Religions > Atheism > Vouchers and the Privatization of American Education, justifying resegregation from Brown to Zelman
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
06 Mar 2007 03:26:37 AM |
| Object: |
Vouchers and the Privatization of American Education, justifying resegregation from Brown to Zelman |
This is a 24 page long article. It is quite interesting. I recommend any
and all read it who have an interest in the subject
VOUCHERS AND THE PRIVATIZATION OF AMERICAN EDUCATION: JUSTIFYING RACIAL
RESEGREGATION FROM BROWN TO ZELMAN 2/21/2005 10:34 AM
Klint Alexander* Kern Alexander**
http://home.law.uiuc.edu/lrev/publications/2000s/2004/2004_5/KAlexander.pdf
[excerpts]
1132 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 2004
I. INTRODUCTION
Resistance to Brown v. Board of Education1 and its progeny has
taken many shapes since 1954. Initially, the response was blatantly
confrontational, as massive opposition gave birth to a decade of social
conflict. Later, the resistance became more subtle. Housing patterns
changed as whites moved to the suburbs, then to exurbia. Private religious
academies were built throughout the South, and new enrollments revitalized
parochial schools in the North. Middle-class parents took a new and
intensified interest in their children’s education and sought out schools a
safe distance from busing and integrated schools. Various rationales
emerged over the years as proponents of private schools sought moral
justifications for their abandonment of America’s public schools.
As the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr observed in Moral Man and Immoral
Society, privileged groups who benefit from inequality invent
“specious proofs” to support the moral justifications for their
discrimination.2 These justifications seek to “negate and transcend” the
actual purpose for which the inequalities were created.3
The specious proofs used to justify racial discrimination in the post-Brown
era espouse appealing concepts of liberty, parental choice, competition,and
neutrality, which implicitly call for the privatization of educationwith
public resources. The tuition voucher has become the preferredmethod,
funneling public tax funds to private and parochial schools.
The subject of vouchers has consequently become a lightening rod
issue in American politics. A voucher is a coupon worth a predetermined
amount of money that is presented at a private or parochial school by the
parent. The school and parent endorse the voucher, and the school redeems
the money from the state or local school district. Vouchers, and other
similar devices, are not new; they have often been used as a conduit to
move public funds to the private sector, not only for education, but for
various health and welfare functions of government as well.4 Yet, the
public most readily understands vouchers as a way to channel money from the
general public coffers to church schools. Opponents of
vouchers argue that such devices reinforce the reactionary preferences and
biases of parents who choose to spend the public’s money at likeminded
schools.5 Michael Walzer, in his seminal book Spheres of Justice,
1. 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote, “[I]n the field of
public education the doctrine of separate but equal has no place. Separate
educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
Id. at 495.
2. REINHOLD NIEBUHR, MORAL MAN AND IMMORAL SOCIETY 116–17 (1932).
3. Id.
4. JOSEPH E. STIGLITZ, ECONOMICS OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR 55–63, 104–14,
304–22, 391–98, 420–41 (4th ed. 2000).
5. JEFFREY R. HENIG, RETHINKING SCHOOL CHOICE: LIMITS OF THE MARKET
METAPHOR 193 (1994); JOHN F. WITTE, THE MARKET APPROACH TO EDUCATION: AN
ANALYSIS OF AMERICA’S FIRST VOUCHER PROGRAM 190–209 (2000).
No. 5] RESEGREGATION: FROM BROWN TO ZELMAN 1133
captures the essence of the problem of vouchers and parental choice in the
marketplace of education: “For most children, parental choice almost
certainly means less diversity, less tension, less opportunity for personal
change than they would find in schools to which they were politically
assigned.”6
The purpose of this article is to explore the relationship between
school vouchers and desegregation in the aftermath of Brown v. Board of
Education. Part II will briefly examine the historical roots of tuition
vouchers and various theories underlying the Supreme Court’s interpretation
of the First Amendment’s religion clauses. Part III will explore early
efforts to circumvent desegregation and the key Supreme Court decisions
from Griffin7 to Zelman8 that paved the way for the establishment of
tuition vouchers in American education. Part IV will discuss the
implications of various voucher initiatives across the country as well as
the federal government’s recent role in furthering the cause of private and
parochial education at the expense of public schools. This article will
conclude by arguing that the use of tuition vouchers did not arise in any
significant degree in the United States until the public schools were
desegregated following the Brown decision. In response to desegregation,
a veiled crusade was launched under the pretext of private choice to
resegregate the nation’s schools through the use of tuition vouchers and
other forms of public aid to private and parochial schools. The Supreme
Court’s decision in Zelman was a critical turning point which gave
privatization a new impetus, opening the constitutional door to an
expansion of tuition voucher initiatives and the erosion of Brown’s
significance in American society.
