Problems

Faulty
Arguments

Virginia &
Loudoun Co.

Better
Solutions

VOUCHERS = NO SOLUTION, BUT DEFINITELY A PROBLEM!

The concept of vouchers was initiated in Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana in the 1960's as a way to subsidize segregated private schools. The plans were struck down by the federal courts.

Over the last five years, vouchers again have been promoted by numerous right wing groups. Because the majority of Americans reject the concept of "vouchers," that term has been replaced by language which increasingly obscures the fact that public funding of private education is still the bottom line. More recently, voucher legislation has been called scholarships for inner-city children, tuition tax credits or education savings accounts. Regardless of the name or the process, the end result is identical: our tax dollars are diverted to private schools at a time when many public schools are in dire need of funding.

The use of "scholarships" is a particularly cynical ploy, as it plays upon the plight of poor, inner-city children and the desire to help them. However, these "scholarships" help only a few children, while condemning the vast majority to an inferior education by undermining efforts to improve public schools and by shifting tax dollars to private schools. The real goal should be improving schools for all children, not just a few.

Vouchers for inner city children are simply the first step toward full state funding of religious schools - the true goal of the pro-voucher movement.

The cruel irony of these "scholarships" is best described by Dorothy Gilliam:

"On Thursday, the House of Representatives narrowly passed a program that appropriated $7 million to help 2,000 D.C. students pay the tuition to attend private and religious schools. House Republicans say they want to help the city's children. But their purpose--once again--is to use public money to fund private and religious schools, cementing a two-tier system. In proposing to help the most-mobile, while providing no answers for the 76,000 left behind, they would create a harder-to-educate public school population, confirming their own views that local schools are inadequate." [Washington Post, 10/11/97]

WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH A VOUCHER SYSTEM?

Problem 1: There is no conclusive evidence that vouchers really work. "Research on the impact of existing private school voucher programs has not demonstrated substantial achievement benefits for these programs. In fact, most differences between performance in public and private schools can be explained by the family background of the students." [Secretary Riley's 1997 White Paper]

Evaluations of the two longest-running, publicly-funded voucher programs [Milwaukee and Cleveland] provide no conclusive evidence of the benefit of vouchers for student achievement:

• "The one clear implication of these [three separate] studies [of Milwaukee's voucher program] is that the impact of voucher programs on student achievement remains unproven." [Secretary Riley's 1997 White Paper]
• In its ongoing study of Cleveland's voucher program, the Indiana Center for Evaluation concluded in 1998 that "After approximately two years in the scholarship program, the impact of the program on students' achievement remains unclear."
• "A First Report Card on Vouchers: Cleveland's program gets mixed grades. Parents are happier, but students may not be learning more. And vouchers may be dividing the city." (Time Magazine, April 26, 1999 - headline)

What does work? Read about the massive STAR study which proves conclusively that smaller classes are more effective than vouchers in improving academic performance.

Problem 2: Vouchers may be unconstitutional because they force citizens to support the teaching of religious views with which they may disagree. The Constitution states government may not subsidize sectarian activities, but the bills introduced by voucher proponents clearly state that sectarian schools may receive public funds. [Sectarian schools make up 80% of all private schools.]

Problem 3: Vouchers are an inefficient use of tax dollars and will cost taxpayers more. Money for private school vouchers would come from public school funds or tax increases.

• Milwaukee's public schools lost $29.4 million to vouchers in the 1998-99 school year. If the program expands to its full potential of 15,000 students, the cost could go as high as $73.5 million, forcing school officials to make budget cuts and threatening programs needed to improve their schools.
• Public school costs will not go down just because there are fewer students, but their resources will be diminished. It costs just about as much to teach a class of 30 as of 35 in terms of building maintenance, teachers, buses, etc. However, schools will not only lose the amount of the voucher but their share of state funds for each student who leaves.
• Vouchers would go to those already in enrolled in private schools, including students from higher income families who could afford to pay tuition. (Cost for U.S. would be $15 billion according to Secretary of Education Riley's 1997 White Paper.)
• Private schools are not more efficient than public schools in containing costs. Private schools' per-pupil costs are lower because they do not serve disabled, limited-English, and other disadvantaged students (who are more expensive to educate), because private school teachers are paid less since they need not be certified, and because they are often subsidized by their alumni and churches.
• The U.S. does not spend more than other countries on education. We rank ninth among 19 industrialized nations in per pupil expenditures in grades K-12, and 14th among 16 industrialized nations in percent of per capita income spent on education (Dr. David C. Berliner, "Educational Reform in an Era of Disinformation").

Problem 4: Lack of Accountability means taxpayers have no control over private schools and how their money is spent there.

