John Kenneth Galbraith proposed a test for the "good society" that deals directly with the financing of education. The Arizona Constitution may require that the legislature establish and maintain a "general and uniform" public school system, but, as the author argues in this article, the chronicle of the school funding cases in Arizona is more of a tale of legislative avoidance, lip service, passive resistance, outright antagonism, and inadequate funding than it is of rapid steps toward Galbraith's definition of the good society. After presenting the historical perspective on the legal struggle to bring an adequate education to all children, the author assesses the value of court rulings with respect to school funding by examining four cases (Shofstall v. Hollins; Roosevelt Elementary School District v. Bishop; Hull v. Albrecht and Students First; and Flores v. State of Arizona). In this article, it is argued that educational adequacy is still socially constructed in minimalist terms and noted that the movement from equity to adequacy is necessarily evolutionary. However, no standard definition of adequacy exists. In Arizona and elsewhere the courts continue to struggle in shaping the political and social forces to achieve "the good society" for all children. (Contains 34 notes.)