This Needs To Be Included, Unless, Of Course, You Try to Include It

Brad Last ran a bill solely to address arguments raised against the voucher bill.

The bill (1) requires that teachers at voucher-eligible schools have criminal background checks, (2) doubles the amount of money the State School Board gets to administer the program, and (3) deals with arguments that voucher schools might teach unlawful activities. Only 5 Democrats voted for the bill.

Why do you think that is? Is it just that the word "vouchers" was in the title?

I don't believe the vote means that Democrats are in favor of felonious teachers, that Democrats are against providing more administration money, or that Democrats favor Jihad schools. Nor do I believe their negative votes were bought by generous Union contributions. Nor do I believe that Rep. Becker twisted their arms to vote against the bill.

And, I surely don't believe the media will ever ask why today's votes are so seemingly at odds with earlier stated positions that such protections are needed in the law. But it would be very interesting to hear why people think those votes were cast against things many of the "no" voters said they wanted in the voucher program.