Tell us: Should we amend the Alaska Constitution?

As the foundation for our state and nation, proposing amendments to the Alaska Constitution or the U.S. Constitution should not be done lightly.

Several bills are in play this legislative session that, if passed, could reshape the face of this state. Some seem knowingly unconstitutional, such as House Bill 69, sponsored by House Speaker Mike Chenault, R-Nikiski, and co-sponsored by several others, including all four Valley representatives.

Embarrassingly pointless and antagonistic, HB 69 exists in an alternate reality where state law trumps federal law. We see no wisdom in spending limited time and public resources on laws such as this one that, if passed, would send Alaskans to federal prison for weapons violations.

But nothing proposed thus far by our legislators seems so ill-advised as Senate Joint Resolution 9. Masquerading as a proposal to provide school choice, SJR 9 would offer voters a chance to change the state constitution to allow public money to go to private schools. It is shocking that lawmakers would move to make such a change without first having a conversation about its possible consequences.

It seems necessary that any change in how public money is spent to provide public education should not be undertaken lightly, or without extensive public dialogue about the possible consequences of doing so. Such a profound and unprecedented change should also be shown to benefit all Alaskans.

It is unclear to us how SJR 9 meets these standards, or offers any benefit especially to students in rural Alaska. Students who live in the Bush already have far fewer choices for schools and classes than their urban counterparts. An $18 million lawsuit settled in January 2012 aimed to remedy some of these inequities.

If public funds are channeled to religious and other private schools, we wonder if those schools also will have to conform to other rules relating to public education, such as those that govern the teaching of evolution in the classroom, sex education and rules that prohibit discrimination against gay students and teachers.

If we don’t ask — and work to honestly answer — such questions, it seems likely we will pay millions over the next five, 10, 20, 30 years or longer to have these issues decided by the courts.

Instead, here’s what we’d like: A thoughtful, broad-based conversation among Alaskans. We would exclude politicians and experts from the Lower 48 who are already selling a bill of goods that insists, without much explanation, that this will be good for our public education system and its tens of thousands of students.

Our Valley lawmakers, who are at the forefront of the effort to push SJR 9 on Alaskans, tell us there is a groundswell of support for amending our constitution to send public tax dollars to nonpublic schools. But thus far, our Opinion pages are missing the voices of parents who support this constitutional amendment. If you support SJR 9, we’d especially like to hear from you. If you don’t support SJR 9, we’d like to hear your reasons, too.

Send your opinions to news@frontiersman.com, or mail letters to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 873509, Wasilla, AK, 99687. Submissions are limited to 600 words and must be signed with the writer’s name and community of residence.

This isn’t just about amending the Alaska Constitution. It’s about all of our children and making sure each has solid opportunities to learn and grow. This is a cause worthy of our best and most careful consideration.

The proposed education funding amendment will be a topic of discussion on this week’s broadcast of Valley Edition on Radio Free Palmer today at 5 p.m. Frontiersman publisher Mark Kelsey, independent journalist Zaz Hollander and Palmer blogger Terry Snyder will discuss the issue with host Mike Chmielewski. Tune in at FM 89.5, or stream over the web from radiofreepalmer.org. The program will be rebroadcast Monday morning at 8:30.