Abolish_public_education wrote on November 21, 2009 06:17 PM: Firstly, it's the LEGISLATURE's job to define "involuntary servitude", not the Courts. Who needs to rely on the opinions of legal professionals, anyway? The Constitution is written in simple English. Involuntary Servitude is obviously making someone do something against their will. Probably >70% of NV kids are in public school INVOLUNTARILY. The issue turns on exactly *what* they are doing.

Most of them are providing warm bodies for the Districts to get government funding, ie "idle" work. If idleness is profitable, I'm sure the kids would rather be doing it someplace else for their OWN benefit. At GVHS students have to walk (or equivalent) "to raise money for science classes", ie "active" work.

Better re-read the Constitution. Article 11 §2 says "the legislature may pass such laws as will tend to secure a general attendance .." In other words, *optional* is the DEFAULT unless the legislature enacts compulsary attendance, which to the delight of educrats and your dopey coalition, it did.

BTW, state lotteries are a complete RIPOFF. They offer miserable odds to players (usually poor people) and they make lottery commission sinecures for political cronies.

Joe Bama wrote on November 21, 2009 02:01 AM: How about a state lottery run by high school dropouts?

Nevada Student wrote on November 20, 2009 09:49 PM: I wonder why "Abolish_public_education" did not attend the meeting to testify before the Youth Legislature.

This person says lotteries are prohibited under Article 4, Section 24 of the NV Constitution. That is correct. What this person fails to say is that the Bill Draft Request of the Youth Legislature will be a constitutional amendment.

Second, this person says that education is "involuntary servitude," yet does not cite what NV Supreme Court Decision or SCOTUS Decision defines this.

By the way, some of this person's citations are incorrect. Article 1, Section 17 (not 18) of the NV Constitution prohibits "involuntary servitude" (Sec: 17. Slavery and involuntary servitude prohibited.) Additionally, nowhere in Article 11, Section 2 is education considered "OPTIONAL." Indeed, there are no NV Supreme Court Decisions to back this up. Simply, Article 11, Section 2 of the NV Constitution provides for a "uniform system of common schools" (Section 2. Uniform system of common schools.)

One may find the NV Constitution on the NV Legislature's website, http://www.leg.state.nv.us/const/nvconst.html

Abolish_public_education wrote on November 20, 2009 03:30 PM: It shouldn't surprise anyone that public education advocates would converge to replace Mariani's Constitutional proposal (narrowed compulsary attendance) with an unconstitutional, big government, special interest one. Lotteries are PROHIBITED under Article 4 §24.

Ken wrote on November 20, 2009 12:56 PM: Things have gotten better for the youth legislators. In the past they had to go to the short bus to find someone to play the youth Dina Titus.

Abolish_public_education wrote on November 20, 2009 10:46 AM: Employers said they were not interested in hiring high school dropouts. And alternative education would be limited because many apprenticeships and adult education programs require participants to be at least 18, educators said.

Involuntary servitude is prohibited in this state (Article 1, §18). Why do we DRAFT kids into the school system? Mariani's proposal was definitely a step in the right direction. Indeed, the Constitution set up pub-ed with attendance OPTIONAL (Article 11 §2).

I wouldn't expect employers like Kirkorian or Agassi to badmouth dropouts. Both quit in 8th grade! No doubt the guy who dissed them has a worthless 4 yr degree and (NON)works for the government. If "educators" (who have pretty dismal records) had their way, you'd need a PhD to sweep floors.

If attendance was voluntary, CCSD would probably lose >90% of its students -- to the BENEFIT of the opt-outers. The sooner kids leave CCSD the better off they'll be.

Continuing the Irresponsible Cycle wrote on November 20, 2009 08:18 AM: Let's see ... what can we think of to help our downturn in gaming (gambling)?

Not-so-brilliant answer -- more gambling, a lottery!

What are we teaching these kids? How to be more irresponsible? The first proposal was less school, now it's gamble more.

And to remind readers, each of the states that that was rated low in education financing and sought the lottery route to help them -- each of them is still ranked in the bottom.

Essentially, there are several factors explaining this including the state legislatures of those states then-shifting those monies being replaced by the lottery monies elsewhere, the monies being negligible, and the actual problem(s) ... another drum roll ... being it had more to do with the lack of student work, poor teacher direction and school district administrations.