Good News Regarding Vouchers and School Choice


Length: 1717 words (4.9 double-spaced pages)
Rating: Excellent
Open Document
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Text Preview

More ↓

Continue reading...

Open Document



Good News Regarding School Choice

 

Good News v. Milford is very good news indeed for advocates of school vouchers and faith-based organizations (FBOs). The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision upholding the right of a Christian youth group to meet in public schools after class hours is a significant signal of the Court's willingness to treat religious organizations and viewpoints on an evenhanded basis.

 

In 1992, Milford Central School in New York State enacted a community use policy outlining purposes for which its building could be used after school. Under the policy, district residents could use the school for "instruction in any branch of education, learning, or the arts." The school was also to be made available for "social, civic, and recreational meetings and entertainment events, and other uses pertaining to the welfare of the community, provided that such uses shall be nonexclusive and shall be opened to the general public." Several district residents who sponsored the local Good News Club-a private, voluntary Christian organization for children ages six to twelve-submitted a request to the interim superintendent of the district, seeking to hold the Club's weekly after-school meetings in the school cafeteria. They were excluded, however, because their proposed use-to have "a fun time of singing songs, hearing a Bible lesson, and memorizing Scripture"-was "the equivalent of religious worship." The school authorities claimed that such a meeting was prohibited by the rules that forbid the school from being used "by any individual or organization for religious purposes."(1)

 

The Court, per Justice Clarence Thomas, found Milford to have created a limited public forum-in essence, a standing invitation to use public property for the designated purposes. When the state establishes a limited public forum, the state is not required to and does not allow persons to engage in every type of speech. However, said the Court, the state's power to restrict speech is not without limits. Such restriction must not discriminate against speech on the basis of viewpoint, and the restriction must be "reasonable in light of the purpose served by the forum."(2)

 

Relying upon two earlier but more narrowly written opinions, the Court found the school district to have discriminated against the proposed religious speech in Good News. In Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches (1993), the Justices held that a school district violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment when it excluded a private group from presenting films at the school based solely on the films' discussions of family values from a religious perspective.

