Years ago, the Florida Supreme Court found the state’s education voucher program to violate the constitutional clause. State funds went (among other organizations) to parochial schools. Instead of acknowledging their mistake and how much they spent defending the program in court, the so-called fiscal conservatives went in a different direction.
They formed a non-profit organization where companies could contribute funds to pay for vouchers. For every dollar that a company “contributed,” it owed $1 less in taxes. In other words, $1 less went to the state’s general fund for public education, public safety, public works, and public health. The state has been and is being replaced in favor of a few.
It also meant millions of dollars were donated to an organization exempt from freedom of information, open assemblies and declaration of economic interest laws that provide much-needed transparency. That being said, it is only in the last 3 years that California’s charter schools have had to comply with such laws as the Ralph Brown Act.
This is not just a theoretical loss of money. When the mass shooting occurred at Douglas High School in Broward County, the PA system was not working and it appears the school lacked fire doors or electromagnetic doors (1950s technology). It’s challenging not to see a connection between the diversion of revenue from the state’s general fund for vouchers and the clear lack of equipment/technology at Florida’s struggling public high schools.
Although not as severe, it is likely that voucher programs in other states have also led to a larger gap between the “haves and have-nots” in public and private education. Though California may seem “liberated” from the trials and tribulations of coupons, my home state of Illinois has gradually implemented what I call a coupon lite program.
For example, relatively recently, they provided a tax credit of up to $400 for “school expenses and supplies.” At the time, most public school students had little to no tuition, so families who sent their children to private schools benefited disproportionately.
They also offer a tax credit for those who contribute to scholarship funds used for students attending private schools. The state does not make the contributions, but loses revenue through the tax credits. Also, reduced student attendance translates into less government aid to local school districts, compounding existing problems.
Almost more importantly, we’ve all noticed how divided American society has become. Can’t this be partially attributed to the growth of charter and private schools along with voluntary home schooling (i.e. not due to illness or pandemic)?
Might it not be anecdotally hinted that the country also became more hateful, stratified, etc. as specifically white ethnic or evangelical students entered charter or private schools in increasing numbers? The exchange years ago between students at Covington Catholic High School and Native Americans is an example of the fear between some in private schools and people of color or people outside the Christian faith.
While minority members may try charter schools for flashy marketing or a desire to make things better for their families, it doesn’t usually take long. Such schools are not well suited for students who have difficulties or who do not speak English as their main language. Those who remain in such schools tend to be homogeneous. Therefore, they are not used to disagreeing on issues of public policy, faith, and other important matters.
They may also not be used to being in the same room or part of town with “others”. Additionally, it almost seems as if some proponents of vouchers, and to a lesser extent charter schools, want a return to Plessy. Inherently separate and unequal environments for the “pure” (think America First) people and “these people.” And now we have a more violent nation. However, more of this violence is based in part on the background.
Scroll to Next
Cutting funding for private school vouchers is a fiscally responsible effort. When a state runs a deficit, it’s important to ensure that revenue is spent in a way that benefits all residents. Even when a state like California has a surplus, it’s still important to add value to the vast majority of the state’s residents.
Especially in the current environment, it can be important to take a close look at how education takes place. We can say “no more” to charter schools in storefronts and private schools in buildings that woefully fail to meet current city/county and state building codes. We can say we need to look at colleges where professors are encouraged to state on the school’s website what church they belong to and what ministries they serve.
This can be viewed as a unique impact on the academic and social environment of an institution likely to receive federal funding. While this may seem unfair, imagine the professor who attended Evangelical Christian private schools from K-12 and then attended Oral Roberts or Liberty. Unless this was an outstanding student, I don’t see where a variety of thoughts or perspectives (experiences) would have come into play.
As far as I know, at least a handful of California colleges are similar in this regard to the East Coast schools mentioned above. Let’s not forget that the college Nixon attended at the time showed a broad interest in student life and activities, as did some in Illinois. This is not to belittle such schools as a whole. However, given the dynamics of Jewish, Asian, LGBTQ+, and people of color campuses, I have difficulty seeing where an apparent preference for certain tenets or perspectives can make that collegial environment more welcoming or safer
Especially with the limited number of police officers who appear to be refusing to protect Hispanic and Jewish students in Texas and Florida, we need to look at who is teaching our students and what we can expect as results. Do more officers go to such schools? Does the increased presence of such schools make previously unacceptable attitudes appear ok? Or is this mainly the result of the previous government’s apparent popularity?
I attended Evanston Township High School (ETHS); a Title I school. It is no coincidence that there was an ETHS club or organization for Obama where I don’t think there was a similar club for his opponent(s). It’s also no surprise that many of us have been in public service, community service, and social advocacy. America’s shortcomings weren’t just news at 5:30 p.m.; they were situations that we or our classmates struggled with all day, every day.
It’s much harder to say “not my problem” when that’s partly your environment. Of course I didn’t have the same experiences as classmates who got pregnant earlier than most others who were of color etc. Yet I wasn’t in an environment that suggested I was superior to the people who had those experiences.
This is another example of how life is better in California than anywhere else. At the moment:
- Private school vouchers do not compete with the need to adequately fund public schools
- There is a constant, common sense concern to ensure that charter schools no longer have the full freedom they once had
- Ethnic studies are taught in all schools in the state
Progressives can be proud of that. Not to mention that until recently there were limits to increasing car insurance premiums and rent increases. I don’t know of any people who would fight against either component of progressivism.
.