It's true. The public school system also uses tax dollars collected from childless taxpayers. But there's a difference-- a critical one.
It's not a point of hypocrisy. Some folks are going to say that the voucher-loving taxation-is-theft crowd are being hypocrites to say that they don't like paying school taxes except when it benefits them, but I'd argue that their point is more "If we're going to do this thing I hate, let's do it in a les objectionable way" or maybe "Watch me hoist these libs by their own petard." And that's as American as apple pie.
It is certainly more accurate to point out that vouchers don't just give certain taxpayers their money back. And it is certainly problematic that a voucher system uses money not just from childless taxpayers, but from parents whose own children are not allowed to participate in the voucher system (too poor, too not-religious-enough, too LGBTQ, too low achieving etc etc etc).
But the big critical difference is that in the public system, childless taxpayers get to participate.
They get to elect board members who then decide how those tax dollars should be best used. They get a voice. Their voice may not always dominate, and sometimes the voices that do dominate are, well, not so awesome.
But today is a good day to remember that democratic governance (or a republic, either*) is not defined as "system of government in which I always get what I want." All democracy promises us is a voice. And that's one of the things that a voucher system denies. Private schools do not answer to the public, are not owned or operated by taxpayer-elected boards, and are not required to show the public jack squat about what they do with taxpayer dollars. To really hammer the point home, most voucher laws now come with hands off language, expressly forbidding the people's elected representatives from interfering in private school operation in any way.
One of the things that got us riled up as colonies was taxation without representation--taking our money without allowing us a voice. That denial of a voice to childless taxpayers is an undemocratic feature, and a distinct contrast with the public system which, though imperfect, provides avenues for taxpayers to be heard, to get some representation with their taxation
Undemocratic processes have been critical for school vouchers; no voucher proposal has ever survived a public vote, which is one reason that voucher evangelists have to evangelize to legislators and not the general public.
It has been a long, slow process to give more Americans a voice since we were founded all those years ago. School vouchers seem like a step back for many reasons, but calling for more taxation without representation is definitely a backwards move.
Happy Fourth of July! Enjoy the day!
*Reminder for all those trying to make a distinction out there that democracy and republic are just the terms derived from Roman and Greek for "of the people."
Sorry, but there has been taxation without representation in the education industry since the Obama/Duncan years. They doubled down on Bush's wet dream and built an empire on the backs of children and middle class Americans without one iota of concern for what parents and teachers wanted in public education. They created the push for vouchers because of taxation without representation. Reap what you sow....because now what's left to fight for public schools are really angry parents (both sides) because of taxation without representation. I don't approve of vouchers, but I sincerely understand why parents want to have them since my children were smack dab in the middle of Obama education deforms.
ReplyDeleteIn Alachua County Florida, we now have a charter group taking over a public elementary school- buildings and all with a simple majority of returned votes by parents and teachers. The “public”, such as all ordinary residents or businesses, had no say, no vote. Nor did incoming kindergarten parents, but outgoing 5th grade parents did!
ReplyDelete