If there’s one thing most Americans can agree on it’s that our education system is in dismal shape. A big chunk of that comes from the fact that our public schools have not, in some places, been able to provide students who come from low-income families with the resources that they so desperately need to be successful. One proposed way to fix this for at least some students is to institute a system of school vouchers. The idea of such programs has been heavily debated and discussed for decades. Read on to learn about school voucher programs and both sides of the debate.

What are school vouchers?

Vouchers parents to send their children schools outside of those assigned to them by location. These schools are often described as more innovative charter schools than are found in the traditional public system or private schools. Use of school vouchers varies throughout the United States, with some programs run at the state level, and others at the city level. Some notable long-lasting programs include those launched in Milwaukee in 1990, and Cleveland in 1995.

What is the argument in favor of school vouchers?

Providing families with more choices about how to raise their children is a staple of the American way and the voucher system would give control to parents to select the school that is best for their child. Vouchers would also allow children in low-income areas to escape the vicious cycle of poverty and go to a higher quality school so that they can get a better education. Additionally, private school vouchers would create direct competition between private schools and public schools and the competition will force all institutions to better themselves in an effort to attract students.

What is the argument against school vouchers?

For all the potential benefits that could come if state and local governments provided school vouchers, the policy also has notable flaws.  Opponents argue first and foremost that private school vouchers compromise the integrity of the entire public school system. The government operates public schools, yet it also incentivizes families to avoid them.  The conflicts of interest in this scenario makes it seem ineffective. Any public funding that goes to school vouchers is money that could have been spent improving the public school system, which cannot improve without support and investments from the government. Opponents also argue that many private schools are religiously affiliated and school vouchers provided by the government is essentially taxpayer funding of religious institutions.

How do school vouchers hold up in court?

The constitutionality of school vouchers has been heard in several court cases. Cleveland launched its program in 1995 in response to the city’s dismal public schools; however, because Cleveland’s program allowed students to use the vouchers to attend private schools with religious affiliations, the program was almost immediately the subject of lawsuits. Eventually, the question made it all the way to the Supreme Court in the 2002 case Zelman v. Simmons-Harris. In Zelman, the plaintiffs argued that the case violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which provides for the separation of religion and state. The court ruled that the vouchers could remain, because even though the religious schools were receiving government funding, the purpose of the vouchers was compelling and there were non-religious options possible. In addition, the program didn’t go to the religiously-based schools, but rather the parents and students who needed the aid, and the program didn’t proselytize or advocate for the religiously-run schools.

Case Study: Milwaukee Public Schools

Vouchers have been an option for students since the early 1990s, but whether or not the implementation has been effective is still up for debate. Thousands of students in Milwaukee take advantage of the voucher program, and like in Cleveland, many do end up in religiously-run institutions. The main question is whether or not it has worked.

The consensus seems to be: sort of. Evidence from the 2012-2013 school year shows that students in Milwaukee’s voucher program are not outscoring their public school peers as a whole on state tests. That sounds disheartening, and would seem to indicate that vouchers have been a failure, but there’s some evidence to suggest that the picture requires more digging than that. The voucher students have, in fact, scored better than their low-income public school peers. Also, test scores in the Milwaukee voucher program have on the rise, perhaps indicating that the program is on the right track.

Conclusion

The voucher system is a creative solution to a debilitating problem in the American education system — particularly in some of our low-income public schools. The argument for vouchers includes the ability for parents and students to inject more choice into their education — hopefully creating more competitive school systems. In practice, however, it hasn’t necessarily worked out to that way. They’re also expensive, and could lead to public schools receiving less funding in the name of creating stronger charter schools. While some students may receive a better education, students as a whole population are left in a worse position. What’s indubitable is that we’re really not sure about the ultimate effects of vouchers yet as there’s no nationwide system to study.

Resources

Primary

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction: School Choice Programs

Cornell University Law School: Zelman v. Simmons-Harris

Additional

World Bank: How Do School Vouchers Help Improve Education Systems?

PBS: The Case For Vouchers

NJ.com: Christie Tours Pro-Vouchers, Anti-Union Message in Philadelphia

Washington Post: Are School Vouchers Losing Steam?

Carnegie Mellon University: Estimating the Effects of Private School Vouchers in Multidistrict Economies

Education Next: The Impact of School Vouchers on College Enrollment

WRAL.com: Voucher Bill Provides Public Money For Private School

Anti-Defamation League: School Vouchers: The Wrong Choice For Public Education

Americans United For Separation of Church and State: 10 Reasons Why Private School Vouchers Should Be Rejected

Sameer Aggarwal

Sameer Aggarwal was a founding member of Law Street Media and he is a graduate of The George Washington University. Contact Sameer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post School Vouchers: Are They Worth It? appeared first on Law Street.

