Phil Downs, superintendent of the Southwest Allen County schools in Indiana, explains here how the cumulative effect of vouchers reduces spending in every public school in the state.
There are about 1,040,000 students in Indiana. There are 35,500 voucher students in the state, most attending religious schools. Most have never attended a public school in the past, and only 274 were issued to students leaving F-rated public schools. Each voucher is worth about $4,258. Basically, the state is using public dollars to subsidize tuition at religious schools (which the state constitution explicitly prohibits but which the state courts approved).
He writes:
It is conventional wisdom that the voucher program only affects big cities. While voucher usage is higher in big cities, the financial effect is felt in every school district because the voucher dollars come out of Tuition Support, in effect reducing the dollars supporting students in all public schools…
The impact of the voucher program is not based on how many vouchers are used in your district. It is based on each year’s voucher program cost to the Tuition Support budget across the state, regardless of the number of vouchers used within the district. For example, Lebanon Schools lost more than $530,000, Plainfield Schools lost more than $770,000, and Carmel Schools lost more than $2,365,000 this year. Currently, there are 23 school districts where no vouchers are used. They are small districts and the voucher program costs them more than $4 million this year combined. Peru Schools is the largest of these districts and it lost more than $321,000.
Here are this year’s losses in Allen County: East Allen County Schools, $1.38 million; Fort Wayne Community Schools, $4.47 million; Northwest Allen County Schools, $1.13 million; and Southwest Allen County Schools, $1.08 million.
To make this complicated issue much simpler…think of a loganberry pie. Indiana has baked a smaller pie and expects it to feed a larger number of people. More kids, fewer dollars.
Put simply, one million students are suffering loss of school funding so that the 35,000 students previously enrolled in religious schools get a subsidy. The one million pay for the others. The one million lose teachers, get larger classes, and have fewer programs. Is that fair? It is certainly not wise.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I read the article, and I found it interesting. It is true, that some Indiana school districts are impacted by the state’s decision to empower parents to opt-out of the public school system. The article barely mentions that with the loss of funds for these districts, the districts have also lost students. The same phenomenon occurs when families relocate out of a district, or leave the state.
Of course the state is rebating money to families, and some (not all) families are using this money to pay for tuition (and other costs) at religiously-based schools. Notwithstanding the state constitution, the Indiana courts have approved this process. The federal courts have also established the constitutionality in the case of Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002).
The families/students who choose to remain in the public school system, are not being cheated. The per-pupil spending in the state of Indiana has risen. See this report from the Indiana state government:
Click to access CEEP%20School%20Finance%20Report%20(2015-17%20Biennium).pdf
Families/students who choose to utilize the state/municipal system are exercising choice. It must be assumed that they are satisfied with the public system, by recognizing their choice.
It is disingenuous to claim that the “one million” are paying for the others. The entire state population is funding education. Some families/students utilize the public school system. Some families/students are opting-out, and choosing to attend alternate schools. It is quite correct to claim that the state of Indiana is subsidizing multiple school systems. Of course it is fair. And it is certainly wise.
The people of Indiana pay taxes for public schools, not for religious schools.
Why do you say that?. The fact that some Indiana families are using their vouchers to pay costs at religiously-operated institutions, speaks for itself. The people of Indiana, are paying for educational services from a variety of providers, including non-public schools and public schools.
One of the finest religiously-operated institutions of higher education in the United States, is Notre Dame University, located in South Bend Indiana. Students attend this college, with funds provided by the US government, including basic grants and ROTC scholarships. The people of the USA are paying their taxes, so that students can attend this college.
Charles,
Don’t change the subject to higher education.
Funding K-12 religious schools is not part of the American tradition. Whenever put to a vote, it loses.
That’s why the Indiana legislature never dared a referendum.
That’s why the Koch brothers are still fighting to kill a referendum on voucher expansion in Arizona.
They are afraid of democracy. Autocracy works much better for them. They can buy legislators but they haven’t yet figured out how to buy the electorate.
Indiana does not have a referendum process to bring such issues to ballot. see
https://cusdi.org/faq/states-referendums-no-initiatives/
So your claim that Indiana legislators would not risk a referendum is moot.
Q Does Indiana allow laws to be passed by
initiative?
No. The Indiana Constitution requires that all laws be
passed by the state legislature. Article 4, Section 1 of
the State Constitution reads in part: “No law shall be
enacted, except by bill.” The State Constitution would
have to be amended before the voters could pass any initiative. END Q
see
Click to access 2010_Referendum_Brochure.pdf
I too, am afraid of democracy. Democracy is mob rule, where 51% of the people could legally kill the other 49%. That is why we have a congress and state legislatures, to act as a “buffer” against the whims of the mob. Democracy would never have allowed LGBTQ rights, gay marriage, civil rights for blacks, integrated schools, and a whole host of freedoms and rights that we take for granted. With democracy, women would never have been given the vote. Is that what you really want?
Our constitutional system requires calm deliberation, and a diffusion of power. That is why Wyoming and California are equal in the US Senate, regardless of population.