II. THE BACKGROUND TO VOUCHERS AND THE RELIGION CLAUSES OF
THE FIRST AMENDMENT
A. The Historical Roots of Vouchers
The idea of tuition vouchers can be traced back to the French Revolution in
1793.9 At that time, the Catholic Church thwarted the French government’s
efforts to create a system of public schools, and in its place, initiated a
system whereby parents were given vouchers to send their children to
religious schools.10 The voucher committed the state to pay the tuition
(rébribution scolaire) of each student at a standard rate. Al-
6. MICHAEL WALZER, SPHERES OF JUSTICE 218 (1983).
7. Griffin v. County Sch. Bd., 377 U.S. 218 (1964).
8. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 369 (2002).
9. ISSER WALOCH, THE NEW REGIME: TRANSFORMATIONS OF THE FRENCH CIVIC
ORDER,1789–1820s, at 180 (1994).
10. DANIEL ROCHE, FRANCE IN THE ENLIGHTENMENT 360 (1998).
[snip]
V. CONCLUSION
Post-Brown equal protection cases and post-Everson Establishment
Clause decisions have effectively circumvented public school desegregation
by facilitating the privatization of education. By dismantling the
First Amendment’s “wall of separation,” the Supreme Court has effectively
obviated Brown and its progeny by opening the floodgates for
states and the federal government to create funding schemes that encourage
parents to send their children to segregated, private, religious
schools. The Supreme Court has thereby condemned future generations
No. 5] RESEGREGATION: FROM BROWN TO ZELMAN 1153
to the stultifying beliefs and prejudices of their parents. The Court’s
decisions frustrate the pluralistic ideal of public schools, a place where
racial and religious animosities are left at the schoolhouse gate and
children of varying backgrounds come together to learn. Meira Levinson
perhaps captures best the dilemma posed by Zelman and the public/
private dispute in education: “It is out of the common commitment to
the visible, even physical institutions of public life that citizens come
to tolerate each others’ private preferences. Children, as future citizens,
develop these attachments best within the context of a public school that
models in miniature this national public square.”159
In Zelman, the Supreme Court allowed parents to use public funds to greatly
diminish the “public square.”
Therefore, the ultimate constitutional incongruity is this: If parents
believe so strongly in racial discrimination that it becomes a tenet of
their religion, then they are eligible for state aid to support their
beliefs. If, however, they believe only half-heartedly in racial
discrimination and it does not rise to the level of a true religious tenet,
then they cannot receive state aid for their private school choice.
All of this portends an exodus of students from integrated public
schools to segregated private schools as tuition voucher programs and
similar incentives are enacted at the state and federal levels. If such
legislation is to be challenged and the stratification and segregation of
society curtailed, new litigation strategies must be conceived and
implemented. Such strategies will pit the philosophy of parental choice and
liberty, now dominant in the Supreme Court’s interpretations of the First
Amendment’s religion provisions, against the premise of equality under
the Fourteenth Amendment and the mandates of the Civil Rights Act.
The resolution will determine whether state-funded religion will claim
refuge in vouchers and tuition assistance and exacerbate racial segregation
in American society.
159. MEIRA LEVINSON, THE DEMANDS OF LIBERAL EDUCATION 114 (2002).
[end excerpts]
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "moonchild" |
|
| Title: Re: Vouchers and the Privatization of American Education, justifying resegregation from Brown to Zelman |
07 Mar 2007 09:34:07 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 04:26:37 -0500, buckeye-elo wrote:
That's the plan! It is a way of subsidizing white flight in the South,
not a way to help poor blacks.
--
Brian (not wanting to be a messiah): "You are all individuals..."
Crowd (in unison): "We are all individuals..."
Monty Python's "Life Of Brian"
http://www.spampoison.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Vouchers and the Privatization of American Education, justifying resegregation from Brown to Zelman |
10 Mar 2007 06:21:01 AM |
|
|
moonchild <moonchild@REMOVETHISoperamail.com.invalid> wrote:
:|On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 04:26:37 -0500, buckeye-elo wrote:
:|
:|That's the plan! It is a way of subsidizing white flight in the South,
:|not a way to help poor blacks.
