Debate Over Government-Paid School Vouchers Is Accelerating

Philanthropists who create scholarship funds to send poor children to private schools have entered — some intentionally, others not — one of the most politicized and controversial frays in education today: the debate over government-financed vouchers to let parents send their children to the private or parochial school of their choice.

ALSO SEE:

Donors’ Choice

The idea of “school choice” and vouchers has been around since 1955, when the conservative economist Milton Friedman first proposed it. And private-school scholarship funds for poor, inner-city children have existed for nearly a decade.

But the issue has picked up momentum recently as Republican leaders and religious groups like the Christian Coalition have made it a priority.

Efforts to use government funds, in the form of vouchers, to send children to private schools are vehemently opposed by teachers’ unions, U.S. Education Secretary Richard Riley, and civil-rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Opponents say that such a system is unconstitutional because it violates the principle of separation of church and state. They also say it is undemocratic because private schools can select the students they admit and can refuse to enroll kids with disabilities, academic difficulties, or other kinds of problems.

Peter Martinez, a senior program officer at the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, opposes government-financed vouchers, and cautions against the privately financed scholarships.

“The problem is that it’s not a strategy aimed at meeting the educational needs of a broad-based urban population,” says Mr. Martinez, who oversees a $40-million Chicago school-improvement effort that MacArthur has been financing over the past decade. “The major concern here is that we have a growing education gap, an income gap, and a skill gap in the U.S. between the disadvantaged communities and the middle- and upper-income communities — and it’s all based around education.”

The debate does not split cleanly between conservative and liberal camps, however. Vouchers have gained the support of Democrats like the Rev. Floyd Flake, a former U.S. Congressman from Queens, N.Y., and of many low-income minority parents. On the other hand, some conservatives and libertarians oppose the government-financed vouchers, fearing that they would lead to government control of private schools.

Proponents of school choice say they want to introduce an element of competition between public and private schools to improve a public-school system that they call a bureaucratic monopoly. That monopoly, they say, only absorbs extra dollars and other resources that it receives from those trying to improve the schools. With vouchers and other policies that allow a choice of schools, they argue, bad schools would see an exodus of students and consequently would be forced to improve or shut down. Good public schools, on the other hand, would flourish, bringing in more kids and more dollars.

“Let’s let the public schools compete for the students,” says Amway Corporation President Dick DeVos, who supports CEO Michigan, a private-school scholarship fund in Lansing. “I know a lot of public schools that would do very, very well, and some that would close down. I have no sympathy. They should close.”

But opponents of school choice say that giving children privately financed partial scholarships or publicly financed vouchers only helps a selected few thousand kids and ends up weakening the public-school system, which educates most American children.

“The idea that education is susceptible to the same market pressures that the automobile business is is just nonsense,” says Julian Bond, chairman of the N.A.A.C.P. “Most children are going to go to public schools, and anything that weakens those schools lessens the life chances of our schoolchildren.”

Some non-profit leaders also note that school-choice programs can be demoralizing for the students who do not receive vouchers or scholarship assistance and must remain in public schools — as well as for the teachers who educate them.

Currently, only two cities, Milwaukee and Cleveland, have government-financed voucher programs to send poor kids to private or parochial schools. Their existence has been tied up in legal battles for years. The Milwaukee voucher program was upheld by the Wisconsin State Supreme Court in June. The case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and last week the Justices, without comment, declined to review the case. While many school-choice proponents say they were cheered by the news because it lets the vouchers stay in place, opponents say that the Court’s move does not mean much and that they believe that the Justices are likely to review another case sometime in the future.

Five other lawsuits on school choice-issues are pending across the country. Experts say it may take months, if not years, for all the court cases to be decided.

That’s too far into the future, say some of the corporate executives and other wealthy individuals who have decided to put up their own money to help poor kids attend private schools in the meantime.

“Some people think you can wait five years and it’s no big deal — whether I rewallpaper now or in five years, what difference does it make?” says Virginia Gilder, a private New York City investor who pledged $1-million to help kids at the Giffen Memorial Elementary School in Albany attend private schools. “The sad thing is that these kids are losing out now — part of the generation will be lost.”

In addition to advocating changes in education policy, some philanthropists and proponents of school-choice programs are also pushing for state tax credits that would allow people to reduce their tax bills if they gave to private-school scholarship groups.

Arizona last year became the first state to pass a tax credit for individuals who give to non-profit scholarship organizations that aid poor families. Several other states give parents a tax break to pay for their own children’s private-school educations.

Arizona’s tax credit, worth up to $500, takes effect this tax year. Few Arizona residents, however, have been motivated by the credit to donate yet, largely because the tax break is being contested in the Arizona Supreme Court.

The National Education Association and other critics argue that the dollar-for-dollar credit is the equivalent of a voucher, taking money out of the state’s treasury and putting it into predominantly church-run schools. They say the tax credit violates the state’s constitutional ban against using government money to pay for religious activities.

Supporters, however, say the money in question belongs to individuals — not the state — and therefore raises no constitutional problems. A decision in the case is expected soon.

Despite the legal challenge in Arizona, national organizations, such as CEO America and the National Center for Policy Analysis, in Dallas, continue to promote state tax credits for donors to private-school scholarship organizations. Organizations in Michigan, for example, are working to get a measure on the state’s 2000 ballot that would amend the state’s constitution to create a school-tuition tax credit for individuals and companies.

Such a tax credit, says Gary Glenn, president of School Choice Yes!, which is leading that move, “would allow citizens of all income levels to become school-choice philanthropists.”