From: albeaj@jima.b17d.ingr.com (Jim Albea)
Subject:  Libs should oppose vouchers
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:31:15 GMT

I ran for School Board as a Libertarian in the recent election.  I 
took the "purest" approach to education in opposition to the official 
Libertarian position.  The purest approach, in short, states that 
there should be a separation of Education and State in much the 
same way that Church and State are separated today.  The "official" 
position supports tax exemptions and vouchers as an "interim" measure.  
Here are some of the reasons why I took that position:

                 Tax exemptions/ vouchers:

There are many potential problems with exemption approach but the
main problem is that once in place, these exemptions could be 
politically easily converted into vouchers.  This would be death 
knell for private and free education in America.  The moment a 
*single* dollar of voucher money enters a school, then the 
institution becomes a "recipient".  Any recipient institutions 
come under tight governmental control.  The recent Rust vs Sullivan
case is a good example.  The federal government ruled that any family
planning clinics that received federal money could not mention abortion
as a family planning option.  The supreme court *re-affirmed* that the 
federal government may restrict free speech (or violate any other 
constitutional governmental limitation) in any institution that 
receives federal money.  After all, Americans are still free to 
seek out institutions that have not been poisoned with federal 
dollars.  Establishment of vouchers would mean that the "poisoning" 
of education would be total.

In 1952 the Commission on Financing Higher Education determined: 

 "We are convinced that it would be fatal were federal support to
  be substantially extended.  Power means control. Diversity
  disappears, as universities and colleges would follow the order
  of one central institution, and the freedom of higher education
  would be lost."

The findings of this commission were ignored.  Essentially all of
higher education has come under federal "support".  This support is
the method by which affirmative action, hiring quotas, politically
expedient research, and political correctness not to mention skyrocketing
inflation have have been vested upon supposedly private institutions. 
As libertarians we should do whatever we can to keep whats left 
of private education from getting caught in this web.


              State apparatus power base is too strong.

It should be noted in all of this that education is the number one 
expenditure for the combined governmental apparatus of Federal, State, 
and Local.  Also, the teachers unions and educational bureaucracy are 
the largest the most politically motivated power block in the country.  
It is politically naive to think that any radical changes to the system 
will not be turned to their advantage.  This should satisfy those who
argue for magical wording of voucher proposals.


                  Bureaucratize a huge Bureaucracy

The system will be much more complicated than it is now which will
mean that the size of the bureaucracy needed to manage it will have
to be even larger.


                     Creating Dependency groups

Today, parents other than being taxpayers and providers of the clients
to the system, are mostly out of the process.  Vouchers would turn parents
into yet another vocal government dependency group.  Their primary
focus would be to increase the voucher amount, under pressure from
institutions and bureaucracy who would need ever increasing funds to
keep up with the inflation caused by ever increasing funds.


                       Interim...  How?

I do not see how a voucher system evolves to a system of freedom.
What political forces would drive the move?  From what quarter and
for what reasons does a movement arise to eliminate the voucher?
Certainly not the educational establishment which would be firmly 
in control of the system and benefiting greatly from it.  Certainly 
not the voucher created schools.  Certainly not parents who are 
more likely to be considering the voucher as an Entitlement; 
yea even a Right.  Certainly not from the general population who
would, viewing the probable slight increases in performance from
the system, be more inclined to leave it alone.  Instead of vouchers
being an interim to the free market I see vouchers as being an
interim to total state control of education.  Eventually the
do-gooding, central planning, elitest, social engineers are going
to figure this out and by then it may be too late to stop this
thing which we helped start.


The following is my re-write of the official position:

 (taken from Bergland's "Libertarianism in One Lesson")

SEPARATION OF EDUCATION AND STATE

There is no proper role for government in education. One of the most valuable
contributions to a peaceful and free society was made by the founders of this
country when, in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, they established
the principle of separation of church and state. They were aware of centuries of
religious war and persecution that resulted from attempts to establish state
religions and to suppress dissenting views. *The right to freedom in the area
of intellectual development and personal philosophy is fully as important as
freedom of religion, and for the same reasons!* Thus, there should be a
separation of education and state just as there is a separation of church
and state.

  (the following replaces lots of stuff on on credits and vouchers)

Interim measures such as vouchers and tax credits will eventually bring 
all education under governmental control and therefore should be opposed.  
The Libertarian should seek ways to strengthen private institutions 
using methods that are completely outside of direct governmental financing 
schemes.  This is the difficult path where there are no radical changes 
and wondrous overnight transformations.  But this is the only way to 
assure that freedom in education will be preserved and that eventually 
education and state separation will be possible.

-- 
Jim Albea                     albeaj@jima.b17d.ingr.com

  "Whatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that
may not, the act that no man may commit against others and no man may
sanction or forgive.  So long as men desire to live together, no man may
_initiate_ - do you hear me? no man may _start_ - the use of physical
force against others."                         Ayn Rand  _Atlas Shrugged_