There is a great deal of truth in that.
Prior to Brown v Bd of Ed just about the only private schools that existed
in this nation were private religious schools. moslty private Catholic
schools.
With the ruling in Brown V Bd of Ed there began, especuilly in the south,
the creation of Protstant private religious schools throughout the south
Later, with court ordered busing etc in the North such schools began
springing up in droves in the north as well
It's ironic that so frequently that one who benefit the most from vouchers
are the same ones who don't need them, but sure don't turn them down
either.
The poor blacks even with vouchers, still can't afford the better of the
private schools.
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Vouchers and the Privatization of American Education, justifying resegregation from Brown to Zelman |
09 Mar 2007 01:49:30 PM |
|
|
jalison/buckeye wrote:...
"This is a 24 page long article. It is quite interesting. I recommend
any and all read it who have an interest in the subject...
"VOUCHERS AND THE PRIVATIZATION OF AMERICAN EDUCATION: JUSTIFYING
RACIAL RESEGREGATION FROM BROWN TO ZELMAN 2/21/2005 10:34 AM
Klint Alexander* Kern Alexander
**http://home.law.uiuc.edu/lrev/publications/2000s/2004/2004_5/
KAlexand...
1132 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 2004
I. INTRODUCTION
Resistance to Brown v. Board of Education1 and its progeny has taken
many shapes since 1954. Initially, the response was blatantly
confrontational, as massive opposition gave birth to a decade of
social conflict. Later, the resistance became more subtle. Housing
patterns changed as whites moved to the suburbs, then to exurbia.
Private religious academies were built throughout the South, and new
enrollments revitalized
parochial schools in the North. Middle-class parents took a new and
intensified interest in their children's education and sought out
schools a safe distance from busing and integrated schools..."
The NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel's schools (the "public" schools) of the US
are less integrated than parochial schools.
See: Greene, Jay, "Choosing Integration," The Wall Street Journal,
July 8, 2002. Greene's full study, "The Racial, Economic, and
Religious Context of Parental Choice in Cleveland," is at www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg.
(jalison): "Various rationales emerged over the years as proponents of
private schools sought moral justifications for their abandonment of
America's public schools. As the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr observed
in Moral Man and Immoral Society, privileged groups who benefit from
inequality invent "specious proofs" to support the moral
justifications for their discrimination..."
Rather like the authors, who here invent specious justifications for a
policy which condemns children of poor minority parents to the NEA/AFT/
AFSCME cartel's wretched schools.
School Corruption
http://www.diesel-ebooks.com/cgi-bin/item/059580988X
School Corruption
http://www.diesel-ebooks.com/cgi-bin/item/059580988X
Neal McClusky on corruption in schools
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa542.pdf
No Voice,No Exit: The Inefficiency of America's Schools
http://www.ipi.org/ipi/IPIPublications.nsf/PublicationLookupFullText
http://www.ednews.org/articles/3721/1/The-Reality-of-School-Corruption/Page1.html
"2 These justifications seek to "negate and transcend" the actual
purpose for which the inequalities were created.3 The specious proofs
used to justify racial discrimination in the post-Brown era espouse
appealing concepts of liberty, parental choice, competition,and
neutrality, which implicitly call for the privatization of education
with
public resources. The tuition voucher has become the preferred method,
funneling public tax funds to private and parochial schools. The
subject of vouchers has consequently become a lightening rod issue in
American politics. A voucher is a coupon worth a predetermined amount
of money that is presented at a private or parochial school by the
parent. The school and parent endorse the voucher, and the school
redeems the money from the state or local school district. Vouchers,
and other similar devices, are not new; they have often been used as a
conduit to move public funds to the private sector, not only for
education, but for various health and welfare functions of government
as well.4 Yet, the public most readily understands vouchers as a way
to channel money from the general public coffers to church schools.
Opponents of vouchers argue that such devices reinforce the
reactionary preferences and biases of parents who choose to spend the
public's money at likeminded schools.5 Michael Walzer, in his seminal
book Spheres of Justice, 1. 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Chief Justice Earl
Warren wrote, '[I]n the field of public education the doctrine of
separate but equal has no place. Separate educational facilities are
inherently unequal.'
Id. at 495."