How to Cite this Page

MLA Citation:
"Good News Regarding Vouchers and School Choice." 123HelpMe.com. 30 Apr 2017
    <http://www.123HelpMe.com/view.asp?id=11180>.
Title Length Color Rating  
Essay about Just Say No to Vouchers and School Choice - Private School Vouchers: Just Say No The basic idea behind vouchers is for the government to use taxpayer money to encourage the transfer of a student from a public school to a private one with the expectation that his performance will improve. That any government official would actually support a program that essentially encourages parents to remove their children from public schools shows that they have no commitment to public education. Consider these arguments: Improved Scores The expectation that a bad student in a public school will turn into a good student in a private school is not only absurd, it is yet another slap in the face of public school teachers....   [tags: Argumentative Persuasive Topics] 663 words
(1.9 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
The Solution is More Discipline, Not Vouchers or School Choice Essay - The Solution is Discipline, Not School Choice Charlie is a problem child by any definition of the word.  He hasn't done anything horrific, like shooting another student or attacking a teacher. It's the annoying games he plays that drive everyone crazy. His favorite game is throwing scissors at the chalkboard when the teacher's back is turned.  He likes the screeching noise he can make if he throws the scissors at just the right angle.  And when he gets caught, he loves cursing at the teacher.  His biggest thrill is telling her to "mind her own f---ing business" while his classmates giggle or snicker....   [tags: Argumentative Persuasive Topics] 1710 words
(4.9 pages)
Powerful Essays [preview]
School Vouchers: Parents Need a Choice Essay - The 14th Amendment in the United States Constitution forbids states from denying any person life, liberty and property without due process of the law. It further states that any person, within a state’s jurisdiction, cannot be denied equal protection of its laws. This amendment protects all people. Chief Justice Clarence Thomas, in a 2002 ruling, stated reasons why school choice should be protected under the 14th Amendment. Justice Thomas wrote in defense of school choice, “Whatever the textual and historical merits of incorporating the Establishment Clause, I can accept that the Fourteenth Amendment protects religious liberty rights....   [tags: school choice, school reform]
:: 15 Works Cited
4616 words
(13.2 pages)
Term Papers [preview]
School Vouchers are the Solution Essay - We, as human beings, irrespective of our backgrounds, traditions and cultures, believe in certain fundamental ideals. We want all our children to have access to a good, overall education regardless of family income; we want to make sure that they are prepared for times to come; we want them to be responsible adults; and expect that these qualities are fostered in them through learning in their familial environments, friend circles and most importantly through the institution called school. The growing idea has been that these ideals may only be achieved through a universal centrally planned system of tax-funded schools, commonly known as “public schools”....   [tags: School Choice]
:: 6 Works Cited
1685 words
(4.8 pages)
Powerful Essays [preview]
School Vouchers Essay - School Vouchers      School vouchers can be described as financial funding given to students who elect not to attend public schools. Therefore the government would not be spending money educating that student in a public school. A school voucher is the allotment of money that the government would have used for that student to attend public school. This money is then given to the family of the student to help fund the education of that student. This money cannot be used for anything other than education....   [tags: Position Paper School Vouchers]
:: 3 Works Cited
1466 words
(4.2 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Will School Vouchers Improve Public Schools? Essay - It is a growing debate in an area that American society cannot afford to ignore, as the discussion on voucher schools directly affects our youth, the very foundation of our country. Many cities across the United States have proposed school voucher programs in an effort to improve the education of inner-city children that come from low-income families. However, with this proposition arises certain questions that cannot be avoided. Although proponents of school vouchers argue differently, challengers of the system expressly state that the taxpayer-funded voucher system infringes upon our First Amendment rights....   [tags: School Choice Essays]
:: 2 Works Cited
1084 words
(3.1 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay on School Choice is the Future of Education -     Current efforts to change schools fall into two general categories. The first embodies decentralization of administrative power to school sites, much akin to a popular movement to move many governmental social functions such as welfare to state and regional levels. The second is to create competition among school districts for students, a key tenet of the industrialized world that purports to deliver a greater range of products and services at a price the market will bear. When parents have the option of sending their children to more than one school, the term "school choice" is often applied....   [tags: School Vouchers Essays]
:: 4 Works Cited
1013 words
(2.9 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
School Vouchers: A Harmful Choice Essay - School Vouchers: A Harmful Choice Since entering office in January, President George W. Bush has given education reform high priority on his agenda. One element of his four-point initiative involves the implementation of school vouchers. A voucher, as defined in The American Heritage Dictionary, is a "certificate representing a credit against future expenditures." (The American Heritage) By diverting tax dollars from public schools to private institutions through the use of vouchers, America's public education system will become less effective, students from low income families will be set further behind, and the First Amendment will be directly violated....   [tags: Argumentative Persuasive Education Essays]
:: 13 Works Cited
3105 words
(8.9 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
School Vouchers The Wrong Choice Essays - School Vouchers: The Wrong Choice Susie is a young girl who lives in Florida. Since kindergarten, she has attended a nearby private school. Her parents willingly pay her tuition, even though doing so forces them to cut other corners. They do not mind these sacrifices, since they know that their daughter is getting the best education they can give her. Jesse lives downtown, in the inner city. She attends the local public school and struggles through her classes. Her mother would like to send her to a private school, where there is less violence and a calmer atmosphere, but cannot afford it....   [tags: essays papers]
:: 5 Works Cited
1484 words
(4.2 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
School Vouchers Essay - One of the most important topics in government today is the issue of school vouchers. The two sides have remained deeply entrenched in their rival positions concerning this issue. Some wonder about the practicality of using the vouchers, while others wonder if it is defeating the purpose of the educational system. Educational vouchers can be very beneficial for both the student and even the school districts involved in the program. Many people do not realize the benefits of this program. Educational vouchers are something that many school districts need to implement due to their advantages....   [tags: Educational Vouchers Scholarships]
:: 5 Works Cited
1749 words
(5 pages)
Powerful Essays [preview]

Related Searches




Likewise, in Rosenberger v. Rector (1995), the Court held that a university's refusal to fund a student publication because the publication addressed issues from a religious viewpoint violated the Free Speech Clause. The majority concluded that Milford's exclusion of the Good News Club based on its religious nature was indistinguishable from the exclusions in these cases, and held that it constituted viewpoint discrimination.

 

The result in Good News is significant for what the Court refused to do: namely, indulge the notion that some protected religious speech is "too religious." The Court expressly disagreed with the idea that something that is "quintessentially religious" or "decidedly religious in nature" cannot also be characterized properly as the teaching of morals and character development from a particular viewpoint. Said the Court: "What matters for purposes of the Free Speech Clause is that we can see no logical difference in kind between the invocation of Christianity by the Club and the invocation of teamwork, loyalty, or patriotism by other associations to provide a foundation for their lessons."(3)

 

Federal judges are expected to play many roles, but attempting to differentiate between religiously informed moral instruction and unambiguously religious practice or instruction is not comfortably one of them. Indeed, even contemplating such distinctions is theologically perilous, for while some religions treat ethics and religion as distinct subjects, the adherents of many mainstream religions of the West (including Judaism and Christianity) hold ethics and religion to be inseparable. The lower court had presupposed that morality is independent from divine will, but that is not so for many believers. Indeed, had the Supreme Court not disavowed that specious notion, it would have rightly been seen as improperly taking sides over religious doctrine.

