If you can only speak in cliches and parrot other people, don't expect thinking people to pay much attention.

Joe, you must be an inconsistent Randian Objectivist!!! Thus, with one smooth flick of my wrist I can disregard everything you say henceforth.

As for the legislature...many always have and always will view choice for parents and students solely as a punishment for public schools. It is fairly predictable that they would amend the bill to the point that all it accomplishes is punishment for only certain public schools.

As for the average politicians desire for consistency and credibility, I've told this story a hundred times but it is apt. Up here in Greenville as the County Council was debating the "tree ordinance" Xanthene Norris was deriding Scott Case's amendment to the law. Case would give tax credits to businesses and developers to plant trees in parking lots rather than crafting arbitrary rules and fines based on one-size-fits-all. Ms. Norris gave the sole reason why she would not support Case's plan by rattling off the long list list of exemptions; for car lots, movie theaters, etc. etc. Case leans over the mic and says "Those are the exemptions in the original draft that my amendment eliminates." Ms. Norris responds "Oh, well, I still don't support your amendment" to thunderous applause from the gallery.

Fat Chance!

The statist big gummit education monopolists will simply subject McGee to some other anal exam until they find something else to object to.

Their whole objective is to protect their entrenched bureaucracy. Vouchers and tax credits do nothing but erode their power base and force them to compete with the private sector for sanction by those that consume the service they alledgedly provide.

That's why there's little chance of these folks "bolstering their credibility" by being consistent in their objections.