Whose Right Is It, Anyway?

Although the Supreme Court has yet to release an opinion in American Electric Power v. Connecticut (previously discussed here), many commentators approaching the case from divergent points of view believe that the Court will likely reject the common law public nuisance cause of action, which is based on the power companies’ creation and release of substantial amounts of greenhouse gases that have contributed to global warming.  Aside from the jurisdictional and substantive issues that the AEP case raises directly, the issue lurking under the surface in that case, and made explicit in at least two other international cases, is the extent to which claims alleging environmental damage should be adjudicated on the basis of rights entirely separate from those which humans may assert for the benefit of individual human interests.  Stated differently, the problem of redressing harms caused by our overconsumption of fossil fuels and various other environmental harms raises what I believe to be two extremely provocative questions, neither of which will be answered here, but which provide a starting point for more effectively and honestly addressing issues of environmental harms.  First, how does a society decide to whom/what rights will be granted, and second, can a system of human laws accurately and effectively provide rights to nonhuman natural systems?

As an initial matter, perhaps notions of “granting” or “providing” rights already obfuscate a fundamental question; that is, is it honest to say that any human can actually grant rights, or are humans solely in a position to deny fulfillment of rights that exist inherently for the benefit of all beings? 

Continue ReadingWhose Right Is It, Anyway?

Tony Evers: Trying to Throw High Heat at Voucher Schools

Tony Evers, the state superintendent of public instruction, has been making waves by going on the offensive against proposals to expand the use of private school vouchers in Wisconsin. In addition to what has been said in news stories such as this one in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, I’d offer three thoughts that struck me as I read the lengthy memo Evers offered to members of the legislature’s Joint Committee on Finance this week.

One: Legally and politically, this is almost surely idle thinking, but what if the private schools that are in Milwaukee’s voucher program had to face the same kind of consequences for getting weak results that charter schools and, of late, conventional public schools face?

Charter schools, which are independently operated, publicly funded schools, are generally given five-year contracts by a government body. (In Milwaukee, charter contracts are granted by the School Board, city government, or the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.) It is not unusual for a charter school to be closed if it is not getting good results at the end of five years, or sometimes sooner.

In the conventional Milwaukee Public Schools system, school closings are becoming common. Tightening finances and declining enrollments are key reasons, but getting bad results is also a factor. And a list of schools, including several major high schools, are under orders, based on federal policies, to take steps such as overhauling their programs and staffs and getting new principals because of low student success.

Continue ReadingTony Evers: Trying to Throw High Heat at Voucher Schools

The Sins of the Children Visited – This Time – on Their Parents

What to do about children who fail in school, or who simply fail to attend school at all? Efforts in recent years have focused on the schools themselves and on the teachers, and there have been initiatives to test children for performance in key areas and punish schools or teachers in underperforming schools. A recent New York Times article describes another approach: punishing the parents of underperforming (or under-attending) students. In “Whose Failing Grade Is It?” author Lisa Belkin discusses proposed legislation that endeavors to hold parents accountable for the performance of their offspring. She cites as examples a bill proposed in Indiana that would require parents to volunteer for at least three hours per semester in their children’s schools, as well as a proposed bill in Florida that would grade parents on their level of involvement in their children’s education, said grade to be posted on the child’s own report card. Belkin also notes that some states (she mentions Alaska and California) already have laws in place allowing for punishment of parents of habitual truants by imposing monetary fines or requiring attendance at parenting classes. The Indiana and Florida proposals were not enacted this past year, but their sponsors have vowed to try again in the new legislative session.

Obviously, very young children are entirely dependent on their parents’ efforts to get them to school, and to make sure that they have the necessary materials and support in order to attend consistently. However, problems of school truancy and failure to adequately fulfill academic requirements are more often seen and discussed as children enter the middle school and high school years. When we look at the issues facing these older students, are parent-directed laws a viable solution to the problem of kids failing in school?

Continue ReadingThe Sins of the Children Visited – This Time – on Their Parents