VOUCHERS: THE PARENT TRAP

Who will have the fundamental right of educating children: parents or politicians?

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.

I would have thought the requirement that a voucher 'cover' an entire year of private tuition (which is presumably much more costly than the public system spends) would tend to drive a private school bankrupt.

Raises a good point which needs to be addressed: Vouchers do not need to cover full tuition and states should not require they do.

It is better to have parents pay something.

The Children's Scholarship Fund gives out over 40,000 scholarships to lower income parents (under 25K I believe) a year. They only cover 50% of the tuition. Yet over 1 million parents apply for the scholarships.

Parents without much money are just like any other parent, they love their kids and will sacrifice for them. They can pick up a second job for a while, find some at home business to start--a few grand more a year in income is doable. And when parents do that, you know they will take a keen interest in seeing their kids do not slack off.

From post#69

Comply with federal antidiscrimination provisions.

Agree not to compel any opportunity scholarship student to profess a specific ideological belief, to pray, or to worship. The private school must adhere to the tenets of its published disciplinary procedures prior to the expulsion of an opportunity scholarship student.

I would have thought these 'intrusions' would prevent new religious private schools from opt-ing in to the voucher program. No?

Thank you for clarifying the relative costs of private vs voucher...surprising, but good news.

LarryLied's post:
Vouchers do not need to cover full tuition and states should not require they do.

Whereas from post#69
Accept the opportunity scholarship amount provided by the state as full tuition and fees for each student.

So that aspect of post#69 is wrong? If a private tution exceeeds the value of the voucher, a parent can kick in the rest?

Here's the article mentioning the new private schools opening. And, BTW, these schools are opening as a result of a different voucher porgram -- one paid for by corporate tax credits, and not requiring the student to come from a failing school. The only requirement is the student's family be low income. This program has been popular with blacks, and I expect Gov. Bush will win a lot more black votes this Nov. than most predict:

Parents snap up school vouchers
[Jeb's 3rd voucher program results in new private schools]

Also, I will ping you all on a few of the very real success stories of public schools following Gov. Bush's educational reforms.

the requirement that a voucher 'cover' an entire year of private tuition (which is presumably much more costly than the public system spends)

Do you have any idea what the "gubment" schools cost?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't it approach 10 grand/pupil in D.C.?

Then there are the additional intrusions which you verified.

Don't get me wrong ... I'm plenty concerned about the intrusion/usurption but what other alternative do we have to defeat gubmint monopoly?

Unfortunately, vouchers do nothing to directly combat the root problem of the invidious college departments of "education".

I'm neither a liberal nor a libertarian and I'm totally opposed to government controlled public schools. My child goes to a private Christian academy. I am opposed to school vouchers because I want to see my child's school remain a high standard private school, not a dumping ground for the liberals' problem kids who are now not allowed to enroll.

Vouchers will bring government control to any private school which cashes a voucher. This is being made a federal issue as we speak, thanks to liberal republicans who, as usual with every issue, fail utterly to understand the problem.

What we should all concentrate our efforts upon is the abolition of the federal Department of Education. That was the goal at one time and all that has changed since we made it a goal is that the GOP leadership decided to give socialism one more chance.

Let them stick their silly voucher plan where the sun doesn't shine. It is a poor replacement for the action that is needed, the dismantling of a federal department and the rejection of a labor union as the final authority in schools.

You wouldn't take food stamps would you? Why do you want a voucher?

Enough with the food stamp argument. A voucher system designed and approved by politicians is so unlikely to be anything like what you're describing as to be laughable.

There is simply no way in hell that any politician is going to relinquish a dime he's extorted without gaining more control in return. Do you envision vouchers as a simple break in taxes in the amount paid by a parent in tuition? Do you envision it as a food stamp redeemable at any private school in the range of travel of a family?

What is almost a dead certainty is that politicians envision vouchers as a food stamp redeemable only where they say in advance. Politicians will see to it that any private school accepting vouchers as payment for tuition will be subject to every lunatic union regulation and court ruling that public schools are subject to.

Surely you don't think that politicians have all suddenly become saints, or even normal human beings, do you?

USA Today-Letters to the Editor

April 9, 1999 Florida Gov. Jeb Bush

Fla. Education Plan

For the record, I want to clarify two potentially misleading points in Walter Shapiro's column in USA TODAY on my "A+ Plan for Education" (Vouchers pass in Fla., but will schools?" Hype and Glory column, News, April 2).

Shapiro stated that private school students in Florida are not required to take the statewide assessment exam. While this is technically true, our plan requires that children in chronically failing public schools who use "Opportunity Scholarships" to attend a private school, continue to take the statewide assessment exam.

Shapiro also stated that Florida's private schools are not accredited by th state. In fact the state does not accredit any school, public or private. However, the vast majority of both public and private schools in Florida are accredited by regional accrediting organizations suth as the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Furthermore, under our A+ Plan, private schools that accept Opportunity Scholarships must either become accredited or be working toward accreditation.

By requiring students using Opportunity Scholarships to continue to take the statewide assessment exam and by requiring accreditation of private schools accepting Opportunity Scholarhips, we believe that our A+ Plan is designed to determine whether they will work.

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush

Tallahassee, Fla.

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.