Then those schools should be under the same rules as public schools and under the same school boards as public schools.
14 States Have School Choice Voucher Programs
- Thread starter LuteHawk
- Start date
Well...most private school have a testing requirement to get into them because they are subject to accreditation and don't have those resources.
So when that subsidy comes out of the parents' tax payment, who pays for the decrease in state revenue or how is the decrease covered.
Not necessarily, inasmuch as the public school has also reduced a unit of its costs.
Your costs may vary, of course. Here in Arlington, VA, the FY 2020 per pupil spend was 19,921.
Then you aren't included in what I said. Which was "100% of those that do support forgiving debt".
Exactly. And it wouldn't be hard to prove in a court of law either.
You’re saying they additional tuition they spend and can write off on their taxes? Like college? Well, that amount of taxes they are avoiding as a result are far more than offset by the amount they don’t get and is absorbed by the public schools.
Example, Tuition costs $10K, they get a $5K voucher then pay and write off the additional $5K and don’t have to pay taxes on that, say maybe $1500. Well, they only got $5K of the $7K so the $2K plus all local (additional $5K in CR) stays in the public fund unused by them. So they forfeited the use of $7K which more than offsets any lost revenue for the state.
The separation of church and state issue was tried in the Indiana supreme court a decade ago and vouchers were allowed.
I think it is everyone’s responsibility to fund public schools, whether you have children or not and whether they go to public or private schools or not.
Just because the public might see schools as bloated doesn’t mean it’s true.
So the only option is to go against the 1st amendment and subsidize even private institutions with tax revenue.
It's the federal courts that matter here.
A state's options are basically as follows:
1. No voucher program (ie, work to improve your public schools).
2. Program that allows for choice/transfers among public systems/schools (eg, from an underperforming public school, or where a local jurisdiction is small enough that it can't support its own).
3. Voucher program for private schools, that does not preclude use in religious private schools if allowing use in nonreligious private schools. (This is the maine case that Scotus will decide this term)
What a state can't really do is establish a voucher program usable in private schools, but not religious private schools.
Well, it's not against the first amendment, but at the end of the day, that's not the only option at all. A state can simply work to improve its public schools, or per above, could create school choice options within the public system. But if it establishes a voucher program useable for private schools, it can't discriminate against religious private schools.
Carson v. Makin - SCOTUSblog
Independent News and Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court
Last edited:
This will be a direct reduction of the tax bill.
Senate Study Bill 3080, which would create a private scholarship program, would allow up to 10,000 K-12 students in Iowa to obtain a scholarship of about $5,200 to attend another school — religious, private, charter or home-school.
This is $52,000,000 coming directly from the state. Are you telling me that it won't affect public school funding?
If my internet research is to be believed, IA's public education budget is $3.5B for K-12. So while the literal answer to your question is "of course it would," the more realistic answer may be "not in any material way" since we're talking about 1.4% of a massive budget, and which would correspond to a reduction in the number of students of slightly more than 2%. So in theory, the actual answer might be "they'll end up with more to spend per student"
We should get rid Obamacare and not even think of single payer, then I guess. You know...since subsidizing private institutions is so bad.
Yes, but will the costs of operating public schools actually go down as their revenue streams may? If you remove one student from a classroom will you dock a teacher's pay by that proportion. I understand using one less book but will you cut back on lighting and heating?
That's why I called it the insurance subsidy program. Of course that has nothing to do with the separation of church and state.
Lets be honest. This will cost the state more money, lead to lower test scores, and put kids even further behind. Anybody who thinks that this will be beneficial to kids is an idiot.
Neither does this have anything to do with church and state. There are plenty of non-religious private schools that money can go to.
To be sure, there are certain costs that are fixed costs that are a harder nut to crack. (But in some cases may be crackable - eg, if an underperforming school loses enough students to vouchers, it may suggest consolidation of the fixed costs.) But there are certainly variable costs as well (eg, short of actually closing or consolidating a school, it may be that staffing ratios are such that you can cut aides or admin staff)
Last edited:
So you want to discriminate against the religious schools? I believe someone told me earlier they couldn't do that, but what do I know. Like I have said, make them take everybody, make them non-profit, allow the school board to have oversight, go ahead.
$52M is a lot, BUT those 10K students also leave behind ~$70M (assuming ~$12K per student) to the public schools and won’t be a burden to it. PLUS, that’s 10K fewer students that need to be accounted for in the public schools. Like I said, some could be absorbed into the existing structure, but not all. See my CR Xavier example.
We know why so many of our schools fail...an overabundant amount of children who live in poverty in them. It's not complicated.
It just seems like it would increase the overall tax burden and shift the tax burden from property tax revenue to income tax revenue.
You seriously don't see public money going to a religious school as an "establishment of religion"? And before you start, states can't pass laws that violate the Constitution so the idea that it isn't the federal govt doing it is completely immaterial.
It’s called CHOICE. Which means there is no religion being established by the government and therefore not infringing on the concept of Church and State as far as the first amendment is concerned.
Maybe, but this case law exists and as pointed out earlier in the thread that matters.
Are you decreasing the size of the schools? Are you decreasing the teacher's pay? Are you decreasing the administration? Basically, all you decrease is 5200 books for each class.
Like I have said, make them take everybody, make them non-profit, allow the school board to have oversight, go ahead.
I have no idea what you're arguing. Are you saying we can take our tax dollars and rather than allowing them to be used for the general welfare, we can use them for our own welfare? I want a voucher for defense...the military doesn't need my money and they waste what they do have. I can use it to fund my own personal defense force. It's called CHOICE.
You are decreasing the size of public schools, with fewer teachers, fewer facilities, less environmentals, etc. by essentially outsourcing education to others for less than half of what the public pays.
I will not pretend to be able to answer that one, as it's a really big sausage making exercise.
I will say this though - I do not think vouchers are a broad based model for education, but rather a limited measure that should be explored to address smaller scale problems in underperforming schools. What you don't want is for them to simply be a subsidy for rich families' private tuition.
5200 students. How many fewer teachers, fewer facilities will you have? If they all came out of school district or 10 of the smallest districts, you will decrease those items. But they won't.
Like I have said, make them take everybody, make them non-profit, allow the school board to have oversight, go ahead.
