"I believe strongly that vouchers are not best for our society and therefore, no, at least in my rational moments, I don't regret it at all," Burningham said of his involvement in Utahns for Public Schools. Yet, he says, "many people have told me I've just begun to see (animosity) that is going to get worse."

This summer, Burningham refused to allow state board employees to testify before a legislative committee, further angering GOP leaders.

Burningham welcomes the constitutional discussion, calling it appropriate. But he's pretty sure where it's coming from.

"I guess the concern that some legislators have is that they think we (on the State Board of Education) don't follow the law. Well, of course we follow the law. The major issue behind this ... is we didn't see the voucher issue the same way they (GOP legislators) did, but we were the ones that were following the law ... and of course, the Supreme Court agreed," Burningham said.

"That's made some people really angry, so they're thinking about changing (the Constitution) so there's more power (in education governance in the Legislature), so we'll be sure to follow the law. Well, we do follow the law, in my opinion," he said.

Curtis recognizes that some Republicans are angry at the state board because its members refused to implement the current voucher law this past spring, saying it was flawed. Ultimately, the Utah Supreme Court agreed the voucher question should go to voters Nov. 6.

Vouchers may have started this discussion, said Curtis. But he wants the Constitution Review Commission to make a "scholarly" study of public education governance in Utah "before the Legislature weighs in" in the 2008 session.

Said Curtis: "It may well be that we don't need any (constitutional) change. And I'm not necessarily advocating a change" — other than having direct elections of State School Board members, which the Legislature can do through statute without changing the Constitution.

The review commission is purely an advisory body. While legislators are encouraged to take proposed constitutional amendments to the commission, they don't have to. In fact, the Legislature, angry at what was seen as the Constitution Review Commission meddling in politics several years ago, passed a law saying the panel can't take positions on a proposed amendment after the Legislature has passed it — kind of a "shut-up-and-butt-out" attitude. And proposed constitutional amendments can be introduced, debated and passed in the Legislature without having been reviewed by the Constitution Review Commission.