At last! Three civil liberties groups have sued to block the implementation of “education savings accounts” in Nevada, which are vouchers that will be used in religious schools.
LAS VEGAS – Three civil liberties organizations filed suit today in Nevada District Court to challenge a school voucher program signed into law last June by Gov. Brian Sandoval. The American Civil Liberties Union, the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued on behalf of a group of parents, clergy, and other taxpayers who oppose the program’s effort to divert taxpayer money to private, religious schools.
“Parents have a right to send their children to religious schools, but they are not entitled to do so at taxpayers’ expense. The voucher program violates the Nevada Constitution’s robust protections against the use of public funds for religious education,” said Tod Story, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada. “This program allows public money to be spent at intuitions which operate with sectarian missions and goals and impart sectarian curricula. This is exactly what the Nevada Constitution forbids.”
Under the program, parents of students enrolled in public school for at least 100 days may transfer their children to participating private schools, including religious schools, and are eligible to receive thousands of dollars in public education funds to pay for tuition, textbooks, and other associated costs. The funds will be disbursed through so-called “Education Savings Accounts,” and there are no restrictions on how participating schools can use the money.
The lawsuit argues that the funding scheme violates Article XI Section 10 of the Nevada Constitution, which prohibits the use of public funds for any sectarian purpose. The lawsuit also claims that the program runs afoul of Article XI, Section 2, which requires the legislature to provide for a uniform system of common schools.
“The voucher program will use taxpayer dollars for religious education and indoctrination at a number of religious schools, many of which discriminate in admissions and employment,” said Heather L. Weaver, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “The program would be a huge loss for religious liberty if implemented.”
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
It’s about time the ACLU got involved in this fight. Not just in Nevada but nationally for the widespread violations of civil rights in this deform education movement.
I can’t understand why states are allowed to use public funds for vouchers to any type of private school. On what basis, legal or moral, should our tax dollars be used to fund private enterprises? Can anyone explain that to me?
Ditto charter schools that are privately run or managed, for profit, with sweetheart real estate deals (one affiliated company buying real estate and renting it to the affiliated charter school for exorbitant rates), all feeding at the public taxpayer trough. They won’t open their accounting books to public scrutiny, they don’t follow the same rules/laws as public schools, they don’t take the same kids as public schools, they don’t by and large outperform public schools….so why are we giving them taxpayer dollars and paying hefty administrator/principal/superintendent salaries – oh, and the teachers get paid a pittance and are tasked to work 10-12 hour days, longer school years, and keep their mouths shut, follow a script, and punish the kids who must also remain silent all day long. How do they get away with it?
Public money goes to private enterprises all the time. Any time the state outsources a job (such as building a park) or gives out food stamps. Essentially, most public money is returned to the private sector through wages, etc. Employees, private contractors, and welfare recipients are not discriminated against in terms of how they use the money, but in terms of whether or not they fulfill the purpose for which the money was given.
Personally, I’m not big on charter schools because they have to work within the same secular parameters imposed on all public schools. These parameters inhibit their ability to inspire children to learn by limiting children’s “vision for learning” generally to getting a good job and making lots of money. Similarly, secular public schools are hampered in their ability to build good moral civic qualities. They can speak a language of equality, but they have proven poor at changing children’s hearts to truly care for others.
Though many religious schools unfortunately do little more than model secular schools, some schools attempt to pass on higher values and views of life. They try to inspire children to view their futures as a “calling” and “others” as people to be valued.
“Though many religious schools unfortunately do little more than model secular schools, some schools attempt to pass on higher values and views of life.”
“. . . higher values and views of life”
What are those supposed “higher values and views”? Without providing what those are one cannot adequately address what you say in that sentence. Please explain.
TIA!
