Judge Howard Manning?s unabashed attempt to shame the legislature into moving on the $22 million he approved to begin helping 16 low-wealth school districts in North Carolina as part of his Leandro rulings should not be taken lightly. See Judge Fired Up On State Budget. The state legislature should resist all attempts to move on the $22 million and for good reason.

As education lawyer Alfred Lindseth notes in his Education Week op-ed Adequacy Lawsuits: The Wrong Answer for Our Kids school finance litigation cases like Leandro have as ?their primary purpose obtaining ?adequate? (read ?significantly more?) state funding for K-12 schools?Adequacy cases allege and seek to prove that the state has not met its duties under these vaguely worded provisions of the state constitution.?

Supporters of this type of litigation say the benefits are obvious: increased funding will give us better teachers, smaller classes, better facilities, and raise the achievement of poor and minority students.

But, Lindseth says, there is a distinct dark side to adequacy litigation and that the billions spent will probably be wasted. Here is the dark side:

? More money, without fundamental changes in how it is spent, will not improve student performance.

?Alternative means of education reform will be shifted to the back burner.

?More resources, rather than the effective use of existing resources, becomes the rule.

?Local control of schools will be seriously eroded.

?Standards will be lowered.

?Our democratic institutions will be weakened.

The evidence Lindseth ushers forth to support each of these points cannot be ignored. Adequacey litigation may have a humanitarian face, but it has a cruel heart.