Hot Topics: School Vouchers
Dateline: November 11, 1998 (updated 3/16/00)
A wave of bills and referenda have lately increased the pressure to force
local, state and federal governments to provide financial subsidies to parents who
choose to send their children to private or religious schools instead of free public
schools. None of this is new - Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman proposed
such a plan some forty years ago, but it was received little enthusiasm. In the 1980s,
the feasibility of a voucher system was studied in Great Britain, but after heated
debate the legislature rejected the idea.
Today, the idea's popularity is spreading across the country, especially among the
nation's more conservative elements. Let's take a look at some of the arguments,
pro and con. You can read about recent
news on church/state separation issues.
YES
1. Private schools offer superior education. According to some studies,
math and reading proficiency at private schools is significantly higher than at public
schools. Our nation's publicly-run schools are in a state of ruin, failing miserably
to properly educate the leaders of tomorrow and private schools are the only hope
for parents who want their children to receive a decent education.
2. Vouchers help parents afford an otherwise too-expensive education.
Presently, only children from wealthy families can afford the benefits of a private
education. Publicly funded vouchers would eliminate this unjust disparity and allow
for children in low-income homes to get a good education, too.
3. Choice saves tax-payer dollars in the end. Public school education
can cost a great deal more on a per-capita basis than private school education. Under
a voucher system, the private institutions would be able to achieve superior educational
benefits for a lower cost. Billions would be saved annually as ever more children
transfer from public to private schools.
4. Vouchers ensure the survival of private schools. Enrollment in
private schools declines as the discretionary income of lower- and middle-income
families declines. Their inability to send their children to private schools threatens
the future of private schools, especially parochial schools in the cities. Vouchers
from public funds would allow these institutions to survive.
5. Overcrowding in public schools would lessen. Public school enrollment
all over the country, especially in states like California, is increasing dramatically
and will only get worse, straining an already desperate situation. Private and parochial
schools have room for additional students and, if allowed, could help ease the crisis.
6. Competition will force improvement in public schools. Under a
free-market system, the brightest students will go to the best schools, which are
presently private schools. In order to stop such an exodus, public schools will have
to do a better job at competing with what private schools offer, and that means dramatically
improving what they offer. Outmoded teaching methods and bloated beauracracies will
have give way, as they inevitably must do in free markets.
7. Vouchers will relieve parents of double-taxation. Every parent
who sends their children to a private school is essentially paying a double-tax.
The first is for the public schools which they do not use, the second is for the
private schools which they do use. It is inherently unfair for families to have to
pay twice for a service, especially when they do not use the publicly offered service.
Vouchers would rectify this situation by returning money to parents for use at private
institutions.
8. Private schools will improve the morals of the nation's youth.
Public schools are morally degenerate, failing to provide our nation's youth with
proper guidance. This can be directly tied to the elimination of school prayer and
Bible reading in the 1960's by atheists and secular humanists. Vouchers will allow
poorer families to send their children to religious schools where chidden will be
able to enjoy genuine religious freedom. They'll have daily prayers, Bible reading
and no immoral or anti-religious education. We won't see any violent shootings or
massacres at private religious schools as we have at public schools. Our nation will
be vastly improved with the development of a new generation of moral children.
9. Voucher programs which do not include religious schools are unconstitutional.
If a voucher program is created, it has to allow for parents to choose to send their
children to private religious schools as well as private non-religious schools. Otherwise,
the government will be discriminating against religious institutions and religious
parents, a clear violation of the Constitution. Religion must be treated equally
alongside secular institutions.
10. Voucher programs will not violate the separation of church and state.
Voucher programs do not have to force the government to give money to religious schools
The government can give parents the money, and they in turn will be free to give
the money to either religious or secular educational institutions. No money will
be transferred directly from government to churches, thus eliminating separationist
complaints.
NO
1. Private school advantage? What advantage? Many studies, like
those administered by the Natonal Assessment of Educational Progress, indicate that
public schools are generally on equal footing with private schools. Students doing
the same coursework perform about equally in both institutions. Studies which show
otherwise tend to fail to factor out things like income level, educational level
of parents, learning disabilities, etc. When such things are taken into account,
we get a dramatically different picture.