It is the opponents of vouchers who raise specious arguments. Did
nutrition vouchers (Food Stamps) lead to segregated grocery stores?
Dis medical care vouchers (Medicaid, Medicare) lead to segregated
hospitals? No.
"No. 5] RESEGREGATION: FROM BROWN TO ZELMAN 1133
captures the essence of the problem of vouchers and parental choice in
the marketplace of education: 'For most children, parental choice
almost certainly means less diversity, less tension, less opportunity
for personal change than they would find in schools to which they were
politically assigned.'
"Almost certainly"? From what do the authors derive this certainty?
Discussion deleted...
"II. THE BACKGROUND TO VOUCHERS AND THE RELIGION CLAUSES OF
THE FIRST AMENDMENT
A. The Historical Roots of Vouchers
The idea of tuition vouchers can be traced back to the French
Revolution in 1793."
Wrong already. In the pre-Revolutionary British colonies of North
Aerica, several polities supported education through per pupil
contributions to Church-operated schools.
"CONCLUSION
Post-Brown equal protection cases and post-Everson Establishment
Clause decisions have effectively circumvented public school
desegregation by facilitating the privatization of education. By
dismantling the First Amendment's "wall of separation," the Supreme
Court has effectively obviated Brown and its progeny by opening the
floodgates for states and the federal government to create funding
schemes that encourage parents to send their children to segregated,
private, religious schools. The Supreme Court has thereby condemned
future generations to the stultifying beliefs and prejudices of their
parents."
As opposed to the stultifying beliefs and prejudices of State school
bureaucrats, huh?.
What the cartel's defenders cannot admit is that poor minority parents
want OUT of the wretched schools to which current policy condemns
their kids.
From: Hyman and Penroe, __Journal of School Psychology__.
"Several studies of maltreatment by teachers suggest that school
children report traumatic symptoms that are similar whether the
traumatic event was physical or verbal abuse (Hyman, et.al.,1988;
Krugman & Krugman, 1984; Lambert, 1990). Extrapolation from these
studies suggests that psychological maltreatment of school children,
especially those who are poor, is fairly widespread in the United
States...."
"As with corporal punishment, the frequency of emotional
maltreatment in schools is too often a function of the socioeconomic
status (SES) of the student population (Hyman, 1990)."
"Violence at school is a prevalent problem. According to a national
survey of school proncipals (National Center for Educational
Statistics, 1998), over 200,000 serious fights or physical attacks
occurred in public schools during the 1996-1997 school year. Serious
violent crimes occurred in approximately 12% of middle schools and 13%
of high schools. Student surveys (Kann et al, 1995) indicate even
higher rates of aggressive behavior. Approximately 16.2% of high
school students nationwide reported involvement in a physical fight at
school during a 30-day period, and 11.8% reported carrying a weapon on
school property (Kann et al, 1995)."
"Research on victims of violence at school suggests that repeated
victimization has detrimental effects on a child's emotional and
social development (Batsche & Knoff, 1995; Hoover, Oliver, & Thomson,
1993; Olweus, 1993). Victims exhibit higher levels of anxiety and
depression, and lower self-esteem than non-victims (eg., Besag, 1989;
Gilmartin, 1987; Greenbaum, 1987; Olweus, 1993). Karen Brockenbrough,
Dewey G. Cornell, Ann B. Loper, "Aggressive Attitudes Among Victims of
Violence at School", Education and the Treatment of Children, V. 25,
#3, Aug., 2002.
http://www.educationandtreatmentofchildren.net/contents/25_3.html
"Results showed that the over-representation of Black males that has
been cited consistently in the literature begins at the elementary
school level and continues through high school. Black females also
were suspended at a much higher rate than White or Hispanic females at
all three school levels." Linda M. Raffaele Mendez, Howard M. Knoff,
"Who Gets Suspended From School and Why: A Demographic Analysis
Education and the Treatment of Children V. 26, #1, Feb. 2003.
http://www.educationandtreatmentofchildren.net/contents/26_1.html
"Criminal violence emerges from social experience, most commonly
brutal social experience visited upon vulnerable children, who suffer
for our neglect of their welfare and return in vengeful wrath to
plague us. If violence is a choice they make, and there- fore their
personal responsibility, as Athens demonstrates it is, our failure to
protect them from having to confront such a choice is a choice we
make, just as a disease epidemic would be implicitly our choice if we
failed to provide vaccines and antibiotics. Such a choice-to tolerate
the brutalization of children as we continue to do-is equally violent
and equally evil, and we reap what we sow. ..." Richard Rhodes, __Why
they Kill: The Discoveries of a Maverick Criminologist__.