 

Milford argued that, even if its restriction constitutes viewpoint discrimination, its interest in not violating the Establishment Clause outweighed the Club's interest in gaining equal access to the school's facilities. Melding Justice Thomas' neutral or equal access ideas from Mitchell v. Helms (2000) (upholding the nondiscriminatory allocation of educational re­ sources such as computers to religious and public schools alike) with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's long-standing sensitivity to improper endorsement and Justice Anthony Kennedy's similar attention to tacit coercion in such school prayer cases as Lee v. Weisman (1992), the Court found no Establishment Clause violation in Good News.

 

Factually, the Court noted that the Club's meetings were held after school hours, were not sponsored by the school, and were open to any student who obtained parental consent, not just to Club members. Moreover, the objection that the Club was aimed at elementary school children was deemed unpersuasive, since from the endorsement perspective, "the relevant community would be the parents, not the elementary school children." Reasoned the Court: "Because the children cannot attend without their parents' permission, they cannot be coerced into engaging in the Good News Club's religious activities. Milford does not suggest that the parents of elementary school children would be confused about whether the school was endorsing religion. Nor do we believe that such an argument could be reasonably advanced."

 

Good News v. Milford is especially welcome news for supporters of school vouchers and government funding of faith-based organizations. A majority of the Court now affirms that when "aid is offered to a broad range of groups or persons without regard to their religion" there can be no violation of the separation of church and state. Surely, lawmakers sympathetic to President Bush's effort to construct expanded opportunities for FBOs should highlight this principle. Yet as of this writing, they appear not to have fully digested these legal developments.

 

In the bill currently on its way to the Senate, FBOs would be allowed to keep names, charters, and symbols, but not to offer religious services, prayer, or preaching as part of government-funded social service programs. But this is exactly the kind of distinction rejected in Good News, and it should not be bootstrapped into federal law. If individuals are free not to pursue assistance from a religious provider, there is no reason to impose costly and cumbersome requirements to keep the spiritually effective elements of a program administratively separate from the secular ones.

 

Certainly, Mitchell and Good News suggest that the absolute prohibition of "pervasively sectarian" institutions is no longer valid. Such categorical discrimination against religious entities has now twice been described by the Court as a product of the anti-immigrant (viz., anti-Catholic and anti-Jewish) bias of an earlier period of American history. Indeed, for the last two decades, the Court has been evolving from an inconsistent (and often incoherent) prohibition of aid or benefits flowing to religious organizations (secular books, okay, but not maps) to an examination of whether the aid or benefit was used for religious purposes to an equality of distrubution inquiry without unnecessary concern for how the benefit may be used. All this makes good sense. As long as private choice is at the core of the decision, it matters not whether our tax-deductible church plate contributions are used to supply either bodily or spiritual food for the needy; so, too, it matters not if public resources-be they computers or classrooms-are privately allocated within a neutrally designed, evenhanded program to the character instruction of Christ's witness or the Boy Scout handbook.

 

This is precisely why the FBOstructure recently adopted by the House is flawed-it slights private choice in favor of funding FBOs directly by the U.S. Treasury. As noted above, the Court has moved away from using the Establishment Clause to invalidate monies disbursed evenhandedly to a broad range of competing groups, religious and nonreligious alike, but why invite trouble by having disbursement come from R. Barry Bureaucrat, rather than John Q. Public? It is likely this direct delivery of funds that explains the House's unfortunate censorship of FBOs, which itself is constitutionally dubious. And whether or not it is, it certainly invites all kinds of burdensome federal auditing and entanglement, along with subtle pressures on churches to modify their teachings as an implied grant condition.

 

The way out of this morass is not to abandon the creative social service potential of FBOs, but rather to fund them indirectly. Simply allowing taxpayers an enhanced tax credit for donations to the FBO of their choice would eliminate any residual church-state questions. The House measure appropriately expanded deductibility for charitable giving in general. The Senate should complete this work by providing a credit specifically for FBO donations.

 

The case for school vouchers is also strengthened by Good News. The Court is presently being petitioned to review the constitutionality of a school voucher or scholarship program that makes taxpayer education funds available to low-income families seeking to avoid the troubled Cleveland schools. Contrary to favorable voucher rulings in Wisconsin, Arizona, and Illinois, the lower federal courts struck down the Cleveland program because the public schools refused to actively participate in the voucher program, even though the law authorized them to do so. The absence of public participants troubled the lower courts, since it effectively meant that only private religious schools received vouchers in Cleveland. An important side note in the Good News decision suggests that this should make no difference. The Court observed that when a public benefit is offered for actual use "by groups presenting any viewpoint, [the Court] would not find an Establishment Clause violation simply because only groups presenting a religious viewpoint have opted to take advantage of the [benefit] at a particular time."

 

In other words, the fact that only private religious schools have cared enough about the educational fortunes of the least advantaged children cannot be used against them. After all, the law should not be structured so that there is a preferential option against the poor.

 

WORKS CITED:



(1) Supreme Court Decisions        http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-2036.ZO.html

 (2)Ibid.



(3) Ibid.


Return to 123HelpMe.com