Why separate school and state?
|
They say politics makes for strange bedfellows. That can be seen better than anywhere when it comes to educational freedom and the separation of education and It is only natural for people to want a say in what their money is funding. Which is why it was a terrible mistake to establish a government system for administering something as personal and as subject to interpretation and individuality and ideology as education, intend for it to serve all individuals and all families in a one-size-fits-all-fashion, and fund it with a common pool of compulsory tax money.
We all have opinions -- and sometimes deeply held convictions -- about what children should be taught, exposed to, and shielded from; no one wants to be forced to pay for the promulgation of beliefs he abhors. What, then, makes some of us more worthy of our opinions holding sway than others when it comes to how tax-funded school are run? Given that all tax-paying citizens help fund the public schools, then how do we justify who gets a greater (or lesser) say in what activities and beliefs and practices and attitudes should be permitted or prohibited or encouraged or taught in the "common" schools? Do we prorate a tax-payer's say based on amount of taxes paid? No, of course we don't, because our system is one of "one person, one vote," not "one dollar, one vote."
Rhetoric aside -- if we are honest enough with ourselves to PUT all that noble-but-selectively-applied rhetoric about "democracy" aside -- the bottom line for most of us on who we want to see setting policy is, "The people who believe as I do, of course; because my view is the correct [virtuous, legitimate, proper, justifiable, sensible, authorized, factual, truthful, statistically proven, scriptural -- whatever] view to have."
Good intentions and any one person's (or group's) interpretation of "American values" notwithstanding, it is nothing more than arrogant presumption to declare as acceptable or beneficial certain elements that all parents should be excpected to accept in the upbringing of their children, and that all taxpayers should be forced to pay to support.
As Marshall Fritz puts it, "Some want prayer in school, some want condoms. Printing prayers on condoms satisfies nobody."
Freedom of Religion and Public Schooling
(PDF file - opens in new window)
James R. Otteson
"I suggest that the case of government support for education is analogous to the case of government support for religion, and therefore the moral acceptability of the one is the same as that of the other. My suggestion hinges on the claim that both cases fall under the rubric of freedom of conscience, and hence both should be protected on the moral principle that everyones private conscience is inviolable and ought therefore to be safeguarded."
The Problem Is the Schools
Sheldon Richman
"[The Pledge of Allegiance lawsuit] yet again demonstrates the poisonous consequences of government control of education. When government runs schools, disagreements that which would otherwise be easily handled without acrimony become bitter conflicts. There is but one source of the conflict and it is not religion or atheism. It's the use of coercion, taxation, to finance schools. End that, and this conflict evaporates like water on a hot sidewalk.
|
But what about the poor?
|
Most people can't fathom how poor families would afford school tuition for their children without socialized education. If this is a aspect of disestablishment that concerns you, then you'll be glad to know that this is the Big Question everybody asks, so you are far from alone in your desire to provide financial support for access to education.
Education: What About the Poor?
Chris Cardiff | Ideas on Liberty 07.96
"In various forms, the question "what do we do about the poor?" outstrips all others as the most frequently asked question about separating school and state. The implicit assumption, only natural after 60 years of the welfare state and 150 years of government control of education, is that government is the only entity capable of looking out for the poor and educating them.
"Both the historical record and present conditions invalidate this assumption. There is no evidence that poor children were denied an education in the nonslave states before the government takeover of the schools in the mid-1800s. Since then, educational opportunities for the poor have declined steadily." »More
|
Why not vouchers?
|
|
"For those who still believe that voucherized school choice is a libertarian idea, let me ask you this: Does the state (knowingly) fund things that are truly a threat to itself?"
Stephen Carson
|
"When you reach for the money is when they slip on the handcuffs." With taxpayer money comes taxpayer accountability (unless, of course, you are the government, which fails to account for billions of dollars in tax revenue every year). Privately funded schools that accept vouchers become de facto government schools, subject to all the political pressures that have made government-run schools the socially and academically "challenged" environments they are today. This will pave the way to increasingly tighter regulation of all schools, and even of non-schooling ("homeschooling") families, thus making it even harder for 100% privately funded, independent schools (schools that do not accept vouchers in order to avoid the government educationist mandates that go along with them) to remain in existence.
The charade of parental and local community control in government schools is long past a joke. Do we really want to see the same thing happen to private schools as well?
Freedom Rings for Wrong Reasons
J.H. Huebert | LewRockwell.com | January 2006
The usual suspects are, of course, crying over the Florida Supreme Court's striking down of that state's school voucher program. Libertarians, meanwhile, are glad to see any voucher program abolished....That said, the Florida Supreme Court's decision is, as you might imagine, terrible. They had two ways they could have struck down the statute, and they chose the stupid way.
School-Choice Flaws
Sheldon Richman | Future of Freedom Foundation | January 2006
Some advocates of what is euphemistically called “school choice” argue that their reform would be a crucial step along the road to the separation of school and state. Some of us have dissented. Knowing how government works, we’ve had a hunch that vouchers and tuition tax credits would most likely lead to greater regulation of private schools. The cry of “accountability” for schools receiving “public money” would be irresistible.
Libertarian Welfare
Laurence M. Vance | LewRockwell.com | February 2005
"Instead of most schools being subject to the control of the federal government, the imposition of a universal voucher program will result in all schools being subject to the control of the federal government. Partial socialism of education will be replaced by total socialism of education.... Vouchers are not an intermediate step toward a free market in education. A voucher program ensures that a free market in education will never exist."
