Poor Schools Sue for Funding

Critics argue that the lawsuits are diverting attention from other causes of student underachievement, such as lack of parental support and inefficient management techniques used by small rural school districts. In addition, they say, the courts are usurping powers that have traditionally been vested in state legislatures.

"It's up to legislatures to decide whether a state education system should be basic or world-class," Lindseth said. "If voters want to spend money on a world-class education system, that's great. But that's a decision for them, not for some judge, to make."

In several states, the funding lawsuits have led to a test of strength between the courts and state legislatures, with lawmakers either refusing to implement court orders on adequate funding or dragging their feet. Last month, a judge in Kansas threatened to close down the state's school system after the legislature took no action on his order to increase funding for poor schools. The case is now before the state Supreme Court.

"It's become like a poker game," said Smith, the education analyst. "Neither side will back down."

In Manning, the legal battle has come full circle. After World War II, poor black farmers went to court to ask for a school bus for their children, a case that was later overtaken by demands for complete desegregation of the school system that culminated in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954. Today, lawyers representing predominantly black school districts are back in court, seeking not integration but sufficient educational opportunity.

"We are showing that our school districts have the least experienced teachers," said Steve Morrison, the lead attorney for the eight heavily minority school districts that have joined the lawsuit. "Most teachers will jump to a different school district if they are offered an extra $5,000."

Lawyers for the South Carolina legislature argue that the state already has a wealth distribution policy that favors poorer school districts. "It's a myth that the poor districts are spending less money on education than the rich districts," said defense attorney Bobby Stepp, citing figures that show that Marion 7 spends at least $1,500 more per pupil than Horry County does.

Morrison counters that "per-pupil spending is a false standard," arguing that rural districts such as Marion 7 have larger numbers of at-risk students than their suburban neighbors and do not benefit from economies of scale.

How much it will cost to provide an "adequate education" in South Carolina and other states that have become the subject of lawsuits is far from clear. In New York, the Court of Appeals has established a July 31 deadline for the state to respond to plaintiff demands for a $9.5 billion increase in the education budget every year for the next four years, a 30 percent increase in funding.

"It's a huge amount of money," acknowledged Rebell, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs. "But there is a huge problem that needs to be solved. We are talking about a school system in which 40 percent of the kids drop out before they graduate."