- IN THIS REPORT
Readers will read about exciting state-level developments; related documents recently received; and the Editor's View of how one state's teachers' union thinks about parents.
ARIZONA
Arizona's Chairman of the Senate Education Committee,
John Huppenthal, has introduced legislation that would provide vouchers
worth up to $1,500 to as many as 2,000 low-income families to provide for
the tuition at the public or private school of their choice. It is a four-year
pilot program which would eventually be expanded to include up to 8,000
children. This legislation resurrects the measure introduced last session
by then-House Education Committee Chairwoman Lisa Graham, who now serves
as the state Superintendent of Public Instruction. Last year, the measure
passed in the House and failed in the Senate by three votes. According
to Speaker Mark Killian, the votes are still there in the House, and Huppenthal
claims he is only one vote short of the required sixteen votes needed for
passage in the Senate. Dan Schottel, Huppenthal's counterpart in the House,
has also proposed a two-year pilot program to give $2,500 to students attending
the public or private school of their choice, with $1,000 remaining in
the public school district to offset possible losses in state aid. Schottel's
program would be limited to 2% of the school population or 14,000 children
statewide. (Phoenix Gazette, 02/02/95; Arizona Republic,
01/11/95)
ILLINOIS
The state of Illinois has at least three significant
school choice proposals alive in the legislature this year, and proponents
have already pushed one of the three, SB 17, through the Senate Education
Committee. Sponsored by Senators Doris Karpiel and Patrick O'Malley, SB
17 passed through the Education Committee on a vote of 6-4 and is now being
considered by the full Senate. If passed, SB 17 would provide $2,500 grants
to lower-income parents whose children attend private or parochial schools.
The program would be limited to 2,000 students. (Chicago Tribune,
02/01/95)
Also alive in the Illinois legislature this year are two companion bills—HB 655 and SB 209. These proposals would provide $2,500 scholarships to parents of students attending any school in the state, as would SB 17, but would be limited in its application to only six Illinois cities: Chicago, Rockford, Peoria, Springfield, Joliet, and East St. Louis. (Information was provided by Bro. Thomas Hetland, F.S.C., President, Driscoll High School.)
KANSAS
A year ago, Freedom Report #6 (02/18/94) indicated
that Representative Kay O'Connor had introduced a doubly phased-in voucher
proposal, known as the Kansas School Voucher Act. HB 2754, as it was known
in the Kansas legislature, would have phased in school choice both by increasing
the number of families eligible to participate, and the amount of the voucher
itself over a period of five years. It was denied debate on the House floor.
Now Rep. O'Connor is again seeking implementation of a genuine school choice
program in Kansas, this time adding provisions for eliminating up-front
costs, as well as providing for college trust funds with any amount of
the voucher in excess of the cost of private school tuition. (For instance,
if the value of the voucher equals $2,000, and the tuition is $1,500, the
$500 excess would be held in reserve for the child's college tuition.)
She and ten co-sponsors have recently introduced the bill, HB 2217, known
as the Kansas G.I. Bill for Kids, into the Kansas legislature. Its counterpart
in the Senate (SB 182) has been introduced by Senators Phil Martin and
Michael Harris. (Information provided by Rep. O'Connor.)
MICHIGAN
Momentum for genuine choice in Michigan is building with
another show of broad citizen support. According to a Detroit Free Press
poll of six hundred registered voters conducted January 18-25, 53% of the
state's voters would support a voucher program that includes religious
schools, and 40% would not. Also, 61% would support some form of voucher
program, and only 36% would not. According to a similar poll conducted
in October, 1993, this is an increase in support for a voucher program
which includes religious schools. (Detroit Free Press, 01/31/95)
As another display of Michigan's appetite for ethically-charged education efforts, the increase in interest for a voucher program which includes religious schools was accompanied by a recently-released mission statement by the Michigan State Board of Education, drafted by Board President Clark Durant, and adopted January 19, 1995. The statement emphasizes the primacy of parental rights in the education of children, and the necessity of religion, morality, and knowledge as essential to "good government and the happiness of mankind." (Detroit Free Press, 01/20/95) Drawing fire from the Michigan Congress of Parents, Teachers and Students, as well as the Detroit Federation of Teachers primarily on issues of separation of church and state, the statement was approved by a 7-1 vote at the newly-elected State Board of Education's first meeting. Durant met challenges to the statement's four separate references to God or religion by noting that the references are taken from Michigan's Constitution. (The Detroit News, 01/20/95) According to Durant, the statement was produced as a direct result of his shock over a new code of conduct released by the Grosse Pointe South High School, where his daughter attends school. It contains references to "rape, arson and weapons such as daggers, guns, stilettos, iron bars, razor blades, and brass knuckles." (Detroit Free Press, 01/20/95)
MISSOURI
Companion amendment proposals have been introduced in
Missouri's House and Senate this year which would create scholarships,
worth 50% of the average amount spent per public school student, for parents
of K-12 students. These scholarships could be redeemed at any private or
public scholarship redeeming school. SJR 17, introduced by Senator Peter
Kinder, and HJR 1, introduced by Representative Henry Rizzo, currently
await hearings in their respective Education Committees. Both proposals
were introduced last year, but have been revised this year to include home
schooling parents as eligible recipients of the scholarships. (Parents