The U.S. District Court in Tampa dismissed a lawsuit filed last year to block Florida’s voter purge program. Two naturalized citizens and a Hispanic advocacy group collaborated on a lawsuit, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund v. Detzner, which claimed that Florida needed to obtain authorization from the federal government in order to remove the names of suspected non-U.S. citizens from the voter registry.

The court determined that the lawsuit was moot after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, which invalidated Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act.  The Supreme Court’s decision eliminated the formula that allowed for the preclearance provision, which the federal government utilized to protect voters.

Florida’s voter purge uses a collection of driver’s licenses and voter registration files in order to create the initial list of voters who may not be citizens, which initially contained 180,000 names.  After comparison with more county records, Florida was able to compile a list of 2,600 registered voters who may not be citizens.  The state also has an agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to use the federal immigrant database in its voter purge efforts.

The obvious issue with Florida’s voter purge program is the unintended removal of suspected non-citizens who actually are citizens, such as Murat Limage and Pamela Gomez, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.  In an effort to prevent non-citizens from voting, which may only happen in a relatively small quantity, the state is setting itself up for more trouble if any legitimate citizens are prevented from voting at the polls because they were incorrectly removed from the registration lists.

The state says that it is looking for ‘suspected’ non-U.S. citizens in the voter registry, which leads one to wonder what basis is being used to develop such suspicions.  The most likely explanation is that Florida is unfairly targeting Hispanic voters  suspected of voting illegally.  It is completely unacceptable for the state government to use any racial or ethnic basis in order to purge voter lists, and the Supreme Court’s decision should not change the fact that Florida’s Hispanic community must be protected from any potential violations by the state.

—

Featured image courtesy of [Atomische * Tom Glebel via Flickr]

Sameer Aggarwal

Sameer Aggarwal was a founding member of Law Street Media and he is a graduate of The George Washington University. Contact Sameer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Democracy in Action: Florida Set to Resume Voter Purge appeared first on Law Street.

A bipartisan group of Senators reached a deal to change interest rates on student loans. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) led the negotiations and came up with an agreement that would tie the interest rates on student loans to the financial market.

Under the deal, federal loans will be fixed to the 10 year Treasury bill. Undergraduate students will face additional interest rates at 2.05% with a cap at 8.25% while graduate students will pay an additional 3.6% in interest with a 9.5% cap. For the upcoming academic year, undergraduates will have a 3.85% interest rate on their federal student loans and graduates will pay 5.4%.

Previously, students loan rates were fixed at 3.4% but they doubled to 6.8% on July 1 and lawmakers anxiously worked to get an agreement before the beginning of the next academic year. The deal was delayed because Democrats wanted rates to remain at 3.4% while Republicans were adamant about connecting student loan rates to the financial market.  Democratic lawmakers will likely support the Senate agreement, which was endorsed by the White House, because of the established caps on interest rates to prevent unreasonable increases.

Students should be relieved to hear that the government has reached a deal to avoid the fixed 6.8% interest rates and to put an end to the seemingly annual uncertainty that surrounded student loan rates.  The uncertainty that surrounds the employment market for college graduates would make it irresponsible for Congress to allow the interest rates on student loans to double overnight and inflict even more financial pain to students. The average student takes on $26,600 in loan debt and a majority of borrowers still carry student loan debt into their 30s.

The costs of higher education continue to rise and the increasing importance that is placed on a college degree in the job market makes it essential for lawmakers to continue to explore ways to make school more affordable. Students who are trying to better themselves with a formal education should not be penalized for the continued inability of Congress to agree on legislation. It is nice to see a bipartisan agreement that will make a tangible impact on the lives of so many students. It is critical for this agreement to pass both chambers of Congress and signed by the President as soon as possible.

As a student with loans, I am nervous about accumulating so much debt with no guarantee of a future income to pay for it.  The threat of doubled interest rates created additional stress for all of the students who rely on these federal student loans to pay our way through school.  In the future, I would like to see Congress take additional steps to confront the rising costs of college and ensure that students are able to get a quality education at an affordable price.

Feature image courtesy of FOX Business

Sameer Aggarwal

Sameer Aggarwal was a founding member of Law Street Media and he is a graduate of The George Washington University. Contact Sameer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Agreement Reached on Student Loan Rates appeared first on Law Street.