Today’s voucher advocates often overlook their original purpose, but the programs’ history of racial segregation is clear when we examine their impact on public schools and students. Voucher programs can lead to racial homogenization of schools, fail to produce the academic benefits promised, and lack the accountability measures and protections to ensure equitable support for all students.
Vouchers also create financial barriers for school districts and contradict common-sense efforts to adequately fund public schools. Contrary to the notion that voucher funds are parents’ discretionary money, vouchers are funded by all taxpayers, further draining already limited public school funding. And vouchers can end up subsidizing tuition for wealthy families who want to send their children to private, often religious, schools (some of whom never intended to send their children to public school in the first place). This funding shortfall hits low-income students and those in rural counties the hardest. As public schools face post-pandemic financial challenges and teacher shortages, vouchers do more harm than good.
Currently, public schools serve the majority of American students. Public schools are places where young people of all backgrounds and identities learn and problem-solve together. If we want to prioritize the well-being and education of all students and the possibility of a just, multiracial democracy, we must mobilize to end vouchers so that we can promote, protect, and strengthen our public schools.
The author is president of Race Forward and a board member of the Philanthropic Initiative on Racial Equity.
A recent article looked at the growing number of families using vouchers to pay for private school tuition and cited some Supreme Court cases on the issue. But the article omitted relevant case history that might help interpret this trend in a less dramatic way.
The rise of school choice programs is not primarily due to decisions by a “conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court.” [that] It redefined the role of religion in education and public life.”
The Supreme Court has held at least five times that participation by students at religious schools in government-funded programs that are open and available to all students does not violate the First Amendment’s separation of church and state.
This series of decisions began in 1983. Mueller vs Allenwhich allowed parents to deduct private school tuition and other education expenses from their taxes. Three of these decisions did not involve any current Supreme Court justices; only Justice Clarence Thomas remains from the court that handed down the decision in 2002. Zelman v. Simmons-Harrissupported Cleveland’s voucher program that could be used to pay for tuition at religious or secular public schools. Only three members of the current conservative majority joined the most recent challenge to the church-state clause in educational choice in 2011.
Judges with very different reputations have taken similar positions on these issues. In 1985, I presided over and won the second of the following five cases: Whitters v. Washington State Department of Services for the BlindJustice Thurgood Marshall wrote the majority opinion for all nine justices.
My client was a blind Bible school student who was preparing to become a minister. He argued that Washington state violated “separation of church and state” by allowing students to participate in a state program that provides educational benefits to the blind if they intended to use that assistance to pursue a religious vocation. Judge Marshall emphatically rejected this argument, pointing to the long history of GI Bills that has always included religious students and religious schools in generous educational assistance programs for veterans.
Recent cases regarding educational choice have addressed clear legal issues arising from the Equal Protection Clause and the Religious Freedom Clause. These cases argue that if the government decides to implement an educational choice program for some students, it is unconstitutional to discriminate against them by excluding them because of their religion.
Michael Faris, Purcellville, Virginia
The author is an attorney and founder of Patrick Henry University and the Homeschool Legal Advocacy Association.
I am a retired public school teacher, and with the recent spate of school shootings, I believe parents and children should have the freedom to choose their school. Sadly, there are a lot of kids who hate, and in some cases hate, public school, but are forced to go there. Schools should not be like prisons. Rational secular study is great, but it is not all there is to life.
I grew up in a secular humanist household, but when I was old enough to go to public school, we recited the Lord’s Prayer every day in class. I thought of it as a poem. The idea of forgiving your enemies and being forgiven was very appealing to me, and seemed like a good approach to a good society where tolerance and forgiveness rule.
I have since studied the world’s religions, and I have found that the world’s faiths have a lot in common.
There is nothing wrong with accepting common Christian values such as loving your neighbor as yourself, loving and doing good to even your enemies, not murdering, stealing, lying, cheating or committing adultery, and helping the poor.
I don’t think increased exposure to religious values will destroy America. I was in the civil rights movement and most of the music we sang was religious.
I found a recent Washington Post article about religious schools where students’ tuition is paid for with publicly funded vouchers to be quite antagonistic.
Many of the schools could best be described as affiliated with a particular religious denomination. I attended such schools from grades 1 through 12 and experienced primarily rigorous academic discipline. The religious aspects of our classes were indirect, provided under the auspices of the church rather than by teachers of other subjects. Religious education for pastors, rabbis, and other clergy is provided elsewhere – in higher monasteries, seminaries, temples, and novitiates.
A more important question than whether these schools have religious affiliations is what students learn at these private schools. Are these schools producing well-educated graduates who are ready to contribute to society? Are these schools providing an adequate return on taxpayer investment?
George Hayne, Dumfries, Virginia
Keeping children safe while riding bicycles
I am 12 years old and I ride my bike a lot. I have noticed that drivers in my area are very annoyed with cyclists. When I read Michael J. Coren’s June 4 Climate Coach column, “You’ll never have to wait in line for a school car again. Here’s how to do it,” I agreed with a lot of what he wrote.
In the 1960s, it was safer because not many people drove their children to school. But now many people drive cars, so the traffic is heavy and cars can be very frustrating, not only at school. Drivers honk at children everywhere, frightening them. There are always a lot of cars around my school in the morning and afternoon, with people taking their children to and from school.
As Coren says, cycling to school in a “caravan” would be safer and more enjoyable. As Coren writes, many people drive to school these days, so if you cycle to school, you may not have anyone to ride with. Riding alone puts you at a higher risk of being hit than if you were in a group. I don’t think drivers are more likely to honk at a large group of people. The only downside is that people who don’t know how to cycle or don’t own bikes might get grief in a bike caravan.
I would say to drivers everywhere, don’t honk your horn, even if your kids can’t go fast enough or you have to get somewhere in a hurry. Honking your horn scares people and makes kids not want to ride their bikes. I don’t cycle as much as I used to because drivers are always getting annoyed and honking their horns. And I think people should feel safe when they’re cycling alone, even if they can’t ride their bikes in a camper.
Summer is approaching and school is out. More people will be riding bikes. If drivers were more patient and didn’t honk, children would feel safer and be able to enjoy the freedom of riding without worry.
Foster Marchand, Alexandria