Our legal system permits challenges to certain legislative actions. The Koch brothers brought suit to stop the Arizona expansion referendum. They lost. see
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona-education/2018/01/30/judge-rules-school-voucher-referendum-proposition-305-advances/1081207001/
The referendum is going to take place.
So sorry you do not approve of democracy.
It isn’t that I do not approve of democracy. I am afraid of mob rule, which is pure democracy. We have a government of laws, not of men (people). Our government enacts legislation after careful, calm deliberation. The framers of our federal government, wisely, made no provision for referendum. They were right then, and they are right now.
Elections are not mob rule.
True, elections are not mob rule. But referendums are rule by the majority. In 1957, White people were in the majority in Little Rock, Ark. The majority did not want their public schools to be integrated. If a referendum had been held on integration, and even if black people had the franchise, the referendum would have been defeated, because the majority did not want integration.
Our nation has created a government, wherein the people elect representatives, to have their strictly limited “power of attorney”, and the government attends to the strictly limited powers, which the people have granted to the government. We do not have national referendums on which kind of airplane for the Air Force to buy.
We also have a court system, that is wholly independent, and immune to the whims of the mob. The courts have had to rule on agendas which are often at odds with the majority. The majority of the people in the USA were (and are) opposed to the right of LGBT people to marry whom they wish. Every state (with the exception of Maryland), which held a referendum on gay marriage, defeated it thoroughly. But we have gay marriage, because the Supreme Court ruled for it in Obergefell v. Hodges (2017).
I have no objections to democracy, I have lived under communism and in an Islamic Kingdom. But we must recognize that minorities have rights, and that a government holding solely to the winds of the latest poll, and the whims of a mob, is unacceptable. Government serves as a “buffer”, to establish the rule of law, and protect all citizens, even if they are not part of the majority.
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others” -Winston Churchill.
I am glad to know that you do not object to democracy. We live under a rule of law and a Constitution that protects the rights of minorities.
I personally do not have any objection to same-sex marriage. Why should only straight people be miserable?
I don’t recall asking you that question.
Just a little humor.
Not funny.
I heard a political show on TV today. The man said that US government is like driving with one foot on the accelerator, and one foot on the brake at the same time. I like that analogy. Our government has a legislature and a court system, to serve as a “brake”.
I certainly see your point and the loss of money to public education is great. But, these folks who have been paying school taxes also pay to send their children to religious schools or home school. They have been also paying for the public schools and usually get nothing for it (albeit by choice). They follow the same state rules that the public schools are required to do. Failing charters eventually dissolve and the kids return to the public schools. Is there a middle point where both sides can agree…perhaps a smaller value voucher?
Personally, I do not want charters (I have teachers in the family) but I have known many successful home schoolers who, along with the religious schoolers, bend over backwards to afford to get their kids in these schools. Shouldn’t they be considered?
I know you worry about financing religion in school but others might object to the public schools teaching climate change or teaching sexual attitudes or numerous other reasons. There has to be a point of compromise where public education isn’t radically hurt and it remains fair to all? I cannot say it has been that way.
@April: Two thumbs up! When it comes to financing schools, many people find it difficult to consider alternate opinions and choices. I think it is entirely fair, to limit the value of the voucher.
Yes, I too find it abhorrent that public schools teach scientific facts and accepting attitudes. Can’t believe my tax money pays for that! If I want to raise my kid as an ignorant bigot, that’s my god-given right! And the state should pay for it!
States have no money, other than what taxpayers have given to them. If you are opposed to state/taxpayer funded school vouchers, would you support educational savings accounts? This way people save their own money for alternate education. And some states have opportunity scholarships, where corporations and individuals donate to a fund, that enables families to choose alternate education.
No public money for private or religious schools. Period. Taxpayers pay for public schools. If you want to support religious schools, make a donation.
Thanks Dienne
Well said
Private schools and Charter schools in Indiana do not follow the same rules. It is very rare for a Charter to be shut down for failing. The state allows it to stay open much longer than the laws are supposed to allow. Private schools accept the students that they want. They have the choice, not the families. This program is killing public schools and those of us who send our kids to public schools clearly see that this is the ultimate goal.
The sad fact about the schools that poor families can afford with voucher is dismal academic results. Vouchers are also used by people to supplement the amount that affluent families pay that can afford the private school tuition. Vouchers are another way that the working class can underwrite the wealthy. https://dianeravitch.net/2017/06/20/lubienski-why-is-betsy-devos-pushing-vouchers-when-research-shows-they-dont-work/
YES, so often the endless publicity we hear promoting a charter/voucher route reminds me of the math adage learned in elementary school: beware comparing apples with oranges. If charters/vouchers take pubic money but are not held to the same rules as public schools taking public money, there is no value in comparing them.
After sharing this…
A Friend’s comment on Facebook
“Some of the comments stated did not give all the correct facts. I sent my children to private/religious schools whch I paid for without vouchers from the State. It has been my opinion that if you acept money from the state, you windup paying for it by giving up your independence. As far as the money that the State is loosing, it had been my understanding that when funding public schools, the number of student in private/religious schools were also included in the total numbers for funding of the public school system. One hand washes the other.”
That letter is not accurate. Public school funding does not include children in religious and private schools. It is based on actual enrollment, only in public school.