Then again, it may be that the Founding Fathers got it right. Maybe the very backbone of America is steeled by the notion that we are all entitled equally to the same educational opportunities and no one, not in the USA of George Washington and George W. Bush and everyone in between, gets left behind. Maybe the best deterrent to misuse of power and privilege is a well-educated citizenry across the board.

It seems to me the only way to absolutely answer the private-public debate is to try one system and then the other and see which one worked best.

But attempting to answer, or obfuscate, that question by compromising what is already in place — a guaranteed public education for all system that has been in effect for over 200 years — seems as subversive as it is unfair.

In the end, it wasn't an answer from either Eyre or Rusk that made up my mind on vouchers. It was two questions posed by Rusk, who asked: "If this is really about the free market, if that's what's going to make things better, then why are we offering government subsidies to open the free market? If you don't like government programs, why would you want to start this new government program of vouchers?"

On vouchers, put me down as a no.

---

Lee Benson's column runs Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Please send e-mail to benson@desnews.com and faxes to 801-237-2527. voucher proponent Richard Eyre and opponent Pat Rusk. Today: based on their respective arguments, how I intend to vote on Nov. 6.