Militant article denouncing school voucher decision

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

While anyone can get this on the web, I thought it would be useful to submit
the article cited in Jose Perez's  posting on school vouchers..

Fred Feldman

Militant,  July 15
lead article
School voucher ruling an
attack on public education

BY JACK WILLEY
In an attack on public education and the separation of church and state, the
U.S. Supreme Court June 27 declared constitutional a Cleveland program that
allocates public funds to pay for religious and other private schools.
The 5-4 ruling upholds the Cleveland education system's six-year-old school
voucher program. Of the district's 75,000 students some 3,700 use vouchers
of up to $2,250 to pay for private education. Ninety-six percent of students
with vouchers attended religious schools in the 1999-2000 school year. The
money is paid out of the city school budget. West Coast longshore workers
oppose bosses' antiunion assault

The conflict between West Coast longshore workers who are defending their
union and the giant shipping companies sharpened last week as negotiators
were unable to come up with a labor contract by the July 1 expiration date.
See article.


Of the private schools in Cleveland's voucher program, 82 percent are
religious, and 46 of the 56 private schools approved for the voucher system
are run by a religious denomination.
The court majority, along with the Bush administration in statements
supporting the ruling, cynically cast its decision as one that aids working
families, especially Blacks and other oppressed nationalities, because it
supposedly provides the only way out of a crumbling public school system.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
issued a statement opposing the decision. Kweisi Mfume, the NAACP president,
said vouchers "will mean fewer dollars for public schools where most
Americans are educated. School voucher programs siphon scarce tax money away
from struggling public schools."
The major teachers unions have also come out in opposition to vouchers and
other moves that undermine public education. The National Education
Association issued a statement calling vouchers "a divisive and expensive
diversion from continuing progress" in public schools.
The ruling proclaimed that the Cleveland voucher program met Constitutional
muster because it is "neutral in all respects toward religion" due to the
fact that government aid "reaches religious schools only as a result of
genuine and independent choices of private individuals."
The dissenting judges pointed out that regardless of any Constitutional
questions, the $2,500 cap on tuition assistance only gives the illusion of
choice because the cost of attending most private schools other than
religious institutions is well beyond the reach of working families who
receive the state funds.
In their decision the majority feigned concern for the deplorable state of
Cleveland's school system. "Cleveland's public schools have been among the
worst performing public schools in the nation," Chief Justice William
Rehnquist declared. Ninety percent of the student body in Cleveland did not
meet basic proficiency standards in the 1999-2000 school year. Sixty percent
of the students who received vouchers were from families at or below the
poverty line. None of the dissenting judges disagreed with the assessment;
they simply pointed out it has nothing to do with the Constitutional
question at hand.

Resegregation of public schools
To a greater or lesser degree, the wretched facilities and lack of ability
to receive a basic education is the bitter reality for millions of other
working-class students and their parents around the country. Resegregation
of the schools has been on the rise for more than a decade. Seventy percent
of the nation's Black students now attend schools that are made of up
students from oppressed nationalities. And 36 percent attend schools where
minority enrollment stands at 90-100 percent. Conservative researcher Jay
Greene reported in a study that 55 percent of children in public schools
attended classes where 90 percent of the students came from a single ethnic
group.
In concurring with the majority, Clarence Thomas, a right-wing justice of
the Supreme Court who is an outspoken opponent of affirmative action, used
quotes from Frederick Douglas and from the 1954 Supreme Court ruling in
Brown v. Board of Education that declared segregation of public schools
unconstitutional.
"Despite this court's observation nearly 50 years ago in Brown v. Board of
Education that 'it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to
succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education,' (1954)
urban children have been forced into a system that continually fails them,"
he wrote.
"At the time of Reconstruction, blacks considered public education 'a matter
of personal liberation and a necessary function of a free society.' Today,
however, the promise of public education has failed poor inner-city blacks,"
he wrote. "Just as blacks supported public education during Reconstruction,
many blacks and other minorities now support school choice programs because
they provide the greatest educational opportunities for their children in
struggling communities."
Calling Constitutional objections to the use of vouchers for private or
religious schools "formalistic," Thomas wrote that universal public
education is a "romanticized ideal" that only "resonates with the
cognoscenti who oppose vouchers." Meanwhile, he asserted, "poor urban
families just want the best education for their children, who will certainly
need it to function in our high-tech and advanced society."
Picking up on this theme, President Bush told a rally in Cleveland that the
Supreme Court ruling was "just as historic" as the Brown v. Board of
Education decision. Bush sought to include vouchers in a recent federal
education bill, but withdrew them due to lack of Congressional support.
Bush asserted that the court ruling declared that "our nation will not
accept one education system for those who can afford to send their children
to a school of their choice and for those who can't. And that's just as
historic." The president added that vouchers are a "constructive approach to
improving public education."
The Supreme Court decision is part of a series of measures that have
weakened public education under the banner of "school choice." Some 2,500
charter schools--private educational facilities that are funded by the
government--have opened in the last decade. In addition, an increasing
number of school systems, most recently Philadelphia's, have turned over
control of their schools to multimillion dollar businesses like Edison
Schools Inc., which now run more than 100 schools with 75,000 students in 22
states.

Separation of church and state
The dissenting justices largely focused their fire on the separation of the
church and state. Justice Stephen Breyer argued against the decision, saying
it provided public funds "to a core function of the church: the teaching of
religious truths to young children."
John Stevens dissented, saying, "Whenever we remove a brick from the wall
that was designed to separate religion and government, we increase the risk
of religious strife and weaken the foundation of our democracy."
Both Justices Stevens and Breyer worried that the consequences of the ruling
could open up "religious strife" in the United States. Breyer pointed out
that the Cleveland program requires religious schools to accept students of
all religions and that no school "advocate or foster unlawful behavior or
teach hatred of any person or group on the basis of race, ethnicity,
national origin, or religion." A superintendent of the schools can revoke a
school's license if he or she determines it has violated one of these
regulations.
"How are state officials to adjudicate claims that one religion or another
is advocating, for example, civil disobedience in response to unjust laws,
the use of illegal drugs in a religious ceremony, or resort to force to call
attention to what it views as an immoral social practice?" Breyer asked.
Citing the "conflict in the Middle East or the war on terrorism," Breyer
asked how will the state respond to funding schools run by religions that
take controversial stands on such issues.
"Efforts to respond to these problems not only will seriously entangle
church and state," Breyer wrote, "but also will promote division among
religious groups, as one group or another fears (often legitimately) that it
will receive unfair treatment at the hands of the government."
"In a society as religiously diverse as ours, the court has recognized that
we must rely on the Religion Clause of the First Amendment to protect
against religious strife, particularly when what is at issue is an area as
central to religious belief as the shaping through primary education, of the
next generation's minds and spirits."
Breyer concludes the decision "risks creating a form of religiously based
conflict potentially harmful to the nation's social fabric."
In 2000, referendums advocating voucher programs were overwhelmingly
defeated in California and Michigan. Supporters of shifting public funds to
private schooling have targeted Arizona, Colorado, Minnesota, Texas, and
Utah as the next states to try to bring in vouchers.
In another decision, the high court went beyond a 1995 ruling that allowed
drug testing of student athletes and upheld testing of students involved in
extracurricular activities. The court majority suggested it would approve
testing of all students under the guise of a school's "custodial
responsibility" for the welfare of students.










~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.