Sen. Stiles Flip-Flops on School Voucher Law

Republican State Senator Nancy Stiles has twice flip-flopped on the new school voucher law.

The new school voucher law allows the use of public tax funds to support the
education of private school students, including those attending religious
schools. The New Hampshire Constitution forbids the use of public funds to
support religion. For that reason, the school voucher law is under court
challenge by both the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and
State.

Last year, the school voucher bill passed the Senate despite State Sen. Nancy Stiles vote against it. However, in the Feb. 8 edition of the Hampton Union, Stiles
indicated that she has changed her position, and now intends to vote against
attempts (HB 370) to repeal the school voucher law. She justified the switch by
saying that any new piece of legislation deserved a chance to see whether or
not it would succeed.

Hmm. Someone with a more skeptical turn of mind might see other motives at play here. During the 2005-2006 legislative session, when Stiles was a state
representative, she twice voted (HB 1707 and SB 131) in favor of school
vouchers, the same position she has now once again adopted. She has returned to her roots - support for vouchers.

What might have caused her temporary shift to oppose vouchers in 2012? In that year, Stiles ran for the State Senate in a newly-redistricted area. She ran against a formidable opponent who had previously represented much the same area both as a state representative and a state senator. Moreover, according to her own words, Stiles noted that the great majority of constituent input she had received
opposed school vouchers, making support for them politically risky.

What to do? Answer: Play it safe and vote against the school voucher bill (SB 372). The school voucher bill enjoyed a large enough majority in the Senate (though it lacked popular support among voters) that it would still pass no matter how she voted. In other words, Stiles had a "free vote." Political survival in a tough race may have motivated Stiles' temporary shift, not the noblest of reasons.

Now, having won the 2012 election, Stiles is free to return to her original position
- support for school vouchers. Actually, the political strategy of supporting any newly-passed bill is exceedingly clever. It allows the politician to be on both sides of an issue. "Although I don't support Bill X, I think we should see whether or not it is successful before passing judgment. So I'm voting for it."

Moreover, Stiles' new argument that any new piece of legislation deserves a chance to succeed is particularly unpersuasive when applied to school vouchers. Suppose a bill was passed and made law that suspended freedom of speech. Should we have to wait to see whether or not we liked censorship of the spoken and written word before we could repeal this law? The idea of censorship is so alien to American democracy that it falls of its own weight.

Similarly, the separation of church and state is fundamental to this nation. The reason many of our ancestors came to these shores was to escape religious persecution in other countries. The school voucher bill clearly violates this principle and should be repealed without delay by the legislature.