2. Why should the public pay to send any children to private schools?
Although it would be nice for poor children to attend good private schools if the
parents wish, that doesn't mean that it is the government's responsibility to fund
it. If private schools wish to have such children attend, they can offer scholarships,
as many already do.
3. Vouchers do not really save money. Whatever the cost of private
school education, voucher systems typically will force the government to subsidize
the cost of such education for students already attending private schools. That would
cost the taxpayers billions of extra dollars they do not presently have to pay.
4. Private school survival? If the public wants private schools
to survive, they can donate money or authorize the government to grant those institutions
some special funds - at no point is it necessary for the government to subsidize
the education of specific students there. People who really do value the free market
will recognize that the survival of such schools are not automatically the responsibility
of the government.
5. Free market competition? The effect of free-market competition
upon bloated, non-competitive industries is often praised, but that praise can go
too far and become quite irrational. The free-market is not a god that we have to
unquestioningly follow - it is a tool which we should use when and where appropriate,
and we should not hesitate to question that appropriateness. Just because it works
in one area does not automatically mean that it will work elsewhere.
Moreover, the idea of the effectiveness of the free-market in improving an industry
is completely dependent upon the existence of real competition.
However, there would be no real competition between public and private schools. Public
schools must fund the transportation of students, whereas private schools have no
such requirement. Public schools must abide by a whole host of governmental regulations
on how to treat children, how to maintain buildings, race, religion, disabilities,
etc., ad nauseam. Private schools have few such restrictions which they must abide
by, especially religious schools. Attempts by the same people who push vouchers to
enact bills like the Religious Liberty Protection Act would cause such religious
schools to have to abide by almost no restrictions, diminishing real competition
even further.
6. Public schools will become dumping grounds for the unwanted.
Private schools are free to pick and choose whomever they wish as students, freely
discriminating for reasons of race, religion, disability, cost to educate, whatever
- they are not answerable to the public, even though some people wish to give them
public money. They can refuse admission or expel students for any reason whatsoever.
Public schools must, except in extreme cases, accept whomever wishes to apply, including
those with expensive physical or learning disabilities, behavioral disorders, contagious
diseases, or language deficiencies. Special students requiring extra effort to educate
will rarely, if ever, be accepted to most private schools, allowing them to avoid
the costs and problems of educating the unusual student. This is one way that voucher
advocates can claim that the per capita education costs are lower at private schools
than at public schools. Once again, we find an important area where real competition
is entirely absent because the playing field isn't even close to level.
7. Public schools would be robbed of critical funding. The funding
of voucher schemes is accomplished by skimming money from already poorly financed
public education budgets, possibly causing deep cuts in transportation costs, security,
classroom improvements, repairs, supplies, and staff. Inner city schools could find
themselves in even worse situations than they presently are. There is a great deal
of reverse-class envy sweeping the country, with middle- and upper-class people balking
at paying to fund social services which are designed to help the poor survive with
a bit of dignity. This is really no different, since these people are looking for
ways to stop paying to educate poor students while they look for better ways to educate
their own. Why should they care what happens to inner-city and minority students?
If they aren't interested in helping to feed and house the poor, they certainly aren't
going to be interested in educating the poor. A permanent underclass is developing
in America, and this will serve to cement that development into fact.
8. Vouches subsidize discrimination. As already mentioned, private
schools are free to discriminate at will, refusing or expelling any student for any
reason like race or religion. Some students have been expelled because their parents
were critical of the school. This is, of course, their right. But why should the
government and taxpayers subsidize this discrimination?
9. Poor schools could take advantage of a voucher system. Bizarre
religious or political groups, cults, and even profiteers may be allowed to operate
schools and receive public funding for doing so. Immune from government oversight,
they'll be free to pursue whatever goals they may have, even including child abuse.
10. There is no double-taxation. Parents who use private schools
are only taxed once: when they pay taxes for public schools. The fees they pay to
private schools are in no sense a tax - they are instead a voluntary payment to a
private institution. Calling it a "tax" is nothing less than dishonest.