Independent Schools at Risk
Jacob Huebert | The Freeman | September 1999
"While free choice is a worthy cause for those who support liberty and quality education, it may reasonably be concluded from all available evidence that voucher programs and other government subsidies to private schools will lead to increased bureaucracy, increased controls over the lives of individuals, and quite possibly the end of independent private schooling in America. If greater educational freedom and diversity are desired, government money and control are not the means to achieve it."
Taking the Voucher Bait
Warren Mass | The New American | August 2002
"Unfortunately, parents favoring quality, faith-based education for their children have more to fear from a program that channels government funds into religious schools than do 'liberals' who worry that a few of their tax dollars might wind up supporting religion. True 'choice' in education is not threatened by the absence of vouchers; it is threatened by the only force that can limit freedom: government." »More
The Corrupting Influence of Government Money
Bob Smith | No Force No Fraud | December 2003
"Government (tax) money, regardless of who ends up with it, is always going to twist those who come in contact with it.." »More
Vouchers and Visions of Freedom: A Fictional History
Richard M. Ebeling | The Future of Freedom Foundation | September 2001
A fictional history written in response to a 1999 lecture by Nobel Laureate economist Gary Becker.
Vouchers May Entrench the Welfare State
Ari Armstrong | Colorado Freedom Report | March 2003
"Moving from a system in which government controls most of the schools to a system in which government controls all the schools is hardly a step in the right direction."
The School Voucher Myth
J.H. Huebert | LewRockwell.com | January 2003
"I've found that when voucher advocates are confronted with this possibility – that government money will result in a loss of independence for private schools – they tend to agree that this is something we should be concerned about, and then they kind of shrug it off and hope for the best, apparently naively trusting that, just this once, government will restrain itself and not ruin everything."
Funding for Private Schools in England and the Netherlands: Can the Piper Call the Tune?
(PDF file - opens in new window)
Geoffrey Walford | National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, Teachers College, Columbia University | November 2000
Abstract: This paper examines the effects of public funding for religious and private schools in the Netherlands and England over the last century or more. These two countries are chosen because both have religious schools which are fully funded by the state and the Netherlands, in particular, is often seen as providing an ideal environment in which private religious schools can flourish. The paper shows that state funding brings disadvantages as well as advantages, for funding has been associated with considerable, yet variable, state control and regulation over such aspects as curriculum, staffing, admissions criteria, inspection and governance. At various points in the past both governments have effected powerful shocks to the religious schools that have received funding, and there has also been a gradual increase in regulation - especially in the last decade.
This increase in state regulation and control is such that there are now some religious schools in both countries which do not seek state funding but refer to remain dependent upon fees. The benefits of state funding are seen as being outweighed by the decrease in autonomy that the schools would undergo. A final twist, however, is that private schools not in receipt of state funding have also experienced increased state regulation at both the country and European levels.
Furthermore, all schools have also been influenced by the growing public rhetoric of 'standards' and 'league tables'which has brought with it a growing pressure to conform to a narrow version of schooling. Diversity is being replaced by conformity.
|
Homeschool Tax Credits
|
Are Tax Credits for Educational Expenses a Good Idea for Homeschoolers?
Larry and Susan Kaseman | Home Education Magazine | May-June 1998
"Are tax credits for private schools, including homeschools, a good idea whose time has come? Or are they a misleading political move that will actually provide families with very little money while they increase government control of private education and reduce our educational freedoms?"
Questions and Answers About Education Tax Credits for Homeschoolers
Wisconsin Parents Association Fact Sheet
"[W]hat is more empowering to you as a homeschooling parent: to have some money refunded after you spend it in ways the government approves or to be able to live, learn, and homeschool according to your principles and beliefs without government interference?"
|
What about irresponsible parents?
|
|
"Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."
George Bernard Shaw
|
From The Alliance for the Separation of School & State:
"The 1840s' municipal takeover of schools told parents they weren't responsible for their children's education. It's the government's job. The 1890s' compulsory attendance legislation relieved parents of the awesome burden of convincing children to attend school. It's the government's job. The 1930s' Social Security told children they weren't responsible for their elderly parents. It's the government's job. The last three decades brought us government breakfast, lunch, health care and after-school care. When governments usurp, many parents abdicate their responsibility. Family life is weakened and children are harmed. This usurpation/abdication two-step has been ratcheting downward for 150 years and has been accelerating in the last 40 years. Government attempts to rescue children from poor parenting are the great enabler of irresponsible parenting."
|
|
"A common complaint of parents involved in the operations of the public school their children attend is that disappointingly few other parents are similarly involved. Low parental involvement in public education is a chronic and chronically lamented problem. Why are so few parents involved? One plausible explanation is that when the government takes on the responsibility of providing for the education of children, parents correspondingly, and understandably, stop concerning themselves with it. The present system of government schooling—with its compulsory monetary support by taxation, its compulsory attendance, and its compulsory curriculum—attempts to control almost every aspect over which parents themselves might otherwise have had control. Parents do not decide on their own how much they are willing to pay or to whom, whether their children should or should not continue to attend school, or what the curriculum is. Even if they send their children to private schools, they must nevertheless continue to pay for the government schools, and in most states private schools either receive government support, which entails various restrictions, or are otherwise regulated by the state in such matters as attendance and curriculum. In view of the limited scope for parental responsibility, it is not surprising that parents tend to dissociate themselves from what they might otherwise treat as a matter deserving great personal attention and commitment."
|
|
|
|
© FreedomOfEducation.net | Last updated 4/28/2006 |
|
|
