The policy implications of state court mandates on public education finance

The question of the effectiveness of the judicial branch of government in the United States is a recurring question in political science. Reaching all the way back to the Federalist Papers, the question has been that without the sword or the purse, how can the judicial branch play an effective role in the policy process?;This dissertation adds to the literature on this question using a case study of a judicial decision from the Cole County, Missouri circuit court in 1993. The decision stated that the public education finance system in Missouri was unconstitutional. The legislature, within 4 months, significantly reformed the way public education was financed in Missouri, despite the fact that the Supreme Court of the state had not yet ruled on appeal.;The questions posed and answered are three fold: First, did the decision cause the reform legislation to be passed? This study finds that it did. Without the court ruling, significant reform would not likely have been seriously considered, and would certainly not have passed. To answer this question in the affirmative, however, does not fully answer the basic question as to the power of the judiciary in the formation of public policy.;To accurately gauge or identify the strength of the judiciary in the policy process, one must determine whether the legislation that passed actually changed the aspects of the finance system that the court identified as unconstitutional. The court decision stated that the finance system was inadequate and inequitable; in other words, too few dollars were spent on public education, and per-pupil revenue varied too widely among the districts throughout the state.;Therefore, the second question was, did the reform legislation address the problem of adequacy by increasing the amount spent on primary and secondary public education in Missouri. The results show that the reform did result in a significant increase in per-pupil revenue throughout the state.;Finally, did this reform legislation result in a more even or equitable distribution of revenue throughout the state? The results here are much less clear. It turns out that while some improvement in distributional equity has taken place, the way in which the finance system was reformed did not focus on improving equity in distribution. Legislators and others involved in the formulation and passage of SB380 were aware of the court concern over equity, but were more attentive to things such as overall budget constraints, effects on individual districts, and local control of education. (Abstract shortened by UMI.).