JUST AS one can count on grass turning brown in the winter months and greening up in the spring, one can count on voucher proposals - like so many Punxsutawney Phils - waking from a long winter's sleep, yawning, gauging the smell of the land and the strength of the sun, deciding if it's temperate enough to emerge. If conditions aren't right, they return to their dens to wait for the world to warm a bit. Like groundhogs looking for a touch of spring, voucher proposals are hinted at, briefly aired, hammered out, sent out for feedback, modified, evaluated, and debated. Some go back to the drawing board when they don't feel the warmth of consensus. Others emerge quietly, testing the currents and taking their spots in state legislatures or on state ballots. Bill drafters study past proposals, figure the costs, and write new proposals. Then proponents send them out to test the winds of public opinion. In the latest testing, the November election, they didn't fare well, as voters rejected initiatives to create voucher programs in California and Michigan. Following the November election returns, editors of the New York Times wrote: The school voucher movement suffered a serious setback with the overwhelming defeat of voucher initiatives in California and Michigan. About 70% of voters in both states rejected measures that would have provided publicly funded vouchers for students to attend private . . . These results should serve as a warning to voucher supporters, including Gov. George W. Bush, that voters simply are not convinced that siphoning off public funds for vouchers can improve education for all. The Wall Street Journal Election section featured the headline Voters Spurn School-Voucher Proposals, followed by Voters in California and Michigan shut the book on ballot initiatives to establish state-funded vouchers for private schooling. The Opinion page of the Christian Science Monitor commented, Liberals decry vouchers as undermining public education, and conservatives hail them as the solution to public-school failure. But research has shown each of these remedies has its own strengths and weaknesses. None is a magic bullet for dealing with failing schools. A Less-Than-Successful Past In 1978 voters defeated a statewide voucher referendum in Michigan (74% to 26%). In Washington, D.C., voters said no to another voucher plan in 1981 (by an 8-to-1 margin). A 1990 voter initiative in Oregon that would have required open enrollment in public schools and allowed tax credits for students in private schools (including church-sponsored institutions) or for students schooled at home was overwhelmingly defeated. A 1992 proposal in Colorado went down 67% to 33%. California's 1993 initiative met a similar fate. To date, no state ballot initiative concerning vouchers, tax credits, or tax deductions for private schools has passed. For a clearer sense of this less-than-successful track record, consider that in their 2000 legislative sessions, the following states introduced - but failed to pass - legislation to create voucher or tax- credit programs or to amend previously enacted voucher or tax-credit programs: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. In their 2000 legislative sessions, the following states introduced legislation to create voucher or tax-credit programs that, though they failed to pass, will carry over to the 2001 sessions: New Jersey and Virginia. In its 2000 legislative session, Arizona enacted legislation to amend its previously enacted tax-credit program by adding a provision allowing taxpayers to receive a credit for donations to a nonprofit foundation that benefits any public school in the state. …