"August 1, 1939"
....
I and the public know
What all schoolchildren learn,
Those to whom evil is done
Do evil in return. --W. H. Auden--
Discussion deleted...
"Therefore, the ultimate constitutional incongruity is this: If
parents believe so strongly in racial discrimination that it becomes
a tenet of their religion, then they are eligible for state aid to
support their beliefs. If, however, they believe only half-heartedly
in racial
discrimination and it does not rise to the level of a true religious
tenet, then they cannot receive state aid for their private school
choice."
Why should anyone expect this result? Catholic schools do not
discriminate along racial lines, and they are the bulk of curent
parochial schools. The initial capital costs of school are not large,
so it shouldn't take long for diverse schools to come on line.
Why suppose that these schools will discriminate along racial lines?
"All of this portends an exodus of students from integrated public
schools to segregated private schools as tuition voucher programs and
similar incentives are enacted at the state and federal levels. If
such legislation is to be challenged and the stratification and
segregation of society curtailed, new litigation strategies must be
conceived and implemented. Such strategies will pit the philosophy of
parental choice and liberty, now dominant in the Supreme Court's
interpretations of the First
Amendment's religion provisions, against the premise of equality under
the Fourteenth Amendment and the mandates of the Civil Rights Act. The
resolution will determine whether state-funded religion will claim
refuge in vouchers and tuition assistance and exacerbate racial
segregation in American society."
Two points: 1) The NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel's schools are NOT
integrated.
2) The "establishment" argument against school vouchers failed. The
authors of the ababove argument suggest that their (bogus)
"segregation" argument somehow relates to an "establishment"
consideration, but do not say how. Supose somehow there is a
connection between religion and segregation. This would not make a
policy which gives to individual parents the power to determine which
institution, if any, shall receive the K-12 education subsidy which
taxpayers allot to their children unconstitutional. By analogy:
Imagine two nightclubs 200 yards apart and across the street from an
army base. One nightclub features country music and serves a largely
white clientelle, the other features jazz and serves a largely black
clientelle. Totally legal, right?
You are invited to check out the following:
Neal McCluskey on conflict of values
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6870
John Derbyshire,
New English Review, Dec. 2006
"The Dream Palace of Educational Theorists"
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm?frm=4844&sec_id=4844
Please read this one page Marvin Minsky comment on school.
http://www.rru.com/~meo/hs.minski.html
This article on artificially extended adolescence by Ted Kolderie.
http://www.educationevolving.org/pdf/Adolescence.pdf
Also by Ted Kolderie
http://www.educationevolving.org/clevel.asp?alevel=a2&blevel=b1
E.G. West, "Education Vouchers in Principle and Practice: A Survey",
The World Bank Research Observer. http://www.worldbank.org/research/journals/wbro/obsfeb97/educate.htm
E.G. West on the history of compulsory attendance.
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/egwest/pdfs/economics%20of%20compulsion.pdf
Caroline Hoxby's papers on the web.
http://post.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/hoxby/papers.html
Caroline Hoxby on class size
http://post.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/hoxby/papers/classsize_oct2000.pdf
Caroline Hoxby on sorting in choice programs
http://post.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/hoxby/papers/hoxby_2.pdf
Eric Hanushek on Education markets
http://edpro.stanford.edu/hanushek/admin/pages/files/uploads/research%20observer.pdf
Andrew Coulson's massive site. Useful links.
http://www.schoolchoices.org
Coulson/CATO study
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa585.pdf
Karl Bunday's site
http://learninfreedom.org/Nobel_hates_school.html
Milton and Rose Friedman's site.
http://www.friedmanfoundation.org
Myron Lieberman's site.
http://www.educationpolicy.org
Here's Lawrence Tribe (Harvard Law), from an editorial page column in
the __Washington Post__: ...[As the Heritage Foundation quotes Harvard
Law's Lawrence Tribe on this subject: "Any objection that anyone would
have to a voucher program would have to be policy-based and could not
rest on legal doctrine. One would have to be awfully clumsy to write
voucher legislation that could not pass constitutional
scrutiny. . . . Aid to parents . . . would be constitutional."]...
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