Public schools, due to the religion clauses of the US Constitution’s First Amendment, are not supposed to favor, endorse, or present a world view. Common or non-sectarian schools are restricted to present only ideas and values considered (by some godlike body) to be “common”. Thus, by “higher values and views,” I mean the ideals that we hold related to our world views. These ideals are highly motivating (life shaping) to those who hold them. Since public education is stripped of the ability to deeply address many ideals, it is inherently less motivating than it could be. Whereas in the 1970’s and 1980’s schools addressed this vacuum by encouraging students to subjectively explore their value systems (values clarification, etc), the next generation focussed on the “self esteem” movement to motivate students, and with this apparent failure, the generation tries to motivate students with the “big stick” of high stakes testing. I believe children are more strongly motivated to learn and grow when their education fits into and draws from the deep beliefs and values they already hold. Secular schools cannot present a meaningful education in the same manner that a religious school can. Craig S. Engelhardt, Ph.D. Director Society for the Advancement of Christian Education (SACE)
>
Craig, (assuming you are the same poster as craiger1528, correct me if I’m wrong),
“I mean the ideals that we hold related to our world views.”
What you wrote is fine and dandy but it doesn’t answer my question, which, in order to discuss what you have written about higher values and views needs to be explained, laid on the line so to speak. So again:
What are those supposed “ideals” and “higher values and views”?
Writing as a Christian, some ideals I bring into the classroom are to teach a concern for others not just utilizing a generic “golden rule” or punishments, but by appealing to Christ’s command to love all people and do good to them… even enemies. Regarding leadership, I would teach, as Christ taught, that the greatest leader will be the servant of others. Regarding patriotism, secular schools have little to say about why students should support this nation… (just because we live here?) I would bring in ideals related to God’s unique plans for each country, that God loves freedom and has a call on America to teach other nations how to be free. I could go on and on, but the point is that the “oil” and the “glue” of society is built upon human commitments that must be valued and compelling to the individual. Some of these topics may seem foreign to the secular school day, but since schools play a major role in raising the next generation, perhaps all schools should.
Craig S. Engelhardt, Ph.D. Director Society for the Advancement of Christian Education (SACE)
>
And it is that explicit dogma and idiology that you cite is why we need secular schools.
“. . . that God loves freedom and has a call on America to teach other nations how to be free. I could go on and on. . . ”
Wow, are you sure that America isn’t Israel? I thought they were their god’s chosen people. It’s exactly that type of hubristic snobbish claims made by the various religions throughout history that convinced those who founded this country to seek to prevent religious interference in “secular” affairs. It is precisely such steadfast “We are THE CHOSEN ONES” that causes much turmoil.
Stick with your Xtianity, Craig, it’ll serve you well but it does not serve this country well. We are far diverse to be served by simplistic religious dogma.
Duane, Sorry it took me so long to get back. I don’t understand your religious bigotry; tolerance calls us to accept the diversity of others even if we disagree with them. Secular schools (I consider them to reflect a non-theistic worldview) may align with the thinking of some, religious schools align with the values and thinking of others. It is not for the state to preferentially fund one worldview (religion) over another.
As to history, you had better read some more, I suggest the book “Education Reform: Challenging the Secular Ideal” (mine). The U.S. founders, common-school founders and the public associated with both those generations were overwhelmingly religious (Protestant Christian). They aimed at secular government to quiet the “wars of religion”, but they never dreamed of “secular society” or “secular schooling” as we now have it. In fact, they believed (as noted in Washington’s Farewell Address and in Horace Mann’s education writings) that good citizenship and public education required strong religious attachments. I don’t endorse returning to exclusive funding of the Christian common schools any more than I endorse the establishment of secularism within today’s public schools. That is why I support school choice.
Do I believe America is a nation chosen by the God of the bible? Yes, it is chosen to bring healing to the world, to educate the ignorant, bring health to the sick, care for the widow and orphan, bring peace and dignity to the oppressed, and support the value and dignity of the individual… Corporately, I believe America, as well as every other nation, has this calling, but each nation will only evidence the calling to the degree their citizens hear and commit to it.
Craig S. Engelhardt, Ph.D.
>
” Secular schools cannot present a meaningful education in the same manner that a religious school can.”
While I agree with that statement as it is (it only states that there is a difference in “presentation”, not that one side is “better” or “worse” than the other), in the context of this discussion I believe what you are hinting at is that those religious schools are indeed “better” at “presenting a meaningful education”. Am I reading that correctly? Is my interpretation correct?
