School vouchers

Commonweal, April 5, 1996

State aid to religious or private primary and secondary schools in the form of tuition vouchers or a tuition tax credit is a worthy public-policy goal. Vouchers would benefit numerous families burdened with paying for both public schools and for the schools of their choice, would facilitate variety in the types of schooling available; and would benefit many poor families whose children often attend unsafe and ineffective inner-city public schools.

The Supreme Court's unnecessarily broad interpretation of the First Amendment's establishment clause has long raised questions about the so-called "wall of separation" between church and state. Favoring one sect or faith, or conversely, placing special disabilities on religious exercise, contradict the intent of the First Amendment. The separation between church and state should be real, but the wall should be permeable enough to encourage the vigorous expression of religious opinion and attachments.

Contrary to the Supreme Court's strict separationist view, religious commitment, tempered by the discipline of democratic practice and rights, is no threat to tolerance or civic peace. Indeed, the virtues of common concern and individual responsibility that religion at its best cultivates are indispensable to democracy. "Citizenship," writes philosopher Michael Sandel (Democracy's Discontent, Harvard), "requires certain habits and dispositions, a concern for the whole, an orientation to the common good." Those virtues can only be nurtured through the attachments of community membership. In America, religious communities have long played a central role in building such ties. Withholding tax dollars from taxpayers who choose religious schools for their children imposes a double infirmity: It circumscribes religious freedom while depriving our democracy of much needed moral resources.

"School choice" has been the rallying cry for those opposed to what they call the state monopoly on school funding. But the argument for diversity in schooling must not rest on free exercise or autonomy rights alone. The state's interest in an educated, informed, and engaged citizenry is compelling. That interest cannot be served by public schools alone. "No single model or means of education is appropriate to the needs and desires of all persons," a recent statement on educational reform by United States Catholic Conference (Origins, February 22, 1996) reminds us. In pursuit of the common good of educational excellence for all--especially in a society as pluralistic as our own--the state should encourage diversity, not monopoly, in schooling. More than thirty years of federal aid to religious universities and the experience of almost every other Western democracy demonstrate the wisdom of such an approach.

Opposition to vouchers rests on strong court precedents, but often finds allies among religious groups who fear that the strings attached to government aid compromise religious integrity. Such fears may be justified, but the experience of Catholic and other religiously affiliated colleges suggest that a middle way can be found. Perhaps the most persuasive objection to vouchers concerns the potential damage to an already besieged public school system. It is predicted that vouchers will encourage an exodus from the public schools that will leave behind only the most difficult or unprepared students. Such worries are not unreasonable, but they are exaggerated. One possible way to safeguard against such an outcome would be to require schools accepting vouchers to reserve a certain percentage of their enrollment for children who are economically disadvantaged.

A picture of the public schools on the verge of abandonment is overdrawn. The social patterns of most communities as well as decades of tax investment continue to make public schooling attractive for the vast majority of families. Philosophical allegiance to the public schools, even among many religious Americans, is quite strong, as the recent defeat of school-choice initiatives in California and other states indicates. Most important, there is considerable evidence that many public schools do a good job (see Philip Altbach, p. 33). Confronted with an expanded private-school franchise, there are good reasons to think that public schools will rise to the challenge, not collapse.

How the public and private schools can best work together for the national good is the real educational and public-policy question. In that light, the financial disability historically imposed on families choosing education in a religious setting seems an obvious restriction of free speech and free exercise. Vouchers, by giving tax monies to parents and not directly to religious or private schools, promise to remedy that injustice without violating the First Amendment's "endorsement" test.

Admittedly, the devil is in the details. State laws funneling public funds directly to religious institutions have been ruled unconstitutional. Nevertheless, the Court has allowed public monies to pay for the busing of children to parochial and private schools, and has even approved of a Minnesota law granting tuition tax credits for the same. These rulings suggest that financial assistance given to individuals rather than schools may pass constitutional scrutiny.