Moreover, just because a person freely chooses to replace or supplement a public
service with a private company does not mean that the government should refund any
money which would have gone to that unused public service. People who hire private
security firms do not receive money taken from police department budgets, and people
who install private pools do not receive refunds because they do not use public pools.
Public schools, as with public police departments, offer direct and indirect benefits
to society as a whole and all individuals, even when those individuals are not immediately
using their services. Finally, unless the public decides that the government has
no business providing police protection and education, then the government has the
responsibility of properly maintaining and funding those services for all citizens
- even for those who are not presently using them, just in case they will need to
use them tomorrow.
11. Private schools will not "fix" morality. If our children
suffer from any moral deficiencies, it is the fault of the parents, not the schools.
Inept parents will not find sudden changes in their children just because they've
started attending a private school. The problems facing our nation's youth are difficult
and complex - it is absurd to try and simplify them by claiming that they are the
result of a lack of prayer or Bible reading in public schools, and it is equally
absurd to claim that their inclusion in the school day will have any significant
impact.
12. Funding religious schools is a violation of the separation of church
and state. Religious schools are, quite properly, viewed by both supporters
and detractors as ideological and educational extensions of churches. Awarding them
public money for their functions essentially taxes all citizens for the religious
goals of a few. Even if the money goes from government to parent to school, constitutional
problems remain. In 1967, the Supreme Court ruled against a voucher program in Louisiana
which was designed to thwart public school segregation. In the decision of Poindexter
vs. Louisiana, the Court explicitly declared that "The United States
Constitution does not permit the State to perform acts indirectly through private
persons which it is forbidden to do directly." That, of course, is exactly what
voucher schemes like the one in Wisconsin is trying to accomplish. Just as the government
cannot subsidize churches by funneling money through sympathetic private citizens,
it cannot subsidize church schools by funneling money through those same persons.
| Quote of the week: Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one. Malcom S. Forbes (Quoted from: Peter McWilliams, Ain't Nobody's Business if you Do, p. 734.] |
At present, voucher programs of some sort have been proposed in at least 20 states as well as Congress, although only Milwakee, Cleveland and Florida have had working programs allowing parents to use tax-money to send their children to religious schools. The Milwaukee program had been appealed to the Supreme Court after the Wisconsin Supreme Court permitted it 4-2, but the High Court's justices refused without comment to review the case, 8-1. The Florida program has just been declared unconstitutional. This sets no national precedent and the highest courts in other are expected to decide upon other cases. This will certainly embolden voucher supporters to push legislation in more states. People on both sides of the case are, however, disappointed in the refusal because, until the Supreme Court finally renders a decision in a voucher case, the constitutionality of all such programs will be open to question. It would be devastating for the Court not to rule against them until well after many large programs have been instituted across the country.
Some state constitutions explicitly prohibit government aid to religious schools, which would seem to prohibit voucher programs which include religious schools - but one of those states is Wisconsin, and judges there approved of the voucher scheme. So, it is not clear that issues of constitutionality will prevail in the face of religious and partisan fervor. Sadly, Supreme Court decisions have been all over the place in this area. Programs to pay for textbooks in private schools have been upheld, as have funds for transportation. But other programs, like those providing remedial education for children attending private schools, have been struck down.
Who advocates voucher programs? Traditionally, support has come primarily from the Catholic Church, an institution which has long maintained the largest system of private religious education in America. Interestingly, at the same time that they are increasing their demands for state subsidies, they are also increasing their demand that their parochial schools be used as tools for Catholic evangelization. Clearly, then, they are looking to have our government financially sponsor their attempts to spread their faith.
Catholic leaders have since been joined by libertarians and right-wing Protestants.
The former think that free-market reforms are the ultimate solution to ineffective
schools. The latter are hell-bent on destroying public, secular education in favor
of their own brand of religious indoctrination. There is little evidence that either
group will have much positive effect on our nation's educational system.
That's where we stand now -but what will the future bring? Tell us about your own
ideas on education, educational reform, and school vouchers on our Bulletin
Board!
|
Make your opinions be heard on the Bulletin Board or Chat Room! |
