From: cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Subject: Re: liberal v. conservative
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Reply-To: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Date: 20 Aug 92 14:54:34 GMT

Tom Cavender writes
> Perhaps you would like to enumerate "The Education
> President"'s "vision" for American education.  One
> would only hope that it's better than his "vision" for
> American business and the economy! :->

It is contained in his "Education 2000" program which was posted recently to  
one of the relevant newsgroups, so I won't bother doing so again. And while  
this is not necessarily a brilliant document, it _does_ contain what has to be  
the centerpiece of any meaningful reform - choice. Hence the Democratic party  
with it anti-choice allies and control of both houses of congress saw itself  
forced to stop any attempt to do anything about it. At least in this case  
Bushes excuse for not achieving very much does hold water.

> Seriously, a system of vouchers is yet another ploy to
> appease Pat "Ayatollah" Robertson and his band of
> crazies.  It plays heavily toward sectarian schools that
> have been dominated by fundamentalists and
> charismatics.

I'm afraid you are quite mistaken. The idea of School Choice did not come from  
the traditionalist right, but from the libertarian wing of the conservative  
movement and as you know atheism is rather common among those. The earliest  
mention I know of the idea of vouchers is in Friedmans Capitalism and Freedom  
more than 20 years ago and since then he (who is BTW jewish) and others like  
him have lead the fight for Choice. No doubt about it - many religious schools  
would benefit from this and many traditionalists will support it because of  
that, but to claim that this is the source for the idea of School Choice and  
the support of it is ludicrous.

> And isn't it altogether possible that vouchers would be
> contrary to the Establishment Clause of the First
> Amendment?  After all, wouldn't the government be
> funding religious instruction?  I remember a case from
> the forties or fifties (can't remember the name of the
> case) in which the Supreme Court decided that it was o.k.
> to provide transportation to private schools since the
> money didn't directly go to religious instruction, and
> it served a higher, secular purpose (education).  The
> voucher program a the government to fund (through the
> backdoor) religious instruction. 

Again I'm quite afraid you are mistaken. The correct parallel is the GI bill  
which indeed did pass in that time frame. (Hence the title 'GI bill for  
americas children' for one of the current Choice initiatives.) It allowed GIs  
to attend any university of their choice including religious universities and  
be finanically supported by the federal government. This was upheld as the  
support was for children, not for religion par se. To prohibit the use of  
vouchers in religious schools makes about as much sense as to withhold SS  
payments to known catholics as they might donate some of it to their churches.

> The emphasis ought to be on improving public education
> and preserving the First Amendment, rather than
> supporting the Religious Right. 

Public education will not be improved as long as it is under the total control  
of the current educational establishment. The only feasible way to bring it  
under control is School Choice.

	Carl Edman
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc