“DEFUND PUBLIC SCHOOLS!!!!!!”
The U.S. Supreme Court might as well have issued such a three-word ruling to send its message allowing Montana to spend tax money on religious schools.
The court struck down the state’s Blaine amendments last week for the wrong reasons, just as they were enacted for the wrong reasons during the 1800s. In so doing, the court encouraged advocates of religious schools to spring into action for more legal victories.
The court’s decision could possibly translate into less money for public schools so as to fuel religious school budgets.
A narrow majority of justices -in an unsurprising 5-4 vote – barred the state from using a provision in its Constitution to exclude religious schools from its private school scholarship program, according to The New York Times.
Montana adopted the amendment in 1872 at the behest of Maine’s James G. Blaine during a period when anti-Catholic sentiment was extensive, and 36 other states enacted similar provisions to generally restrict government aid to religious institutions, according to a collection of sources. The amendments were named for Blaine, who pressed for legal measures to deny public funding to religious schools.
Blaine served as Speaker of the House of Representatives, a senator, secretary of state and in 1884 an unsuccessful presidential candidate.
Our modern-day anti-Blaine, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, was inspired to proclaim: “Your bigoted Blaine amendments and other restrictions like them are unconstitutional, dead and buried. I’m calling on all states to now seize the extraordinary opportunity to expand all education options at all schools to every single student in America.”
Bigoted? DeVos means that Catholics must be accepted by society now that Protestant, Jewish and other religious schools savor a piece of the nonpublic school aid pie.
As most readers probably recognize, every penny spent on religious education – and, for that matter, on any nonpublic school – is a penny removed from public education.
My concern is not only directed against religious schools but all private schools, which includes charter schools. Public schools are underfunded to begin with, and any money that is sent to private schools is less money available to fund public education.
Granted, many public schools are in awful shape and all families want something better. A few years ago, Philadelphia went as far as eliminating nursing positions from some of its schools.
People like DeVos will claim the answer is for students to abandon public education for private schools with help from the government, often in the form of vouchers.
Why not simply revamp public schools where needed and upgrade them into high-quality schools? That takes money, of course, and children in big cities have been victimized by defunding of schools for decades. They were cheated from receiving a decent education.
In Pennsylvania, schools in Philadelphia and smaller cities have long been defunded by a state legislature controlled by Republicans. Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and some other cities are governed by Democrats.
Interestingly, the larger counties generate a high percentage of the state treasury. The sales tax supplies the state with $4 billion each year, and one-quarter of that is sent from seven of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties – Philadelphia, its surrounding suburban counties, and Allegheny and Westmoreland counties in western Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh is part of Allegheny.
Some states do provide funding for auxiliary services such as school supplies and transportation. This is acceptable since these services are unrelated to educational content.
Depending on one’s sense of humor, columnist George Will supplied some absurd hilarity to the debate when he referred to “the public-school monopoly.” Would he describe the police, military or welfare programs as public monopolies? Surely he jests.
A business owner is expected to create a workable business plan to determine profitability, and this applies to private schools. Any business person who needs to supplement a business plan with government financial aid is inherently incompetent. If they cannot live by their business plan, how can they be trusted to operate their schools with any degree of capability?
“This wasn’t about the money; this was about right and wrong,” said Alan Gillis, whose family is suing the state of Maine after he had to spend $5,000 yearly so his daughter can attend Bangor Christian School. She graduated this year.
“This lawsuit is about other families and other children,” he told a Times reporter, “and allowing those folks to choose the best academic environment for their children.”
If it is not about the money, why is he demanding that the state pay for the tuition of younger families?
Millions of students over the years would have loved to be treated to “the best academic environment,” but their parents could not afford it. That Gillis could raise $5,000 each year to pay for his daughter’s tuition is not solely white privilege. Or Christian privilege.
It is privilege. Period.
Republished from San Diego Jewish World