased by $57 million.
More specifically, the total spent on salaries of teachers and other professional personnel in the Instructional category declined by approximately $130 million, or about 8.6%. During the same period, expenditures for salaries in the Administration category increased by $15 million, or 8.1%.
On SeeTheSchoolSpending.org, you can see this trend has continued over the past two decades. In 1993, more than 41% of per-student spending was spent on teacher salaries. By 2014, that had declined to less than 33%. (In 1960, which precedes the data shown on SeeTheSchoolSpending, teacher salaries made up 60% of school spending.)
This means that the bulk of new spending has gone to things other than teacher salaries. If more money is put into the current MAEP formula, that trend is likely to continue.
Questions
Is it possible there is enough money already going into the school system? Could it be that too much money is being directed toward people or programs that do not improve student learning? Based on the findings described above, the answer to those questions appears to be "yes."
Will "fully funding the MAEP formula" cause student achievement to improve? If more money is appropriated, will it find its way to the classroom, where real progress can be made? If past performance is an indication of future results, the answer to those questions is "no."
* Click on the "Rank" heading to sort in order; click it again to sort in reverse order. This link shows 2013 comparison. Spending and grades for 2015 have not been reported, and the 2014 accountability grades are meaningless (see "Waiver Grades").
MCPP President Forest Thigpen issued the following statement regarding the ruling by U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves which overturned Mississippi's Constitutional provision defining marriage: (more…)
Seven years after his death, a friend of mine is drawing national attention because of a simple but profound observation he made about the process of how ideas move from being politically impossible to becoming law. His observation helps explain, in part, why the work of think tanks like ours is so important. (more…)
It is a travesty that a majority of the Senate Education Committee would consider the CEO of one of Mississippi's greatest success stories to be unworthy to serve on the State Board of Education.
Maybe the education establishment is afraid that Bomgar might try to apply the same innovation to the education system that he has to the technology sector. (more…)
The Senate has passed and the House is considering bills that would, for the first time, provide state funding for pre-kindergarten programs from the state budget. Mississippi Center for Public Policy opposes state-funded pre-kindergarten.
(more…)
We appreciate Governor Bryant's willingness to take a stand on this issue. The promise of state control over an Obamacare health insurance exchange is an illusion. Federal officials have the power to dictate the operation of an Obamacare exchange, and we have no doubt they will do so over time.
(more…)
We all want our public schools to succeed. But what, exactly, does "success" mean?
In a few days the Mississippi Department of Education will release the ratings for public schools and school districts in our state. For the first time ever, schools and districts will be graded A, B, C, D, or F.
(more…)
Contrary to what was reported in this newspaper on Sunday, I did not "help design the [state health insurance] exchange used today," and I have consistently opposed the creation of an exchange under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). A brief call to my office before publishing these inaccuracies - and others - would have been helpful. (more…)