Yes, and if learning to read, do math, understand history, etc., is more “meaningful,” it will not only please parents, but will likely inspire children to work harder. However, I don’t want to get into public education’s enamoration with test scores. Though religious schools do well with grades, I’m more concerned about nurturing good people. And here, religious schools have far deeper resources of community, philosophy, and flexibility than their public school counterparts.
Craig S. Engelhardt, Ph.D. Director Society for the Advancement of Christian Education (SACE)
>
I resent your implication, Craig, that religious schools are the only ones that are teaching morals and values.
This is why I’m am member of the ACLU.
Engelhardt is way off base. “Secular” in education means “religiously neutral”, not “irreligious”. Englehardt is knocking the public schools that serve 90% of our kids and that are run by 13,000 local school boards. — Edd Doerr (arlinc.org)
Edd,
You missed my point! Perhaps, I was not clear; I don’t argue that secular schools are irreligious – quite the opposite: I argue they are quasi-religious in themselves, and opposed to many other religions. I am arguing that secular public schools are NOT neutral – rather they actively and tacitly support a secular perspective on life, knowledge, and morality. The hope of a “neutral school” only exists where education is shallow and relatively meaningless – beyond that, we disagree… but is a shallow education what we want for citizens – let alone our children?
Christian citizens of the 19th century similarly claimed the neutrality of the common school. It is funny that Catholics didn’t see it that way. Few religious people share my understanding, but I think it is because we are philosophically dumbed down as a culture nurtured for generations within secular schools.
If I bring suit, perhaps I will hire a thoughtful ACLU lawyer to defend my religious liberties!
Craig S. Engelhardt, Ph.D.
>
Craig (belpw): So, what are you advocating? That taxpayers support of multiplicity of faith-based schools, which would fragment our school population along religious, ideological, social class, ethnic, gender , and other lines? That is a formula for utter chaos. — Edd Doerr
Edd;
America was born out of this “chaos”. There were many diverse schools reflecting generations of diversity at our founding. Our early unity grew out of working together and finding a general overlap of values and beliefs worth defending. Yes, the fear of Catholics fragmenting society propelled the common school system, but when Catholics became “good American citizens OUTSIDE the public schools, it should have served to undermine the intolerance of common school supporters.
The idea that social unity was linked to the common school evolved in Europe in the early 19th century. Contemporary studies do not show that homeschooler or private schoolers are weaker citizens – they actually tend to be stronger (I can get you the research if you want it). In fact, though most schools are little heard from, it seems to me that when I hear of factional discord in a school, it is virtually always a public school. We created the idea of unity based on secular education, but I have not seen research that backs it up.
You present a list of social schisms, but Constitutionally, not all of them could be used to separate students such as (race and class). What is wrong with allowing children to deeply explore their faith/ non-faith within the school day? If their faith is found lacking, they can go elsewhere as an adult. The connection between unity and schooling is an imaginary ideal. I guess you could say individual families are a “formula for utter chaos” also, and that the government should support group family homes… I don’t see it that way.
Craig S. Engelhardt, Ph.D. Director Society for the Advancement of Christian Education (SACE)
Email: contact@saceschools.org Web: http://www.saceschools.org Mail: 502 Northcreek Dr., Chandler, TX 75758 Phone: (254) 218-0287
>
I’m so pleased they are advocating on behalf of the children in public schools by pointing out that there is a “common” school system that exists:
Click to access ACLUNV_Filed%20Complaint%20Duncan%20v%20Nevada.pdf
Maybe public school parents should redirect political contributions to the ACLU lawyers, huh? Their elected lawmakers don’t seem to be advocating on their behalf 🙂
I get giving parents choice – but this is a bridge too far.
It basically removes the onus for education from the state and only goes so far as its responsibility is to redistribute funds to individuals.
Certification, elements of a good education, quality of programs will fall to parents (even when good information is available which is seldom true) and if parents choose badly due to a lack of their own education (or lack of access to funds to supplement the state’s check) and/or quality options DO NOT EXIST – then it is a bit of too bad so sad not our problem.
There is something simply sickening when we give money to those who already have at the expense of those who don’t and wash our hands of any responsibility for providing a society that takes care of its neediest – especially children who don’t choose their parents.
