Courtney Bowie is a senior staff attorney with the ACLU Racial Justice Program. In this article, she describes the ACLU’s efforts to stop discrimination against students with disabilities in Wisconsin’s voucher program. Privatization, she says, is promoting segregation and rolling back decades of legal advances for students of color and students with disabilities.
In Wisconsin and elsewhere, voucher supporters have fought efforts by the U.S. Department of Justice to oversee their voucher programs.
Bowie writes:
There are now over 20 states and the District of Columbia that use public funds to subsidize private school enrollment, whether it’s a tax credit for parents of students attending private schools or voucher programs, like the one in Wisconsin, that give a student a taxpayer-funded voucher worth a certain amount to pay private school tuition. These programs are touted as giving poor students, often in so-called “failing districts,” the same “choice” that wealthy students have. In Wisconsin and Indiana, these programs are springing up statewide and in public school districts that are not failing. The argument that these programs are an escape from failing school districts is rapidly falling apart as more and more programs are statewide and aimed at decreasing the tuition costs of students’ families who already can afford private schools.
As these public subsidies for private schools expand throughout the country, the civil rights umbrella available to public school students is at risk of folding. In some states like Georgia and Alabama, private schools benefiting from voucher or tax credit programs were founded as segregation academies to thwart federal integration efforts. While the program in Milwaukee and its school district serve almost entirely students of color, as “school choice” spreads around the country, the stage is set for these programs to become even more exclusionary and segregated. If states and local communities permit this to continue, they will cement the public funding of separate schools for only select groups of students, which evidence shows will disproportionately exclude racial minorities, students with disabilities, religious minorities, and LGBT students. This flies in the face of what we have known for the 60 years since Brown v. Board of Education — separate is not equal….
Voucher supporters in Wisconsin say Washington has declared war on them when it’s clear the Justice Department only wants to ensure school privatization doesn’t undermine the hard-fought gains of educational equity in the places most historically resistant to it. The only logical conclusion from this response is that voucher supporters fear oversight and want to continue to operate in a civil rights vacuum.
If that is their fear, then we know what the true purpose of Wisconsin’s voucher program is. It is to create segregated school systems, both in terms of race and in terms of disability. The result is a public school district deprived of the resources to educate its students and left with those most difficult to educate.
Stopping this from getting even worse would be a war worth fighting.

Courtney & I worked together to file the USDOJ disability discrimination complaint which continues to raise the ire of voucher supporters, but has yet to solve the problem due to lax enforcement of the ADA on voucher schools by the Wisconsin Dept. of Public Instruction as I wrote here. http://systemschangeconsulting.wordpress.com/2014/01/22/wisconsin-fails-to-protect-the-civil-rights-of-children-with-disabilities-in-voucher-schools/
LikeLike
i would love to have the ACLU step into Massachusetts. Actually, every state should have this type of inquiry and legal action, as necessary.
LikeLike
I would welcome them in Alabama as well. I am sincerely hoping that the Alabama Accountability Act gets struck down once and for all once the latest appeal regarding it is heard by the State Supreme court.
LikeLike
Massachusetts holds cap on charter schools: “Finally, a dozen Legislators have stood up against these charter carpetbaggers. They understand how a charter school would drain resources from their traditional public schools. They see what is happening in Boston Public Schools, and other urban cities, where the results of MCAS scores have opened the door to charter schools saturating our urban communities, creating a two-tiered segregated system of “haves” and “have nots” and creating a windfall in QZAB interest free bonds, and New Market Tax Credits for charter school venture fund investors at the expense of Massachusetts most vulnerable children. CLOSE THE LID! http://www.patjehlen.org/issues/grading-schools-testimony-board-elementary-and-secondary-education”
are these funding mechanisms what is the norm in other states?
LikeLike
borrowing with tax exempt bonds QZAB…. legislator patjehlen describes to Massachusetts legislature how the funding for charters is enhanced by these
tax exempt bonds
this PDF tells charter schools how it works
Click to access 1696.pdf
LikeLike
funding of charter schools:
” Charter schools are a vehicle that investors use to make and keep their money at the expense of urban children. Charter schools have foundations that often own the building the school resides in and pay rent to the foundation. Bonds and Federal New Market Tax Credits, which provide a 39%+ Tax Credit to investors, are often used to build or renovate these building.
