Viewpoint: Proposed voucher amendments threaten public schools

Viewpoint: Proposed voucher amendments threaten public schools

By: Kent S. Miller
Emeritus professor of psychology, Florida State University

I know. As with you, my eyes tend to glaze over when the subject turns to constitutional amendments.

The phrase “school voucher” evokes the same response. But hold on, for we need to pay attention to at least two proposed amendments on Florida’s November ballot.

For this we are indebted to former Governor Jeb Bush, who continues to feud with the editorial boards of most of the major papers in the state over the issue of school vouchers.

Last week he responded to a St. Petersburg Times critical analysis of proposals put forth by the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission. www.tampabay.com/opinion/essays/article489835.ece.

The amendments deliver a one-two punch to public education in Florida.

The right punch comes from the first amendment: “providing that an individual or entity may not be barred from participating in any public program because of religion and repealing a prohibition against using public revenues in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or any sectarian institution.”

The effect of this would be to neuter the 1st District Court of Appeal ruling that state- funded vouchers were unconstitutional because they represented “indirect support” of a religious institution.

The left punch comes with the second amendment, which changes the current constitutional requirement for the state to provide high quality free public schools to a minimum, nonexclusive duty.

It would reverse legal precedent prohibiting public funding of private school alternatives to public school programs, without creating an entitlement.

In short, public money could be used in aid of churches -- and the duty of the state to provide a quality education becomes minimal and nonexclusive, thus permitting vouchers.

In his article to the Times, Bush invoked his old enemies: teacher unions, “liberal special interest groups,” and the Florida Supreme Court; while charging the paper with employing “worn-out diversionary tactics to obfuscate the issues…”.

Obfuscation indeed…but predominately provided by the pro-amendment camp.

Note the following.

An activist taxation commission [Florida’s appointed Taxation and Budget Reform Commission], dominated by Bush associates, side-stepped its primary responsibility to focus on tax and budget issues and overreached in proposing the amendments (CP0020 & CP0040).

In order to improve the chances of getting the voucher amendment passed, the Commission added a clause requiring that 65% of school monies be spent on the classroom, figuring this would get votes it might not otherwise.

They did this knowing that the standard was already being met.

Deception surrounds the Corporate Income Tax Scholarship program, a much larger effort than the voucher program the court struck down (over 900 schools participate, 82% of them religious, supporting 20,000 students -- as opposed to less than 800 under the overturned Opportunity Scholarship program).

It is presented as a means for corporations to voluntarily contribute to the education of poor students.

Yep, the program is voluntary to the extent that corporations may choose to give money to the schools rather than paying taxes owed to the state.

They get dollar-for-dollar credit (and credit for being good citizens) without it costing them a cent.

(The 2008 legislature made clear its intent to expand this program by instructing the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability to conduct a study on methodologies for increasing the amount of tax credits and the use of insurance premium tax credits for scholarship funding).

Governor Crist joined the chorus.

In a time of drastic cuts to public education he endorsed expanding the Corporate Tax program by $30 million, saying “If private entities have the desire to contribute and give chances for other options for educational opportunities for children, it sounds like a good thing.”

His words were deceitful in that he is too sharp not to know that every dollar the corporation gives means one less dollar for the state.

Proponents of vouchers make remarkable but unsubstantiated claims about the progress of students in Florida’s public schools, giving credit to the voucher programs.

The 1st District Court of Appeal ruled that state-funded vouchers represented “indirect support” of a religious institution.

Proponents of vouchers deceitfully argue that this reasoning would end dozens of programs across a broad spectrum.

Not so.

Religious charities have for years played a crucial role in the delivery of social services by contracting with the government. But they do so without proselytizing and without regard to the religion of those being served or being hired to serve.

If those currently expressing so much concern about the education of poor students were sincere, they would be working to help improve Florida’s near-the-bottom standing in the funding of education.

So. If you favor years of controversy played out in the courts, continued dismantling of public schools, the establishment of a private system not accountable to the state, tax dollars going to religious schools, and the strangulation of beginning efforts at real educational reform, you have a clear choice. Vote for the voucher amendments.