And then we tell those same needy people who can’t provide a better education by their own means that we did it for them, they should be happy?
Never mind that this ESA practically invites large scale malfeasance by those who are desperate – take the money and your kids and flee the state or declare them home schooled.
I do not see this leading to a good education for even a great many children.
You raise a very good question does the “onus for education ” lie with the state or with parents? True, some parents are so ignorant that they can’t recognize a good education, or so selfish that won’t give their children a good education, and the state should step in to protect these children. However, I believe most parents are both capable and caring.
Though many people on this site obviously hold education ideals, supporting any uniform public system, supports a winner take all ideology. The current “winners” are those who now impose testing on everyone. Every educational generation has its own “winners” to be fought for control by those with other educational ideals.
Common education’s Achilles heal is that it opposes ideals in its attempt to be “common”. Ideals are controversial and are thus short-lived when imposed within a democratic system.
If you truly support some education ideals, join me in the private sector where you can freely offer them, then argue for a share of the public funding proportional to the number of families that agree with your ideals!
Craiger1528,
Why should you as a private entity be entitled to state education funds that are constitutionally mandated for public education for all. I wish you luck in your private venture, but if you want to take in tax dollars then you should have to abide by any and all laws, policies, mandates that the public schools do. Can you not survive in that vaunted free market place of education ideas without a government subsidy?
Again I have no problem with you attempting your private venture, I think it’s great, just do so on your own and not with monies that are collected and distributed for the common good, the public schools.
Ahh, the common good. That is the topic I like. Public education should serve the common good, and the state is obligated to seek out the best way to insure that all children receive a good education that nurtures productive American citizenship. My research finds that government run and other secular public schools are not the best education for the common good due to their bureaucratic and secular nature. Thus, just as a local government might contract out the building of a bridge that it lacks the expertise to build, I believe government should fulfill its educational obligations by moving to a “plural” (rather than a common) system of public education (yes, government lacks educational expertise because much of a good education lies in the “religious “domain). Allowing families to choose between an array of schools and pick those that fit their ideology will strengthen advance the public good over the common system we have experimented with for a century and a half. Much of my research is in “Education Reform: Confronting the Secular Ideal .”
Craig S. Engelhardt, Ph.D. Director Society for the Advancement of Christian Education (SACE)
>
“My research finds that government run and other secular public schools are not the best education for the common good due to their bureaucratic and secular nature”
My research, including my k-12 education in Catholic schools, finds that community local run secular public schools are the best education for the common good due to their democratic and secular nature. Much of my research and experience is in “Education Reform: On Fidelity to Truth: Confronting Idiology* and Dogma in Educational Malpractices”
Nice standoff, eh. So now what?
“yes, government lacks educational expertise because much of a good education lies in the “religious” domain”.
So are you saying that “good education” can only lie in religious dogma? The question then becomes “Whose religious dogma”? And why should I have to pay for someone’s religious indoctrination when those religious entities do not pay taxes? Who made them so special? (Besides their self-alleged particular god)
And you once again skirted my question: Can you not survive in that vaunted free market place of education ideas without a government subsidy?
Six questions now. Can you answer them? (now seven-ha ha)
*Idiology (n)
a) Ideology based on falsehoods and error.
B) Ideology of idiots.
Duane, you had me going; I thought you had written a book with a similar title! You throw out words based on bias and presumption. No, don’t think “dogma” as you use the word, is the focus of a good education, but since a good education teaches children to reason and care for his/her fellow citizens, the education of children must be placed within a worldview. Every value and belief has a worldview context – that is why I claim secular schools are “religious.” They sometimes actively and sometimes tacitly present a view of Truth.
I don’t see this blog doing a very good job defending democratic education… It seems to criticize what the process comes up with! And secular? From my perspective, it appears that we are devolving as a nation built on secular education. However, you may value things I do not, so I grant you the right to support secular schools with your tax dollars, just don’t make your religious schools the only public option.
Craig S. Engelhardt, Ph.D.
>
Disappointing to see the ACLU relying on this KKK-era language, and absolutely Orwellian for them to claim to be in favor of religious liberty.
