|
 |
|
|
|
|
COVER STORY:
School Vouchers and Religious Schools
February 15, 2002 Episode no. 524
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BOB ABERNETHY: This coming week, the Supreme Court hears arguments in a case that could have a major impact on all church/state relations. At issue is the Cleveland school voucher program. Under it, the state of Ohio gives money to poor families who want to take their children out of troubled public schools and send them to private schools. But, in Cleveland, almost all the nonpublic schools are religious. Does that mean the state is unconstitutionally entangled with religion? Phil Jones reports.
PHIL JONES: As far as Victoria Pope is concerned, the issue before the U.S. Supreme Court is one of quality education for her children. Should she and other parents be able to use taxpayer-funded vouchers to send them to better schools, even if they are parochial?
VICTORIA POPE: Anybody wants their children to go to the best schools. When I go to that school I know if they miss homework they're going to get a detention, and I like that. That holds them accountable. Whereas in the public schools they would fall through the cracks.
JONES: Judith French, who will be presenting the case for the state of Ohio, says the argument for vouchers is simple.
JUDITH FRENCH (Assistant Attorney General, Ohio): It's about choices for parents. Some of them choose religious schools. Some of them choose nonreligious schools. Whatever money ends up going to a religious school for religious education is not made by a decision of the government. It's made by the decision of a parent.
JONES: The Cleveland public school system was recently declared by the Ohio Department of Education to be in a state of "academic emergency." Only about a third of its students graduate from high school. This reinforces Attorney General Betty Montgomery's argument for the voucher program.
BETTY MONTGOMERY (Attorney General, Ohio): It would allow children to break out of a failing system and at the same time be a wake-up call to a reluctant educational system, that you must change.
JONES: But those opposed to government-subsidized vouchers that go to parochial schools argue that it's not choice but separation of church and state that's at issue. Civil rights attorney Avery Friedman:
AVERY FRIEDMAN (Attorney): All the federal court is concerned with is whether the effect of this program created by the legislature winds up providing government entanglement in religious indoctrination.
JONES: The Ohio legislature passed the pilot voucher program back in 1995 after a federal court ordered the state to take over the failing Cleveland public school system. Now there are more than 4,000 students using vouchers, and 99.4 percent of them are enrolled in parochial schools.
In fact, one third of the children were in parochial schools before they got vouchers, because in Cleveland religious schools are about the only alternative to public education.
(to student Amber Pope): Do they make you go to religious class, or can you skip it if you want?
AMBER POPE (Student): No, you've got to be there.
MARVIN POPE (Student): I like St. Francis.
JONES: Why?
MARVIN: Because they teach you to be like Christ.
Ms. FRENCH: It would be an easier case if there weren't very many religious schools in the program. It does not make the program unconstitutional because, again, the parents are deciding that that's what they want for their kids.
JONES: Each class day begins with prayer. At St. Francis Elementary, more than half the students use vouchers. Because there is limited space in the parochial schools, all voucher children are chosen by lottery. Most of them are not Catholic.
|
|
|
|
Tuition checks from the government are made out to the parents, who in turn sign them over to the schools. The children use the same textbooks as the ones used in public schools. But here, the school day is a half hour longer so that religion can be taught.
Sister KAREN SOMERVILLE (Principal, St. Francis Elementary School): But it doesn't stop there. I have to be really honest about that.
JONES: Sister Karen Somerville, principal at St. Francis, is upfront about the school's mission and emphasis.
Sister SOMERVILLE: This is a Catholic school, and the whole premise of our school is based on [the] gospel and teachings of Jesus. That impacts everything that we do.
JONES: Richard DeColibus is president of the Cleveland Teacher's Union.
RICHARD DECOLIBUS (President, Cleveland Teacher's Union): They make it quite clear in their mission statement: their job is to bring the knowledge of Jesus through the various academic areas, or acknowledge the existence and the wondrous works of God. They all say things like that. They don't make a secret of it. That's why most of those parents pick those schools. They like that message. And that's fine. But the taxpayer shouldn't have to pay for it.
Sister SOMERVILLE: Children come to our school because they want a good education, not because they want to become Catholic. We work hard to give a good education and develop their character and teach them good morals. There hasn't been a child that's entered the program that's become Catholic.
Mr. FRIEDMAN: The court isn't going to examine the extent to which people are being converted to a particular faith. They're going to be looking at the issue of whether or not efforts in advancing a particular religion are taking place. That's what the court is going to focus on.
JONES: Thirty years ago, the Supreme Court established a three-part test to determine constitutionality on church/state issues: the program must have a secular purpose; it must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and it must not result in excessive government entanglement in religion.
Ms. FRENCH: The opposition has conceded that there was a secular purpose, that the general assembly didn't have religious purpose in mind, and they've conceded it doesn't entangle the government in any way. We're really arguing about a fact, and whether it has the primary effect of advancing religion. And we say it doesn't.
JONES: This voucher system has been in and out of state and federal courts for years. The Ohio Supreme Court ruled it constitutional, but a federal appeals court ruled it "an impermissible government promotion of religion," and therefore unconstitutional. And even the top law enforcement officer in the state of Ohio -- the Attorney General -- is unusually candid about her concerns.
Ms. MONTGOMERY: It is very important that we not cross the line between separation of church and state.
JONES: But my question was, "Do you think you've gotten awfully close, but not over?"
Ms. MONTGOMERY: I think we have certainly gotten closer to the line. I don't believe we've crossed it.
JONES: If vouchers are upheld, nothing will change for these kids, but if the court says no, people like Victoria Pope fear their children will have to leave the parochial schools.
(to Ms. Pope): Could you afford to send them there without the voucher system?
Ms. POPE: It would be extremely difficult. I don't know how we'd be able to do it.
JONES: And lurking beneath all the arguments is the question of whether poor children should be able to escape bad schools. Should the Supreme Court consider this?
Mr. FRIEDMAN: If the argument of escaping public schools in the ghetto, where poor performance exists, is raised -- and it may very well be, I think -- pure-thinking justices must dismiss that argument as irrelevant.
JONES: This case will be argued on the basis of constitutional law -- not emotions. The issues are simple and straightforward -- have church and state breached the wall of separation? This is expected to be the case that defines church/state relations for decades to come.
For RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY, I'm Phil Jones in Cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
School Choice Info: School Choice News
Links to new stories on the Cleveland voucher case. This informational site is a project of the Black Alliance for Educational Options, a national membership organization that supports parental choice about educational options.
The Heritage Foundation: School Choice 2003
This foundation is "a think tank whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies." Its state profile on Ohio's school choice issues includes background on the Cleveland voucher case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
