Posted on 07/05/2002 6:49:32 AM PDT by capecodder
Vouchers: The Parent Trap
Texas Eagle Forum March 1999 Cathie Adams, President, Texas Eagle Forum
VOUCHERS: THE PARENT TRAP
Who will have the fundamental right of educating children: parents or politicians?
By Cathie Adams, president of Texas Eagle Forum
Virtually every candidate for political office claims that if we elect him, he will fix public education, and since 92% of our children attend public schools, such political promises appeal to almost everyone. Those political promises have led to a multitude of unproven education fads introduced in public school classrooms, but there is one idea that has yet to overcome political opposition: vouchers, a.k.a. school choice. There are two major sources of opposition for the idea: teachers' unions who are afraid of losing part of their funding and those who hold to free market ideals and oppose government regulations.
Voucher supporters claim they would create competition for the public schools and thereby improve them. But columnist Charlie Reese sums it up nicely: "Government schools cannot compete in any sense of the word. They are government schools, creatures of law and politics. Faculty, its pay, and the curricula are determined not by the schools, but by politicians, bureaucrats and, in some cases judges. To state that public schools can compete with private schools is like saying a bronze statue of a horse can compete with a live one."
In reality, public funding would destroy private education. Saralee Rhoades outlines why in The Freeman, a newsletter published by The Foundation for Economic Education:
Private schools will become dependent on this new source of money and in time unable to exist without it. Private schools electing to safeguard their freedoms, not taking advantage of "free" money, will not be able to compete. When the only schools left are government schools, is there any assurance that the quality of public schooling will not precipitously decline as it has before? The resultant government monopoly will preclude any form of competitive standards. Costs will skyrocket as offices are set up nationwide to monitor the expenditure of government funds, protect students from exploitation, and expand services as further needs arise. Eventually the aim will be the maintenance of the program, not the education of children. Compliance with government policy and maintenance of the status quo will assume greater and greater importance, as more workers become dependent on government-subsidized salaries. The bottom line is that government cannot fix the educational problem because government is the problem.
Some insist that voucher legislation can be written to protect private schools. Chester Finn, chief architect of the National Goals (presented in former President Bush's America 2000 plan and President Clinton's Goals 2000) and a voucher advocate refutes the claim. "Some to be sure, like to think they can have it both ways; i.e. can obtain aid without saddling themselves with unacceptable forms of regulation. But most acknowledge the general applicability of the old adage that he who pays the piper calls the tune, and are more or less resigned to amalgamating or choosing between assistance or autonomy."
Texas voucher supporters believe that if legislation denies federal funds, then private schools would be free from government strings. In 1995, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 1 and created the Texas Workforce Commission that have brought about systemic reforms required by federal education laws, Goals 2000 and School-to-Work. The Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) is being restructured to come into compliance with the rewrite of Texas' essential elements into performance standards/outcomes called Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills-all an outgrowth of the federal programs. It is logical that if private and public schools are answerable to the same bureaucracies, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and the Texas Comptroller, then they will both be controlled by the federal government programs.
State regulation is guaranteed. Governor George W. Bush has said, "I believe we ought to try a pilot voucher program that is tied to our accountability system [the TAAS test]." Rather than public schools being forced to compete in an education market place with private schools, the private schools would be forced to conform to the same outcome-based standards and performance-based tests prescribed for every public school by both federal and state governments. Ronald Trowbridge, vice-president for external programs and communications at Hillsdale College in Michigan, wrote in The Wall Street Journal "If government vouchers are extended to private primary and secondary schools, truly private schools in five, 10, 15 or 20 years will become virtually extinct."
Courts have broadened government control over private schools that take government funds. The infamous Grove City College vs. Bell case decided that even though the GI bill funds went directly to a student rather than a school, it came under federal regulations. The all-male Virginia Military Institute was forced to admit women or forgo state funding. And Liberty University dropped their religious worship requirement in order to retain their state tuition assistance grants. George Roche, president of Hillsdale College writes, "What is especially galling about this (attitude of 'you take our money, we own you') is that federal money was forcibly extracted from us in the first place. When they 'give' some of it back, it comes not with strings attached, but chains." Hillsdale is the only college in the U.S. that refuses even the GI Bill because of its federal tentacles of control.
The bottom line is: Vouchers would cause the demise of private schools because they cannot compete with what some parents will perceive as "free" schools. And government regulation will force them to be like public schools.
Vouchers would grant the government the "right" to collect your money and redistribute it to the more needy or dictate where and how you spend it by granting you a voucher. Collecting taxes and redistributing them is socialism.
Vouchers will cause private school tuition to escalate as witnessed by the sharp increase in public college tuition after the GI Bill was passed in 1943. Fewer parents would be able to afford true private schools.
Vouchers would politicize private schools the same way as public schools. Dr. Gary North, president of The Institute for Christian Economics, describes how voters/parents have consented to a system that rewards educational bureaucrats rather than serving parents as consumers with legal authority over their children. The chief losers of the political scheme are the students.
Vouchers would methodically expunge religion from private school curricula. George Bernard Shaw of The Socialist Fabian Society of England frankly stated, "Nothing will more quickly destroy independent Christian schools than state aid; their freedom and independence will soon be compromised, and before long their faith."
The only voucher bill filed in the Texas legislature as I write this report is HB 709 by Rep. Mike Krusee (R-Round Rock). The bill would mandate that: parents notify the state for a scholarship; the voucher "entitlement" be paid to the school instead of to the parent; the private schools be accredited by a private organization recognized by the Commissioner of Education and report to him on the school's performance on the academic excellence indicators; the private school not refuse to enroll a child on the basis of religion or academic achievement; and that the private school must certify to the Texas Comptroller all admissions regulations.