“…KKK-era language…”??
Dienne, it seems there’s a letter missing from WT’s pen name.
TAGO, Christine!
In state constitutions — the KKK was a big supporter of the state constitutional provisions that are so hostile towards religion. The ACLU might as well try to enforce the 3/5ths-of-a-vote clause while they’re at it.
Source?
The KKK didn’t want tax money going to Roman Catholic schools.
WT, this is a threat to religious freedom because if you begin to give money to religious causes eventually there will be a need for consensus on the beliefs of the recipients. . .otherwise we have a situation similar to communism where everyone is doled out an equal share and, again eventually, one controlling group will call the shots. That is a threat to religious freedom.
Dr. Ravitch is a historian. She knows this all very well. Constitutional provisions like Nevada’s came from a time in the 19th century when public schools were all resoundingly Protestant (remember school prayer? Lasted until the 1960s), and anti-Catholic bigots wanted to be sure that public dollars were used only for Protestant schools, not Catholic schools.
Indeed, when the Nevada amendment was being considered, the Nevada Daily Tribune editorialized that “this is a stepping stone to the final breaking up of a power that has long cursed the world, and that is obtaining too much of a foothold in these United States.”
See scholars.law.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1231&context=nlj
WT, Nevada should repeal the constitutional provision that says public money is only for public schools, if that is the wish of voters. But for now, the provision banning support of religious institutions is there, and the Legislature should abide by the rule of law, not the rule of the Friedman Foundation.
Ah, now I see what you’re trying to get at.
I’d think that the fact that the Protestants tried to hog all the public education money and keep it away from the Catholics might convince you of the need to keep public education (and its funding) and religion separate in general.
Ah, WT, always a reformist angle you pick out. I’m sure you could fault Mother Teresa.
That is perhaps the most bizarre attempt at an insult I’ve ever seen, given that your side is defending anti-Catholic bigotry.
WT, is there any indication that Nevada’s Blaine amendment is currently used to target Catholics? Is there any indication that invalidating Nevada’s voucher system would have a disproportionate negative impact Catholic institutions or students? If so, is there any indication that the voucher system disproportionately benefits Catholic institutions or students?
It seems to me that the threshold question on the law is what “sectarian” and “sectarian purpose” mean.
Flerp — I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t have to look very hard to find people on the anti-voucher side of the fence who hate Catholics and all religion too, and who are happy to ally themselves with the KKK if that’s to their tactical advantage.
Normally I wouldn’t question anything that you’re pretty sure of. But even assuming that I’m able to find people who dislike vouchers and hate all religion, how does it follow that invalidating Nevada’s voucher system is an act of anti-Catholic bigotry? Is it because the ACLU is partnering on this lawsuit with the KKK?
I look forward to reading the KKK’s amicus briefs. It’s probably been a while since they updated their stance on school choice.
I’m just saying that, as no one can deny, there is a very ugly history behind this Nevada constitutional provision, and decent people should be embarrassed to be using such outdated 19th century language as a litigation tool.
Litigation isn’t something decent people do in the first place.
In all seriousness, there are interesting questions here and I can’t dismiss them. How, if at all, has this constitutional provision been enforced in recent memory? Is the provision discriminatory on its face? (In the “common school” era, it certainly was; today, I’m not sure.) In other words, can the provision be saved from its origins and applied in a neutral way? The answers are not obvious to me.
If the Repubs had any honor they would have sought to amend the state constitution, but that would surely be voted down at the polls. How do we know? Because the neighboring states of California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Utah and Colorado have had twelve (sic!) referenda on vouchers or similar plans for diverting public funds to private schools in which voters rejected these plans by an average margin of 64% to 36%. Nevada voters would surely follow suit. For details on the 28 referenda on this issue see my article “The Great School Voucher Fraud” at arlinc.org.
Republicans of late seem hellbent on wrecking public education, undermining the teaching profession, and undercutting the church-state separation principle that guarantees the religious liberty of all Americans, our right not to be forced by government to contribute to the support of religious institutions.
Edd Doerr (arlinc.org)
Good. We need the ACLU on our side!
