An Argument in Opposition of Education Vouchers

by Mike Joseph

Why would anyone wish to withhold support for a program that has the potential to revolutionize the, often, insufficient American education system? This question has undoubtedly entered the mind of proponents of education voucher systems across the country. However, despite the pressure placed on legislators everywhere, close scrutiny of the real issues should not be clouded by public fervor. It is my belief that, after a thorough examination of the merits of such programs, school vouchers would be a gross detriment to both the American education system and the nation itself.

In an education voucher system, students are given "vouchers" for the tuition of any private or public school that accepts transfer students. Parents must pay the remainder of the tuition of the school to which they send their child if it exceeds the maximum amount of the voucher, which is usually around $3000. While the specifics of these programs vary, these statements hold true for the only two voucher programs currently in effect, in Cleveland and Wisconsin.

Paramount of issues at hand is that of the constitutionality of voucher programs. The Establishment Clause prohibits a state religion and guarantees all the freedom to practice whatever religion they should desire. The Supreme Court, along with many lower courts, has held the Establishment Clause to mean also that neither federal, state, or local governments may support a religion, including financially. Voucher programs represent direct state financial support to private, often parochial schools. In fact, even the checks in Cleveland's program, while addressed to the parents, are currently mailed to the school first.

Proponents of voucher programs argue that the type of support offered doesn't violate the Establishment Clause and is very similar to currently accepted programs such as the GI Bill. The major problem with that argument, however, is the nature of the GI Bill. While voucher programs offer vouchers to all eligible students in their respective districts, the funds from the GI Bill are available only to members of the Armed Forces. These funds, though conditional, are clearly a form of repayment for military service.

Another point put forth by proponents is that of competition between schools. They believe that competition between private schools and public schools as well as each other will improve not only the private schools but also the public schools with which they compete. This argument yields two concerns, however. First, people should consider the problems that arose from many trade schools opening for the purpose of collecting money from government grants. A large number of such schools simply enrolled students to be eligible for grant money and provided only a limited education. Of course, this scenario doesn't parallel that of a school voucher program, but the concerns about schools being created simply for the purpose of collecting voucher money. Slightly similar in concept is the other concern regarding this "free-market" argument: Do we really want schools that are supposed to educate the children of this country competing for money and therefore students?

Some argue that voucher programs offer significant savings over public school education, due to private schools being run more efficiently. This claim is based on a comparison of the average voucher maximum, which is currently $3000, and the average per-student expenditure in public school districts, which is currently around $6000. The major flaw in that argument is that it fails to take into account the added costs public school districts incur. As it is now, public school districts in most states are required to provide transportation to and from school, provide textbooks and certain other instructional aides, and other necessary support to students in private schools. Since no current or proposed voucher program alleviates the need for such support, the cost of those services must be factored into the cost for educating voucher students along with the $3000 for the tuition alone. Ultimately, this can actually raise the cost of educating students in voucher programs.

Yet another problem arises from the financing of these voucher programs. It is clear that governments and municipalities aren't going to authorize significant increases in their budgets for education, otherwise they would've done so already and public schools wouldn't be as needing of funds as badly as they currently are. This means that ultimately, money for the voucher programs will be coming either directly or indirectly from the budgets of the public school districts in which they operate. Effectively, the voucher programs will be draining money from the public schools that are already in such a state of disrepair that there is a supposed need for the vouchers.

It is also necessary to recognize that when parents select private or parochial schools, they do so because they believe the method and environment of the instruction. Often this includes sending a child to a school to which children of similar ethnic and religious backgrounds attend. While this certainly is a parent's right, and by all means a necessary and positive option, this option isn't for everyone. Public schools provide an unbiased and neutral forum in which fact can be presented free of slant. They also foster a productive and healthy mixture of students from a wide variety of backgrounds, encouraging cultural understanding and appreciation. This helps not only to provide students with a positive perspective on such matters, but also better prepares them for the workforce and the world.

Proponents often argue that vouchers enable parents to have more of a choice as to where their children attend school and how they are educated. Certainly no one on either side of the issue would argue that parents should have that choice. It has been upheld in court rulings and is supported by numerous laws. However, if a parent wishes to take the education of their child into their own hands, either through home schooling or through private schools, the burden is then on them to arrange for such school and to pay any costs incurred. As is echoed by many of the opponents of voucher programs, public money must go to public schools, which are a necessary public accommodation. Private money must be used for private and parochial schools.

As is prescribed by law, and in fact noted by our founding father Thomas Jefferson, an educated population is a necessary component for a function democracy. Accordingly, and for additional reasons, a functioning public school system is absolutely necessary. It is important that, in order for such a system to remain functional, it must be properly funded. If funds are diverted to nonpublic schools via school vouchers, the public schools will no longer be able to operate effectively. This would, in essence, eliminate the option of public schooling for parents, therefore forcing students to seed education through private means.

Another important aspect that must be considered is that of the capacity of private schools. Currently the majority of private schools, over 85%, are sectarian. Even considering these schools, they have vastly insufficient capacity to accommodate a large number of voucher transfer students, as would occur if voucher programs would be implemented in any type of broad scheme. There would certainly not be a reasonable number of secular private schools available for those parents who desired to utilize the voucher program but did not wish to send their child to a sectarian school, or who could not locate a local, available, school of their denomination. Undoubtedly private schools would quickly open in an attempt to fill the desire for private school education. One must, however, question such schools carefully, as rapid start-ups are likely to lack the quality of established schools.

While opponents of voucher programs have raised the issue of curriculum standards, proponents have often argued that the governments supporting such programs would maintain boards responsible for ensuring proper standards are maintained. However, most private schools would be hesitant to comply with certain requirements, including those relating to mandatory religious education. Further, the question arises as to whether it would be truly desirable to regulate private schools to the point that they would become virtual replicas of the public schools. After all, private schools do have a place, and such regulation would devalue their contribution.

