Voucher Plans

Under a basic voucher proposal, as proposed by Milton Friedman in the mid-twentieth century, the per-pupil amount of state aid for public school students would be made available for parents to use to send their child to a private or public school of their choice. Families could supplement the voucher for their children to attend a private school that charges more for tuition than the voucher amount. A number of variations on the basic plan are possible, such as restricting participation in the voucher program to those private schools that agree to limit the copay amount charged to parents. Also, the vouchers can be made available only to specific student populations, such as children with disabilities, economically disadvantaged students, or those attending public schools rated as deficient on various criteria.

Voucher systems have been discussed in the educational literature for several decades, and there was a brief, federally supported voucher experiment in the 1970s, but the Alum Rock School District, in California, was the only demonstration site. Several New England states, however, have had de facto voucher systems for years, because they authorize school districts that cannot support high schools to provide a stipend for resident high school students to attend neighboring public high schools or nonreligious private schools. Other than such tuition reimbursement plans, no significant voucher experiments were implemented in the United States until the 1990s. In 1999, Florida was the first state to adopt a statewide voucher system, and this program targeted only students attending public schools rated as deficient. Publicly funded voucher programs for disadvantaged youth also are operating in Cleveland, Milwaukee, and Washington, D.C.

Vouchers are getting renewed attention as a strategy to give families more educational choices. Indeed, one of the central themes of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 is to increase educational options for students attending public schools that are not making adequate yearly progress toward student performance objectives.

In a significant 2002 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris held that voucher programs including sectarian schools do not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. With the First Amendment barrier eliminated, the legality of voucher plans will be decided on the basis of state law. In 2004, the Supreme Court ruled in Locke v. Davey that although the Establishment Clause permits states to fund certain services in sectarian institutions, state law might prohibit the use of public funds for religious purposes. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause demands that religious and secular purposes be treated the same in distributing government benefits (e.g., college scholarships) and allowed states to require greater separation of church and state than mandated by the Establishment Clause.

Thirty-six states have constitutional provisions that prohibit public support of sectarian schools, and voucher plans seem destined to generate litigation based on these state provisions. A Florida court found that state funds could not be used to support a voucher plan that allowed students to attend religious schools. Florida also has enacted a tuition tax credit program allowing a state tax break for donations to support private school tuition, and the Arizona Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of a similar Arizona program. However, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that the federal Tax Injunction Act does not bar a federal suit claiming that the Arizona program abridges the Establishment Clause, so the constitutionality of this tax benefit for private school tuition remains unresolved.

...