Don’t Democrats supposedly oppose vouchers? Where are they? Quietly supporting vouchers while telling voters they oppose vouchers?
mmm hmmm. yep. good observation.
“The voucher program violates the Nevada Constitution’s robust protections against the use of public funds for religious education. ”
I am certainly glad this legal action is in motion.
However, you can bet there will be a RUSH to get this and similar state consitutions changed ASAP, aided by big money and evangelical fervor stirred up by more than one Republican candidate for office, Fox news, and others.
The unfortunate precedent for this breech of church/state separation came with the “faith-based” initiatives ushered into federal policies by George Bush, with federal funds going to charters that are clearly authorized and organized by religious groups.
I predict there will be mighty efforts to support the use of taxpayer money to defend “freedom of religious expression” in educational choice, curricula, and instruction.
The Supremes could get this case and produce another ruling that opens the floodgates for tax dollars to fund religious schools.
Of course, in Ohio parochial schools are the major recipients of the Ohio Educational Choice Scholarship (EdChoice) Program. This is in addition to the landmark Cleveland Scholarship Fund.
EdChoice (available since 2005) provides up to 60,000 students from “underperforming public schools” scholarships to attend participating private schools with state “charters.” (A nicely convoluted definition of “charter” operates in Ohio). “Underperforming” means a public school building rated in “academic emergency” or “academic watch” for two of the past three years.
The maximum amounts are about $4,250 for students in grades K-8, and $5,000 for students in grades 9-12). The maximum is adjusted slightly every year and actual payments are for the school’s actual tuition or the maximum scholarship amount, whichever is less.
For the school year 2015-2016, EdChoice Scholarships will also be available to students in grades K-2 whose family income is at or below 200% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines These are the guidleines by household size 1= $23,540; 2= $31,860; 3= $40,180; 4= $48,500; 5= $56,820; 6= $65,140; 7= $73,460; 8= $81,780.
If you look at the list of approved private schools for EDChoice, almost all are parocial and among these, most are Catholic schools. A few Montessori schools are on the list.
I like the way they slid a “robust” in there to turn some reform language back on reforms.
Robust.
Ya know, at the end of the day. . .in the south. . .it probably was church people organizing the first schools. It’s a logical outreach of most thinking churches, I assume. But it is totally scary that we would need to have consensus, which we eventually would, if we were to monitor vouchers and so forth as the Democrats who are sort of going with the tide in NC have proposed. And think how expensive that will be too.
Another garden path. Vouchers are a garden path.
Public schools were not instituted in the south for any race until after the Civil War. And it was the Reconstruction governments that started public schools in the south, not the churches.
TOW. . .but I’ll bet the ones in government pushing for public schools were active members of Protestant congregations.
Not necessarily, since many white preachers in the South were preaching segregation and slavery as God-given and sanctioned. Those congregations would therefore not have been advocating for public education for black children.
When will the ACLU mount a campaign against Indiana?
I will be watching here for the moment that happens. Professor Ravitch, keep us posted!
Also, maybe its time to start charging taxes to “churches” of any and every denomination and religious schools too?
YEP!
Not sure why the supposedly religious $#!^ doesn’t stink and should not be taxed like the rest of us. Remnant thinking of prior religious dominated eras. Tax em all!
My only question:
;WHY DID IT TAKE THEM SO LONG.TO DO THIS?
Don’t forget all the money that goes to the organization that issues the vouchers. Here is Step Up for Students 990 (Florida vouchers “scholarships”). $1.3M exec salaries, $3M other salaries, $350K travel, $618K advertising, $34K conferences, $245K printing and postage, $196K lobbying, $181K check production etc.
http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/593/593649371/593649371_201406_990.pdf?_ga=1.162426428.1680882029.1436713999
It’s a matter of time they go out for Vulture hunt.