Additionally, concern exists also in the issue of admissions. Private schools have right to accept or deny students at will, using a variety of different criteria. Private and parochial school administrators have expressed an unwillingness to change these criteria for voucher students. Effectively, private schools would be able to "skim" the elite students and remand the rest to public schools or lesser private schools. Such students would likely be the most needing of extra attention and support. Public schools under the voucher system, however, would be unable to support those students adequately.

If private schools do open that are able to charge only the voucher-level tuition, one must question their ability to operate with they programs and features parents desire of private schools. It is more likely that the low-end private schools, those within range of voucher-only parents, would effectively be privately run replicas of public schools. There is no reason to believe that they would not eventually face the problems that today plague our public schools.

Proponents of vouchers have pointed towards privately funded voucher programs, which they believe to have worked without difficulty. However, in such a comprehensive program in San Antonio, no significant differences have been observed in student performance. Further, that and other such programs do not accurately represent government-sponsored voucher programs as they are neither bound by the Establishment Clause nor do they take money away from public schools.

When examining this issue, one should also take into account the motivation of those who promote the idea of school vouchers. Often these are religious leaders or private school administrators whose schools would clearly benefit financially from this type of program. Other proponents are commonly parents of children who already attend private school and who are simply looking to be eligible for addition money. Some political leaders are also supporting voucher programs to please constituents who are, by no fault of their own, looking for immediate solutions to the problems they face. However, our society must be careful not to "bandage" the problem, but instead to fix it.

The improvements made by public schools should not be discounted, either. While there are certainly schools and school districts that remain very troubled those administrators and schools boards are not standing idly by. There are continuous improvements in such schools, and there needs to be even more. Taking money from them when efforts are being made to improve their condition will clearly on hinder such improvement. Private schools are and should remain an option for all parents, but our society mustn't waver when it comes to supporting our public schools.

Works Consulted

Baldauf, Scott. "School-Voucher Movement Gets Boost From Wisconsin Court." Christian Science Monitor Electronic Edition. 12 Nov. 1999. Christian Science Monitor. 12 Nov. 1999. http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1998/06/12/p14s1.htm.

Boaz, David and R. Morris Barrett. "What Would a School Voucher Buy?" The Cato Institute. 8 Aug. 1997. 12 Nov. 1999. http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-025.html.

"Private School Voucher Research." OnWEAC. 17 Jun. 1998. Wisconsin Education Association Council. 12 Nov. 1999. http://www.weac.org/resource/may96/voucher2.htm.

Bolick, Clint. "The ABCs of School Choice." Orange County Register (Santa Ana, CA) 8 Apr. 1990: 1+. SIRS Knowledge Source: Researcher. 3 Dec. 1999. http://sks.sirs.com/.

Doerr, Edd. "Having Cake and Eating It, Too." The Humanist Mar. 1999: 34. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

"Fast facts." Wichita Business Journal 29 Oct. 1999: 18. EBSCOHost. 3 Dec. 1999. http://www.epnet.com/cgi-bin/ebscologin30.

Feldman, Sandra. "No bargain: evidence shows voucher schools don't cost less - or work better." The New Republic 25 May 1998: 9. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Feldman, Sandra. "Tough luck!" The New Republic 23 Feb. 1998: 2. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Finn, Chester E., Jr. and Diane Ravitch. "Is Educational Reform a Failure?" USA Today Nov. 1996: 22-24. SIRS Knowledge Source: Researcher. 3 Dec. 1999. http://sks.sirs.com/.

Gunn, Erik. "Voucher godmother skeptical of allies." National Catholic Reporter 26 Mar. 1999: 33. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Hoyt, William H. and Kangoh Lee. "Educational vouchers, welfare effects, and voting." The Journal of Public Economics Aug. 1998: 211. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Koprowski, Gene. "Are schools vouch safe?" Insight on the News 27 May 1996: 40. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Legal Information Institute. 9 Nov. 1999. Cornell Law School. 12 Nov. 1999. http://www.law.cornell.edu/.

American Civil Liberties Union. 13 Dec. 1999. 12 Nov. 1999. http://www.aclu.org/.

Levin, Henry M. "Educational vouchers: effectiveness, choice and costs." Journal of Policy Analysis & Management Summer 1998: 373. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Mankiw, N. Gregory. "Vouchers: Schools Need Competition." Fortune 7 Jun. 1999: 40+. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Murray, Matthew N. and Sally Wallace. "The implications of expanded school choice." Public Finance Review Sept. 1997: 459. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Peterson, Paul E. "A Liberal Case for Vouchers." New Republic 4 Oct. 1999: 29. EBSCOHost. 3 Dec. 1999. http://www.epnet.com/cgi-bin/ebscologin30.

"Lessons Learned." New Republic 4 Oct. 1999: 11. EBSCOHost. 3 Dec. 1999. http://www.epnet.com/cgi-bin/ebscologin30.

Roberts, Nanette M. and Charles L. Glenn "School Vouchers: Two Views." Sojourners Jan./Feb. 1998: 22-25. SIRS Knowledge Source: Researcher. 3 Dec. 1999. http://sks.sirs.com/.

Stanglan, Douglas. "Public vs. private." U.S. News & World Report 30 Mar. 1998: 5. InfoTrac. 3 Dec. 1999. http://infotrac.galegroup.com/.

Thomas, Evan and Lynette Clemetson. "A New War Over Vouchers." Newsweek 22 Nov. 1999: 46. EBSCOHost. 3 Dec. 1999. http://www.epnet.com/cgi-bin/ebscologin30

All content appearing on this page is original.
Copyright © 2000 by Michael Joseph.  All rights reserved.