Before
I am painted as another puppet of the National Education Assn. or CTA,
let me first state that I believe in the tenets of capitalism, competition,
democracy, the Constitution of the United States, and State Constitutions.
Voucher intiatives are presented as a way to make public schools
"compete--" compete by taking state funds designated for public schools
and it to anyone currently attending a private school, or who leaves the
public school to attend a private school. The other half would be
returned to the State General fund; perhaps directed to education, or perhaps
for law enforcement, welfare, etc. All other tenets of these initiatives
are really peripheral. Letís focus on the first:
In California, over 500,000 students currently attend
private schools. 4.7 million currently attend public schools.
If the initiative gives $2,600 to students currently attending the private
schools at a cumulative cost of $1.3 billion less for public schools--
(10% of each school districtís budget), plus another $1.3 billion returned
to the general fund. Picture your district trying to make ends meet
with 10% less money. How could public schools be expected to "compete"
when passage of this initiative would rob them? Would the money come
from advanced placement programs, sports, music, maintenance, reading,
special education, book purchases, science supplies, or considerably larger
class sizes? Incredibly, voucher proponents contend this will make
schools better!
Millions of new tax dollars will
be needed to hire accountants to dole out the vouchers each month.
And with current education tax dollars earmarked for religious and other
private schools, there will be enormous pressure put on legislators to
raise billions in new taxes to maintain current funding levels! So
first of all, this amendment to the State Constitution is yet another entitlement;
for the rich, which is bad for taxpayers. If the government was to
give you a $1,000 automobile voucher, would it make auto manufacturers
produce a better car? Would it be more likely to cause an increase
in sales of Yugos, or Porsches?
New schools (any organization of 25 students
or more) could qualify as a school-- not subject to proper teacher credentialing
or law-enforcement background checks. (I have been fingerprinted
and subject to a background check. Every five years, I must obtain
a TB test, and must complete 150 hours of documented inservice work every
five years to renew my credential). If Texas had a voucher amendment
to their state constitution, the "David Koresh School for the Gifted" would've
been subsidized by the taxpayer.
Decisions regarding public schools including
use of funds currently are accountable to school boards, and teachers must
teach content material listed in state frameworks. Some parents have
been quite successful in having some books banned from public school reading
lists. Private schools however, are not accountable to school boards,
nor frameworks, nor teacher credentialing commissions, nor state law enforcement
agencies. As a matter of fact, an LA Times article several years
ago detailed the nightmare of a group of parents fighting the Catholic
archdiocese about airborne asbestos fibers in their children's unsafe school.
Public school students are tested to compare teaching methods, determine
funding levels, etc. So public schools are accountable.
But the problem with these initiatives which really
raises my blood pressure is that unlike public schools, voucher schools
do not need to be equipped for the handicapped, nor will they be required
to teach students who are unable to pass standardized tests, or have behavior
problems due to mental dysfunction or family problems. These students
will be shipped back to public schools. Remember-- although these
initiatives should be called voucher entitlements, state attorneys general
when conservatives, get to title them "choice." However, it is the
private school that has the "choice" of accepting your child, or not.
As a Methodist I have heard sermons
based on Luke 15:3-10, and Matt. 25:31-46 for example, expounding the importance
of compassion towards our fellow man. As I apply these lessons to
the voucher initiative, some of my most fundamental values as a Christian
are shirked. The Methodist church, and our public schools are two
of the very last egalitarian institutions left in the United States; all
are welcome. Voucher-redeeming schools however, would be able to
discriminate on the basis of sex, religion, academic proficiency, orientation,
physical limitations, and financial status (though not race or ethnicity).
I have taught students who would utilize a private
school voucher. They come from stable families and higher socioeconomic
brackets. I know what an absolute joy it is to educate these incredible
students whether in science class, or Sunday school. Many proponents
of the initiative argue that parents of these children should not have
to subsidize the remaining public school students; many financially disadvantaged,
limited English proficient, physically or mentally impaired, or from absentee-
or substance-abusing parents.
As I interpret these passages and others like
them, God reminds me of my responsibility to "find" (educate) these "lost
sheep"; that when I do, perhaps I am beginning to do the Lord's work.
These passages remind me that all of my students are God's special creations,
not just the best ones. Thatís why the Methodist church took
a stand against these types of initiatives last conference.
If you take the best role models
out of the public school classroom; (the first thing which would happen
with the voucher plan), you have no role models exhibiting academic and
behavior standards for leftover public school students; thereby making
a teacherís already difficult job a nightmare. The best schools,
teachers, and learning technology can't change that. Put another
way, do prisons correct criminal behavior? Joe Taxpayer pays twice
with the voucher system-- once to inflate private school tuition, and again
to pay for prison for an undereducated public school student, because all
of the best role models are now enrolled in private schools. Most
inmates today are high school dropouts.