Choice, January/February, 1995, Citizens for Educational Freedom newsletter)
OHIO
In Freedom Report #17, we reported that Cleveland
Councilwoman Fannie M. Lewis promised to pressure lawmakers into making
Cleveland the testing ground for school vouchers in Ohio. On January 31,
she kept that promise by storming the state capitol with nearly three hundred
supporters of school choice, including parents, children, clergy, grandparents,
and community activists. The group passed out hundreds of letters to their
legislators and demanded that their request for vouchers be heard. One
black parent remarked, "The public schools are preparing black children
for prison, the welfare office or the graveyard. As a black parent, that's
unacceptable." The same day, Gov. George Voinovich had proposed a pilot
voucher plan in his budget calling for poor parents in selected school
districts to receive $2,500 vouchers toward their children's tuition at
the private or parochial school of their choice. Voinovich's proposal does
not specify the districts which would be included under the plan, but the
Cleveland school district would be a likely testing ground. (Plain Dealer,
02/02/95)
TEXAS
Companion voucher bills (HB 301/SB 92) have been re-introduced
into the Texas legislature in the 74th (current) legislative session. With
the assistance of co-sponsors Representatives Ron Wilson (D) and Henry
Cuellar (D), Representative Kent Grusendorf (R) has once again spearheaded
efforts in the House to provide education vouchers to low-income students.
If implemented, the plan would establish 60 pilot voucher programs across
the state for students who qualify for the national school lunch program
to attend either public or accredited "free" (nongovernmental/private)
schools. The amount of vouchers for children who attend free schools would
be equal to 80% of the district's per-pupil cost for public education,
while the remaining 20% stays in the district. Under this plan, each free
school is required to accept the voucher amount as the total payment of
the non-governmental/private school tuition, and to prevent so-called "skimming,"
students would be selected by lottery. (Dallas Morning News, 01/20/95)
Rep. Wilson points to the privately-funded Children's Educational Opportunity
(CEO) program, which provides scholarships to more than 6,000 students
nationwide, as proof that vouchers can work. "It's a perfect example of
how, if given the opportunity of choice and some support, individuals -
particularly students who traditionally have not been thought of as being
able to be excellent students - can turn into outstanding students." (San
Antonio Express, 01/08/95) Newly-elected Gov. George Bush has also
declared his support for a pilot voucher program. (Dallas Morning News,
01/09/95)
WISCONSIN
This Freedom Report will be going to the printer
at the same time Governor Thompson's Executive Budget will describe his
proposal for expansion of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP).
Therefore, we cannot give details on it now. Readers of the previous Report,
#17, know that the Governor has determined to transform MPCP into a true
choice program, under which parents with vouchers could select all manner
of independent school, including sectarian.
One of the classic smoke screens used against school choice generally, and against MPCP expansion particularly, is the charge that such efforts will "skim" the good students and leave in the "abandoned" public schools the students most at risk. The Milwaukee Sentinel on December 15, 1994, editorialized exactly that way: it asserted that "it must be a given" that under any choice program some will be "left behind to fend in a system now minus the best and brightest children, who will have fled."
This portrays the public schools horribly, of course. Worse, as the Freedom Report Editor noted in the same Sentinel on December 30, "...such an assertion defies all logic, and all fact." Given true choice without financial penalty, parents and guardians, who most want the welfare of those in their care, are likely to choose an independent school if the child is doing poorly in the monopolistic school to which they are assigned.
On February 8 the Sentinel detailed the latest assessment of MPCP by the Legislative Audit Bureau and reported what "logic and fact" should have enabled them always to see: "Private schools taking part [in MPCP] have not taken the brightest students from the Milwaukee Public Schools, as opponents feared."
"Instead, state auditors found that the average choice student had significantly worse scores on reading and math tests than other MPS students before the students transferred to private schools."
"Skimming" is one red herring which should not bother
the Thompson effort to expand MPCP. Incidentally, the 2-13-95 Sentinel
reports that the Governor's budget message will also propose transforming
the Department of Public Instruction into a Department of Education
(emphasis added), with the Secretary to be an appointed rather than elected
official, as is now the case.
Marquette University
Address Change
¨ Please note that Marquette
University, and thus the Blum Center as well, has a new address which includes
a post office box, as well as a new zip code. Please update your files
accordingly. Our new address can be found at the bottom of page 4.
Recent Acquisitions
¨ The Blum Center has
recently received copies of revised 1995 school choice legislation from
Kansas (HB 2217), known as the Kansas G.I. Bill for Kids, sponsored by
Reps. O'Connor, et al., along with its companion in the Senate (SB
182), sponsored by Sens. Martin and Harris. The Texas legislation (HB 301/SB
92), filed by Rep. Grusendorf and Sen. Leedom, respectively has also been
received (See TEXAS above.), as well as copies of Illinois legislation
(HB 655, SB 209, SB 17 - See ILLINOIS above.). Also available is the Michigan
Board of Education's mission statement, adopted on January 19, 1995, which
emphasizes the primacy of parental rights, and the necessity of religion,
morality, and knowledge as central to government's administration of public
education. (See MICHIGAN above.)