Senate Education Committee Chairman Teel Bivins (R-Amarillo), also will sponsor legislation calling for a limited voucher program. He says private schools that participate must be accredited and must test their students with the TAAS. This would make the once "private" school economically, spiritually and educationally beholden to the state.
Government vouchers sound good at first, but when we measure whether they will bring more liberty or more government, they certainly grow government. And it is uncanny that conservatives would encourage government to reduce welfare and support a reduction in the size of government, but advocate school vouchers. By cycling taxpayers' money through government hands, then back to parents, the voucher program would create a new category of people who will become dependent upon government largess. We cannot mouth limited government while our actions promote limitless government.
Say "no" to vouchers!!!
They are the Trojan Horse that will bring government control into private schools.
The positive aspect is that the introduction of foodstamps did not lead to more government regulation of supermarkets. This is because, according to people who hold this view, the consumer consumer controls the spending of the foodstamp. Because the consumer will also control the spending of the voucher, they conclude that same conditions (e.g. no regulation) will apply for schools.
I haven't thought of a good response to this argument.
Vouchers go to parents. Not the schools. Therefore, there can be no government involvement - separation of church and state, remember? If parents choose religious schools, the government can't get involved in their religious choices.
vote "yes" for vouchers and school choice. Shut down the indoctrination centers ASAP.
Each year thse liberal centers create thousands of indoctrobots. Only the liberals and libertarians want public schools and the lifestyles they teach. Others want the freedom from indoctrination.
Vote for parential choice. Vote for freedom. Don't let others with political motives dictate for you.
I firmly believe that this argument against vouchers was started and fostered by the NEA as a scare tactic. Its seems reasonable at first since government always wants control. But you must understand the nature of private schools - they are private because they do not want government control. Vouchers will not change this.
Choose thou, whom will you serve? Forced imprisonment by the dictators, or freedom?
I'm glad to see others understand the issue. There are several reasons why vouchers will not mean government control of private schools. Like I posted above, I believe this is a NEA scare tactic.
Vouchers would grant the government the "right" to collect your money and redistribute it to the more needy or dictate where and how you spend it by granting you a voucher. Collecting taxes and redistributing them is socialism.
Vouchers will cause private school tuition to escalate as witnessed by the sharp increase in public college tuition after the GI Bill was passed in 1943. Fewer parents would be able to afford true private schools.
Vouchers would politicize private schools the same way as public schools. Dr. Gary North, president of The Institute for Christian Economics, describes how voters/parents have consented to a system that rewards educational bureaucrats rather than serving parents as consumers with legal authority over their children. The chief losers of the political scheme are the students.
Vouchers would methodically expunge religion from private school curricula. George Bernard Shaw of The Socialist Fabian Society of England frankly stated, "Nothing will more quickly destroy independent Christian schools than state aid; their freedom and independence will soon be compromised, and before long their faith."
I fail to understand how vouchers will bring this about. Perhaps someone could explain the actual mechanics by which parents using vouchers to send kids to the schools of their choice will cause the above?
Regulations always follow government funding.
Here's the start of a list of likely hypothetical scenarios: How long before a civil rights suit v. private school that doesn't accept a student with a voucher?
How long before the government requires certain accrediation of schools accepting vouchers? What about teacher training? What about hiring practices and civil rights?... _________
Source: Berit Kjos
http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/Q-A/charter.htm
Vouchers & Charter Schools
Question: What do you think of vouchers and charter schools? Are you for or against them?
Answer: I can best answer your question with a quote from the glossary in Brave New Schools and the corresponding footnotes. Those who have my book can find these at the end of the footnote section in the appendix. The "strings" attached to vouchers apply all the more to charter schools, which also release the state from many laws that protect parents:
VOUCHERS: Tuition credits used by parents to pay for their child's education in a private school of their choice. The catch: any school accepting these vouchers must conform to national goals and standards. "A simple fact of political life is that public regulation follows money.... Private schools that operate with public money will be subject to public regulations...." "Changes, big changes, are needed," wrote Albert Shanker, President of the American Federation of Teachers. "...it may be that we can't get the big changes we need without choice."
In March, 1984, the U.S. Supreme court ruled that private schools are subject to government regulations even if they receive no direct federal funds. The Court ruled six to three that a private school may be held accountable for federal rules because it enrolls students who receive tuition money from the government. Even though the checks are payable to individual students, not the school, the Court said any scholarships, loans, or grants to students "constitute federal financial assistance to that entity." The opinion, written by Justice Buron R.White, found that the language of the law "contains no hint that Congress perceived a substantive difference between direct institutional assistance and aid received by a school through its student."
On March 22, 1988, P.L. 100-259 became the law of the land. "The measure would extend the reach of four civil right measures that were limited by a 1984 U.S. Supreme court ruling, Grove City College v. Bell. The ruling said that only the 'program or activity' of an entity receiving federal funds, not the entire institution, was covered by anti-discrimination laws. The legislation would reverse the ruling and make it clear that the entire institution must not discriminate if any component receives federal aid." (Congressional Quarterly Weekly, p. 774) Cited by Virginia Birt Baker, "Educational 'Choice'" Free World Research Report, March 1993.
Talk about spin and scare tactics. There is no explanation. Propagada never has much logic.
I don't think vouchers meet this criteria:
1) voucher money is a return to the parent what the parent had been paying in taxes.
2) As someone above noted it is more like foodstamps. Grocery stores accepting food stamps are not regulated.
The key distinction is that parents are exercising there choice as to how to spend their money (rebated through vouchers), not the school or government. The student is not a conduit for government funds in this case. The funds belong to the parent, not the government.
There is one flaw in your example, the government doesn't have a monoply to protect in the grocery industry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.