I've had some parents actually tell me to my face that that's
why they want the voucher. They don't want to pay for someone else's
dysfunctional child. Yet they fail to realize that quality public
education is preventive medicine.
Voucher proponents argue that the demise of the
Soviet Union proved that communist government bureacracies will ultimately
fail. Public schools in the United States, they say are another communist/government
institution, doomed to failure. A Los Angeles Times article Sept.
18, some years back discusses how many Republicans dislike the voucher
initiative as written because the subsidy would increase the role of government
and require yet another government agency to dole out vouchers.
Thomas Jefferson is widely regarded as the founder
of our public schools, and few would regard him a communist. Rather
public schools are the cornerstone of our democracy. And voucher
proponents overlook the fact that the value of their home is related to
the quality of their local public school.
Let me paint one final doomsday scenario:
Maybe not this election, but someday, the voucher initiative is passed.
Professional teachers being laid-off from dwindling public schools would
be forced to teach at private institutions for survival. These could
be bought and traded just like businesses. Picture science teachers
being harassed for teaching environmental science framwork objectives by
a company such as Exxon? Fundamentalist religious schools would force
teaching of "creation science" as they call it, over scientific model of
evolution, all subsidized by the state taxpayer. Both public and
private schools would hire slick Madison Ave. advertising firms to market
their school and get more education dollars from the state.
Consider our private medical system which 45 million
Americans currently cannot afford. This initiative offers no price
controls for private school tuition. And like medical care, learning
technology is expensive and student population rarely decreases. Consider
the following:
-Independent studies show that 1 to 5% of current private schools currently
have vacancies for incoming voucher students.
-The voucher/private schools controversy is happening in the face of
impending teacher shortages, especially in the math and sciences.
Is hiring underqualified people to teach in uninspected buildings an inexpensive,
nearsighted solution to this undersupply?
-Voucher proponents are trying to denationalize public education, while
nationally, efforts are being made to nationalize health care. The
two most priceless things an individual can have. We want them for
everyone, and we want them cheap.
-If private schools are the solution, why arenít qualified teachers
flocking to teach at them?
-What would a $2,600 voucher do to average private school tuition?
-Where does this initiative change the things that are truly wrong
with public education? Where does it reduce class size?
Where does this initiative turn off the television
for unsupervised youngsters and open a book for them instead? Where
does it take guns and knives away from children? Where does it give
single parent families of at risk children a male role model? Where
does it ensure that children coming to school will have been taught Judeo-Christian,
or other religious doctrine which prevents them from tagging buildings,
fighting, engaging in premarital sex, degrading others, or joining gangs?
Where does it stop illiterate illegal aliens from entering the country
and lowering test scores? Where does it mandate food for students
coming to school on an empty stomach?
When voucher initiatives pass, they will not
be about creating better schools. Rather it will be due to the fact
the proponents have been successful in diverting discussion away from how
to best educate children to one of rich vs. poor; "traditional Christian
values" vs. anarchy, homosexuality and devil-worship; envy at the power
of teacher's unions; a cheap excuse for a poor economy and unemployment;
corporate revenge at school frameworks and teachers who have made kids
a little too environmentally conscious, or who question authority from
time to time; frustration with ìeveryone elseís kidsî who do all those
undesired behaviors mentioned earlier. These issues are not addressed
by this initiative.
16 years ago, I was completing junior high and my father was
teaching American Government at Foothill high school in Tustin when the
public education establishment said Prop. 13 would devastate public schools
and put them in the bottom third of US education funding. The Howard
Jarvis-led coalition replied, "never." My dad is now retired, while
I pray that I won't be part of a generation of educators who says five
years from now, "I told you so."
As I read "Bush Delivers Plan for School Accountability,"
(Jan. 24 Section A, 2001), I was struck by the ludicrous nature of our
new president's plan. The party that brought you a reduction in government
will need another layer of bureaucracy to gather test data to find out
which "failing schools" (actually failing TV-addicted, malnourished, abusive-familied,
or neurologically-impaired students) qualify for vouchers.
Next, the party that touts "local control" thinks that even though the
government contributes about 10% of education dollars, that's enough to
merit a Washington- D.C. solution for your school district, with the funding
to do so stolen primarily from special education.
But while were on the subject of vouchers, though, let's
not stop there:
Since I don't trust Sec'y of the Interior Norton to protect our forests,
I demand a voucher from Interior funds to buy some for my children before
it's gone. And since I can't trust Sec'y of the EPA Whitman to safeguard
our water and air, I demand a voucher from their funding to purchase breathing
apparatuses and water filters. Since Sec'y Rumsfeld wants to spend
my tax dollars on the ill-fated "Osprey", let me have a military voucher,
and I can purchase home security. And when there is nothing left
after these vouchers are all doled out, we might as well stop saying the
pledge of allegiance, because there certainly won't be anything "united"
about our states, nor our people.