I don’t know the details of how the voucher program as contemplated in Indiana will work, so this is an honest question. Will vouchers be available for kids and families already going to private schools? In other words, will we be subsidizing their current behavior. And, if so, is this expected to be a significant expense of the voucher program?
The idea of vouchers for kids trapped in a dying school has some resonance. The idea of spending extra money on kids and families already willing and able to avoid public schools doesn’t.
Why not have vouchers flow in both directions. then we would have a complete “free market’ education system. Example, a student does not do the work and fails all of their classes. the public school then gives that student a voucher and says here you go find a school that will take you. Kind of like being fired from the job!!
In my reading of HB 1003, which is currently the voucher vehicle, parents who currently enroll students in private schools are not eligible.
From the bill:
Sec. 4.5. “Eligible individual” refers to
an individual who:
(1) has legal settlement in Indiana;
(2) is at least five (5) years of age and less than twenty-two (22) years of age on the date
in the school year specified in IC 20-33-2-7;
(3) either has been or is currently enrolled in an accredited school;
(4) is a member of a household with an annual income of not more than two hundred
fifty percent (250%) of the amount required for the individual to qualify for the federal
free or reduced price lunch program; and
(5) either:
(A) was enrolled in a school corporation that did not charge the individual transfer
tuition for at least two (2) semesters immediately preceding the first semester for which the
individual receives a choice scholarship under IC 20-51-4; or
(B) received a choice scholarship under IC 20-51-4 in a preceding school year,
including a school year that does not immediately precede a school year in which the
individual receives a choice scholarship under IC 20-51-4.
This portion:
A) was enrolled in a school corporation that did not charge the individual transfer
tuition for at least two (2) semesters immediately preceding the first semester for which the
individual receives a choice scholarship under IC 20-51-4
points to a child who has to be enrolled in public school for the 2 semesters before receiving the scholarship.
This section:
(B) received a choice scholarship under IC 20-51-4 in a preceding school year,
means (to me) once you are in the scholarship system, you continue to stay in the scholarship system as long as you please.
Market forces won’t work too well (I don’t think) unless all of the competing schools are bound by the same constraints – obligated to take all of the same students, same contraints on transportation, same special ed requirements, same constraints on raising tuition. If one school is required to compete with one arm tied behind its back, it won’t be a fair fight.
I’ve said it before, but I see market forces in school competition failing so long as we are also committed to providing a public education to every citizen. That’s a laudable approach – and one I support – but it’s not a market-based approach.
Thanks for the information Paddy. Any idea how it addresses the issue for the future? For kids just entering the school system? (So much easier to ask than to actually do the research myself.)
No info on how it affects kids new to the system, unless you use the above limitations.
Using that if a parent wanted the voucher, the kid new to the system has to go to 2 semesters of public school.
Of course, as it is written, a private school could possibly not charge “transfer tuition” for the first year of schooling of the new to the system kid. However, I am just throwing crap out at this point.
Simply another case of people authoring bills without actually thinking about anything other than their desired result.
Also, Doug is spot on with the free market analysis.
Doug, you point to the part of the bill that I think is clearly unconstitutional. You can’t treat poor people differently just because some of them have already paid to escape private schools. The bill needs to treat all impoverished people the same.
The “other’ – whether vouchers violates the federal Establishment Clause or Indiana’s version of it – I would definitely answer in the negative. We have a long history of provinding scholarships to people and allowing those to be used at religious colleges or universities.
If, constitutionally, we are required to choose between subsidizing those who are currently willing and able to pay for private school or not having a voucher program at all; I guess I’d say we have to skip it. We have heard over and over again how we don’t have money for anything additional right now.
” . . . we are required to choose between subsidizing those who are currently willing and able to pay for private school or not having a voucher program at all; ”
Taxpayers are currently subsidizing all students.
Vouchers simply allow parents to choose their children’s education provider just as they choose their children’s health care provider.
New pic? Very nice!