¨ Educational Freedom Report #7 called attention to the work of Paul E. Peterson, Professor of Government at Harvard, and Director of its Center for American Political Studies, as that work had appeared in a then-new book. Professor Peterson's chapter in the book in question had done two things: it portrayed the "designed to fail" tests being applied to the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP); and the fact that MPCP was overcoming such hurdles and performing well.
In a new paper, "A Critique of the Witte Evaluation of Milwaukee's School Choice Program," (Occasional Paper 95-2/February, 1995, Center for American Political Studies) Professor Peterson brings entirely up-to-date his critique of the shackles applied to MPCP and the results of his assessment: MPCP is performing very well and, despite its built-in limitations and testing hurdles clearly indicates the educationally-productive power of parental freedom.
¨ The Education Project of Los Angeles, California, has released its January, 1995, Report Card (#1), a regular newspaper to be published six times per year. The paper is designed to provide information about the current barriers to educational reform in California. The first issue highlights the power of the teachers' unions in maintaining the status quo, while future issues will be devoted to topics such as O.B.E., the politics of reading, the perils of sex education, and an update on school choice activities. For further information, contact The Education Project, P.O. Box 67398, Los Angeles, California 90067.
¨ Citizens for Educational Freedom (CEF) has produced two video tapes from their 35th Anniversary Celebration Conference on "The School Choice Movement: Past, Present and Future." The CEF Conference video, 1½ hours in length, features CEF founders Mae and Martin Duggan, Phyllis Schlafly, Robert Morrison, Allyson Tucker, Myron Lieberman, and Clint Bolick, and costs $15 plus $2 postage and handling. The Banquet video features the keynote address by Jersey City Mayor Bret Schundler, and can be purchased for $10 plus $2 postage and handling. Both video tapes are available for $23 postage paid, and may be ordered from the Educational Freedom Foundation, 12571 Northwinds Drive, St. Louis, Missouri 63146. Checks should be made payable to Educational Freedom Foundation.
- The defenders of educational finance monopoly (EFM) often
assert that, while they very much want parents' involvement with
the monopoly's schools, such involvement is inadequately provided.
"Don't blame the schools — blame the parents, and the society they reflect,"
summarizes this attitude. Of course, these same monopoly-defenders react
vigorously, even violently, against the ultimate and true method for involving
parents — school choice without financial penalty. This reaction, while
entirely wrong-headed, is at least clearly predictable. After all, EFM's
defense is led by people with a direct material interest in that faulty
structure, and they see school choice as threatening their monopolistic
control over tax dollars.
But this self-protective spirit does not manifest itself only in reaction against school choice without financial penalty. It also comes to the fore when EFM's vested interests imagine that parents are becoming too assertive as regards the monopoly's public schools. This, perhaps even more obviously than opposition to school choice, casts serious doubt on EFM's refrain about wanting more parental involvement. What seems to be wanted is not parental involvement as such, but parental involvement of the "right" type, i.e., submissive and controlled parental involvement which can succor and sustain the monopoly's controls over taxes and children.
We recently received a new piece put out by the Michigan Education Association, the major educators' union in that state. Entitled "Michigan — The Far Right's New Frontier," the document in question brings fully to mind the sad reality described above. Looked at from EFM's self-protective perspective, there are indeed "right" and "wrong" kinds of parental interests and involvements in the Michigan monopoly's schools. The "right" kind: commit yourself to us and the schools, and leave to us, EFM's vested interests, the overall nurturing of your children. The "wrong" kind of parental involvement is anything which suggests that parents might actually want to evaluate and pass judgment on the quality of the school experience. Such a presumptuous parental attitude would treat the schools as a means to an end, rather than as the ends-in-themselves EFM wants them to be.
To illustrate, a few references from "Michigan — The Far
Right's New Frontier," under its first subheading: "WARNINGS." Please note
these sample "signals that warn of a Far Right presence" in a locality,
each quoted in its entirety:
- "Unexpected classroom visits by parents."
(We've got trouble!)
"Increased attendance by same/similar groups of parents at local school board meetings."
(Right here in River City!)
"Demands for copies of documents/records under Freedom of Information Act."
(Parents - that starts with P!)
"Unreasonable demands from parents to be involved in curriculum decisions."
(And that rhymes with T!)
"Complaints about school employees, textbooks/library book selections, or curriculum voiced on local
- talk shows or expressed in letters to the editor."
View
a different issue of the Freedom Report
Return to Blum Center
Home Page
|
The Blum Center grants full permission for all of its documents to be copied, in part or in whole, to extend the reach of the Center's messages and information. We appreciate it when our readers keep us apprised of state and national developments in the area of school choice, particularly legislative developments. Any Blum Center documents not available on our web page may be obtained by contacting us by telephone, fax, or mail. Virgil C. Blum Center for Parental Freedom in Education |
 |