If the state revokes the schools charter, the state cannot claim ownership of the building or school assets because they are owned by the charter schools foundation! There are many philanthropic “consulting” groups whose goals are to “strategically” place clients charitable donations where these clients can benefit financially from it. Let’s see what charter school investors are making big money by investing in the $11,786,000 Qualified Zone Academy Bonds (QZABs) and 130,000,000 in New Market Tax Credits (NMTC) that were awarded to Massachusetts!”
LikeLike
The problem is capitalism.
LikeLike
As a parochial school teacher, I can say that of the many fellow Catholic educators I talk with we have serious misgivings about vouchers. The additional strings of regulation leave us with trepidation. Instead, a tax break for tuition of any type pre-k thru college is preferrable as it would protect from additional bureaucracy, as well as funding of public schools. Not to mention avoids various legal challenges.
LikeLike
Why should taxpayers subsidize private education which they have no control over? Moreover, tuition tax deductions favor the wealthy, which makes them inequitable.
LikeLike
Taxpayers do it all the time in postsecondary education. Would you eliminate Pell grants?
LikeLike
Post-secondary education is completely different because it is not universally available & is not enshrined in every state condition. Pell grants are need based. Tax deductions that you suggest give more money to wealthy people & none to the poor.
LikeLike
So your position is that taxpayers SHOULD subsidize private education which they have no control over if that education is not universally available and not mentioned in the constitution and the subsidy only goes to the poor. A complicated position to take.
LikeLike
No, I did not say that & resent you twisting my words into your distorted logic. I did say that they are different & even postsecondary institutions must comply with the ADA which our complaint demonstrates is not happening in Milwaukee voucher schools. I suppose you would like tax breaks, but would prefer to skip the burden of complying with civil rights laws.
LikeLike
Systems,
Those were the reasons that you gave to allow Pell Grants if they are used in post secondary education but not in secondary education. Simply asserting that the two are “different” is not really any kind of argument. You need to explain how he differences require a different policy.
LikeLike
Apparently you missed these key concepts: universal vs. elective & Constitutional right vs. a privilege. If that’s not clear enough, let’s just stop this argument.
LikeLike
You seem to have gone some distance from the initial post where the concern was “Why should taxpayers subsidize private education which they have no control over?”
You might forgive me for thinking that your post concerned the control over the education provided by taxpayer money. When should taxpayers be concerned about subsidizing education they have no control over and when should they not be concerned about subsidizing education they have no control over? (by the way, I think regulation is certainly a way that the government can have some control over almost everything that is done)
LikeLike
I have gone astray from the initial post? The initial post is about the disability discrimination complaint that I co-authored with Courtney Bowie against Milwaukee’s voucher program. I believe you were the one who went astray with your very first comment. Now, would you like to tell me why you think voucher schools should be able to deny admission to children with disabilities? Did you read the complaint we filed? If not, let’s end this conversation.
LikeLike
So you no longer think that taxpayers should not subsidize private education which they have no control over? Good to know.
LikeLike
Parochial schools have to follow a great deal of public school laws. We do IEP’s, have more academic time per subject than required. All teachers are state certified/licensed. School lunch programs follow all rules and regulations (local, state, national). National standardized exams are taken, but not abused. Finally, every parochial is either ADA compliant, or is made compliant (I.e. elevator) if a handicapped student is enrolled.
Something to consider for those of you with tax concerns is that their is a direct correlation between the reduction of parochial schools and the rise of charter schools. Considering the cost of charter schools to taxpayers, the parochial school is a bargain both immediately, and long term when retirement costs of teachers are included for charter educators.
LikeLike
Systems,
Time spent trying to inform teaching economist is unproductive. Quoting, “There are none so blind as those who will not see.”
I appreciate the work you do and that Dr. Ravitch’s posted this important explanation from the ACLU.
LikeLike
I think that Pell grants and other taxpayer supported subsidies for private education over which the taxpayers have no control are a good idea and I am willing to argue in favor of that position.
LikeLike
Thanks, it took me a while to realize that and I’m done responding now.
LikeLike
“In some states like Georgia and Alabama, private schools benefiting from voucher or tax credit programs were founded as segregation academies to thwart federal integration efforts.”
True.
Down here, if you scratch just below the surface, if you understand the coded language of the region, if you can get people talking ( and you pass for sympathetic)…..Well, a great deal of the love for charters/ dissatisfaction with public schools is very traceable to racism and classism, and it is darn obvious.
LikeLike