• Most private schools do not have to submit to the same rigorous regulations as public schools regarding their admission, discipline, or expulsion policies; curriculum; teacher qualifications; source of funding or how they spend those funds; needs of disabled children; and test results.
• Private schools are controlled by their owners and need not involve anyone, including parents, in school governance.
• No elected school board or legislative oversight exists, even though public funds would be involved.
• Oftentimes the requirements for opening a voucher-eligible private school are so lax that vouchers would encourage the establishment of profit-motivated, fly-by-night schools.
• The potential for fraud is great, as Milwaukee discovered when a private school faked enrollment numbers to increase its funding under the city's voucher program.

Problem 5: Vouchers would separate us by class, race, ethnicity, and religion.

• Public education levels the playing field and prepares all children to live and work together. Vouchers would create a class system of education where the vast majority of inner city students and the learning disabled would be left behind in under-funded schools. A Harvard study showed that public and private school choice can actually leave many low-income children stranded in schools that are worse off than before.
• Long-term voucher experiences in Britain, France, and the Netherlands resulted in social segregation, widening the educational gap between the children of the rich and the poor (John Ambler, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 13, No. 3).
  American studies suggest our experience would be the same as the other countries' since evidence indicates that religion and a desire for racial segregation play a role in shifts to private schools (1995 Phi Delta Kappan report).
• Some parochial schools would promote separatism with public funds because their teachings often refute commonly held views about American society and its central beliefs of diversity, intellectual freedom, and religious tolerance (Visions of Reality: What Fundamentalist Schools Teach, Albert J. Menendez).

WILL VOUCHERS ACHIEVE WHAT THEIR PROPONENTS CLAIM? The two major arguments used by voucher proponents are that vouchers provide poor families with school choice (including the implication that private schools are better than public) and that vouchers would improve public schools by forcing them to compete. A closer look shows these arguments are invalid.

CHOICE: The only choice belongs to the school, not the parents.

• Private schools can discriminate in admission and hiring by sex, test scores, religion, health problems, discipline problems, and physical, emotional, or learning disabilities. This practice skims off the students with high test scores, good behavior and family support, leaving behind children with special learning needs.
• Private schools are free to expel any student who does not meet their expectations.
• Vouchers pay only part of the tuition and often don't pay other expenses. Poor parents could not afford to pay the remaining costs for most non-sectarian private schools.
• Private schools do not have enough seats to absorb a substantial number of additional students. A voucher system would do little or nothing to address the needs of the 89% of students currently in public schools (Secretary Riley's 1997 White Paper).

• Few private schools are in inner cities or economically depressed areas, eliminating any "choice" for those who have no transportation.
• Voucher programs could entail additional costs such as providing public information and transportation and creating a bureaucracy to handle regulations and fraud.
• Our public schools compare favorably to private schools. When students with similar socio-economic backgrounds or students who took the same courses are compared, private school advantage is very small or non-existent (High School and Beyond, 1982 federal survey).

COMPETITION: No proof exists that competition would improve schools.

Markets develop products to satisfy people's tastes or needs according to their ability to pay. A school's selling points could be ethnic, gender, social, cultural or religious homogeneity; convenience, a winning sports team, or a promise of easier programs and better grades.

Markets do not always promote quality...look at junk food and TV sitcoms.

Competition is not fair if the playing field is not level. Public schools must serve all children and remain accountable to the public; private schools do not.

Poor neighborhoods often lack department stores, grocery stores, banks and other services. What incentive would there be for schools to locate there?

Education is a vital public good, and competition is about wiping out your competitor, not making him better.

Other pro-voucher arguments are as blatantly illogical as the ones of choice and competition:

"The money does not go to the school but to the family"...who then gives the money to a private school of their choice. Simply passing public funds through a family does not alter the fact that public money is subsidizing private and sectarian schools.

"With tuition tax credits, parents use their own money, not the government's." Tax credits are public dollars the government has relinquished. Even though the funds are not cycled through the IRS, the fact remains that tax dollars which would be used for public schools are going to private schools.

"Parents of private school students pay double taxes...to support both the public and private schools." Private school tuition is not a tax, it is an additional expense some parents have chosen to pay. We all benefit from an educated citizenry and are expected to support certain basic public services whether we use them or not. However, with vouchers all taxpayers will be doubly taxed--once for private and once for public schools.

FINALLY...
Watch the use of words. Voucher proponents say scholarships, not vouchers; parents' taxes, not public taxes; government schools, not public schools. They don't talk about the money that will be taken from public schools, or how private schools and middle/upper class students will benefit more than inner-city kids. They do not mention that public funds will be used to teach specific religious beliefs...beliefs that sometimes include the denigration of other religions.

Voucher programs are not grass-roots driven but are often promoted by wealthy foundations with political agendas. In Milwaukee, the Bradley Foundation directed $7 ½ million toward diverting public school funds to private and parochial schools. Not surprisingly, Milwaukee is one of only two cities to have implemented voucher programs.

Click here for a comprehensive list of Facts and Myths about Vouchers on the Americans United for Separation of Church and State Web site.