If you don’t want the federal government involved in education in any way, then you better not support vouchers. When you buy goods and services on the plantation with plantation script, then the owners of the plantation have jurisdiction over you. The same will happen with using vouchers (script) to pay for private schools. If you want the government involved in private schools, then keep doing what you are doing. That is supportying vouchers.

When, exactly did I say I supported vouchers? I have said that I support “School Choice,” which, as I have been saying in my most recent School Choice posts, does not mean “vouchers.” I haven’t said one way or the other whether I support vouchers or not. The article written by Dan Lips is merely a viewpoint on one of many School Choice options and, if D.C. wants to go for it, then I say “go for it!!”

-J

I completely understand your reservations…they are more than valid.

However, “school choice” does not necessarily refer to “vouchers.” There are many options when instituting “school choice,” and I think I’ll do a post on those options when I get home today. However, your concern about vouchers in particular I can address here. Courts, including the Supreme Court (I have the cases on my home computer, so I’ll track them down ASAP), have ruled that vouchers and similar programs are 1.) Constitutional, and 2.) do not allow the government to interfere in private education because the money is given to parents, not to schools (although there are some voucher programs that have been suggested that would involve giving money directly to schools. This would pose more of a problem.) One Supreme Court decision of which I am thinking involves government “vouchers” that were given to parents to pay for transportation to schools – public and private. The Court ruled that the government had no say-so in those private schools, despite the fact that they were indirectly paying for children’s transportation to those institutions, because the money was given to the parents rather than the school itself.

Voucher programs in which parents are given the money directly are no different than other “voucher” programs, such as Food Stamps, the GI Bill, and the like. The government gives or returns tax dollars to the individual to spend as they wish; whether that money goes to a religious, secular, public, or private institution is no business of the government. So any concern about government interference in the private sector would be left up to the precedent set forth thus far.

An example: the church for which I work accepts Food Stamps for a food-buying co-op they host. Because the government gives the Food Stamps to individuals, the government has no say-so in the organization where the individual decides to “spend” those Food Stamps – even if the individual decides to buy food from a church. The same is true of Educational Voucher programs in which the voucher is given to the individual rather than the organization.

So, while I completely understand your concern, Court precedent indicates that government interference in this way is now (and will not be) an issue. As with any government action, however, we must be vigilant to make sure that we keep it that way, but we, at this point, have a leg up.

-J

Actually, school choice is merely a part of a vast web of beliefs I have about government (it should be small, limited, and stay out of my business!)…it merely seems that its the big one on which you and I disagree.

I do agree, however, that I don’t want the Federal Government involved in education in any way. I would prefer that no government be involved in education, but I understand how terribly unrealistic that is in today’s world (a girl can dream, can’t she?) Look, ideally parents would be in complete control of their children’s education, with no tax dollars being taken from the parents to fund education. Since that is clearly not an option, those of us who choose not to use the public schools should be allowed to get a “refund” on our investment…why am I paying double simply because I want better for my children than government education (i.e., a superior, Christ-centered education that is not an available option in today’s government school system)?

While the Constitution Party may have reservations about vouchers from the Federal Government, they also say “We support equitable tax relief for families whose children do not attend government schools” (Constitution Party Platform – Education). I’m not saying I want vouchers from the Feds – I want the Feds out of education altogether. What I want is tax relief of some sort from whoever is taxing me for education.

And I have supported the Constitution Party. With the current divisions, however, I am not sure how much longer the party will stand, nor how much longer I will be supporting them.

I’m also glad you received my email…I was beginning to think I had mis-typed the address.

-J