I think you and the previous commentators are completely off key and speaking from ignorance rather than experience. I myself think this is a great idea, I can finally afford to put my daughter in a deserving school and choose to spend my money where I desire. Unfortunately for the past 3 years I have had to pay out of pocket for my daughter to attend a Lutheran school (we aren’t even lutheran) to the tune of $8,000 a year. All while paying our taxes including property taxes and a premium because we rent. So now that my daughter is school age and have made the decision to put her in public school she is in an overcrowded class teased, bullied and in the presence of inattentive children who lack God, discipline and broken families who aren’t engaged with their child’s education bringing down the quality education my daughter deserves. This is the reason socialism does not work… if people aren’t able to choose and invest in the most important sector of their child’s life they leave, move and that’s exactly what we are doing. For your opinion as to how I spend or the desire of spending my money that I pay in literally and through taxation is of no business of yours. Additionally if you want to seperate church and state feel free to get rid of government funded schools and make every member pay for their child. I guarantee you, the ones who care will succeed and the ones who are lathargic and lazy will fail just as they have been. This situation is also created in conjunction with open market section 8 funding. Gone are the days of hard working Americans buying homes within their means and saving for their future. Instead we are forced to overspend to get away from the generational social program leeches within our neighborhoods
If Medina wants to send his kid to a private school, fine, but he should not ask his fellow taxpayers to pay for a sectarian religious education. The 2015 PDK/Gallup poll shows that Americans oppose tax aid to private schools by 57% to 31%, about the same as the average 2 t01 vote against that in 28 state referenda from coast to coast from 1966 to 2014. Further, Gallup, shows that 70% of Americans give an A or B grade to the public school attended by their oldest kid.
Yes, our public schools can be improved — if they are adequately and equitably financed (something Republicans generally oppose), if we have universal pre-K, and if we get serious about fighting the poverty that afflicts 1/4 of our kids.
Edd Doerr (arlinc.org)
Great numbers you pulled out of a hat… yea let’s call a 1000 random people and that with 324 million Americans.
What I especially like is the selective agreement with the families eldest child… that doesn’t ring any bells of dishonesty or lapse in integrity of factual reporting….
Look I pay taxes all of them and having vouchers gives me a real say at where my very real dollars go. I do not believe I should have to leverage my daughter’s future on an under performing school that I fund!!! It’s that simple why pay for a service that is subpar? Would you keep buying a car that continually broke down on you?
As far as funding is concerned, the US spends more money per student than any other country in the world. Money isn’t the problem with the degredation of our schools it’s the lack of involvement through the socialist pacification and disconnection of real costs. It’s also a moral problem when over half of the families attending are coming from broken homes or fatherless homes all contributing to an absolute disconnect and failure.
Take your chances with your own kids, not mine
Actually, Steven, statistical sampling, as long as it’s truly random, only needs about 1,000 people to give a margin of error of + or – 3%, which is about as low of a margin of error as you can get, so 1,000 is fine for this study.
I took a class from a major pollster several years ago.
I expect my kids (now in their 20’s) to live a long time. I want them to be prepared for a future nation – and world – which is diverse in religious beliefs (or none), ethnic and racial identity (or none), educational levels and socio-economic standing. So I chose public schools for them because I didn’t want them to only know kids who were just like themselves, with similar life circumstances.
I also want them to live in a community – and a society -where they can feel secure. A vibrant, well resourced public education is a precursor to and possibly a guarantor of a more equitable society. This is why I support my public schools even though my kids have graduated and why I willingly pay the taxes used to do so.
The idea that the taxes you pay which go to the public schools somehow belong to you is false. They are the contribution you make in an investment in our future. Your taxes also pay for National Parks you may never visit, research on cures for diseases you may never contract, weapons which you will never fire, bridges over which you will never cross. I agree it would be nice to pay less and we could if the most well off paid their fair share instead of creating tax write offs from their charity work which destroys our common spaces.
As to morals and values, a Spanish proverb says: “La instrucción en la escuela, la educación en la casa.”
Education is given at home; instruction in academics happens at school. If you bind your children to you with love, no matter what their instruction, they won’t turn away from the education received at home.
Medina (below) is clearly out of sync with the vast majority of Americans and out of sync with our constitutional principle of church-state separation that protects out religious freedom, our fundamental right not to be forced to pay for anyone’s religious institutions. Medina is out of touch with reality. — Edd Doerr (arlinc,org)