Lynn v. Sekulow

Volunteering Works, Vouchers Don't

Monday August 3, 2009

Jay,

I think it's great that so many Americans want to volunteer for good causes, and I have no problem that many want to work with faith-based groups. Americans can volunteer for and/or donate to the charity of their choice; the government, however, cannot.

The First Amendment makes it clear that public funds should never go toward religious activities. Yet, certain people want to keep pushing programs that will do just that. One of those programs is happening right here in our backyard, and I would like to know how anyone can even justify it.  

The program I'm talking about is the "D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program," which thanks to a few select senators, may be reauthorized, despite the fact that it is unconstitutional and completely unsuccessful.

Today, the Washington Post ran an editorial called "Children First," one of possibly a dozen op-eds the newspaper has written in support of D.C. school vouchers. The Post said, "The program has more applicants than slots; rigorous study has shown significant improvements in student reading, and parents are happy that their children are in schools that are safer and of better quality." 

I don't know where the Post  is getting these facts because they are far from accurate. It's this type of propaganda that keeps alive this program that takes federal taxpayer dollars, gives them to religious schools that are free to discriminate in hiring, discriminate in admissions and indoctrinate children in the tenets of one faith, while leaving the D.C. public school system to suffer. 

Besides, we know for certain that this voucher program has not done what it set out to do. All three congressionally mandated Department of Education studies of the D.C. voucher program have shown that the program has had no effect on the academic achievement of the target students and no effect on students overall in math. And students in the voucher program actually have less access to key services  -- such as English as a Second Language program, learning support, special needs programs and counselors -- than students in D.C.'s public schools.  (See results of the three studies here, here and here.)

Even long-time advocates of vouchers see that voucher programs are failures. An article in the April 2008 issue of Washington Monthly concluded that "some stalwart advocates of vouchers have either repudiated the idea entirely or considerably tempered their enthusiasm for it." The article cited former Milwaukee (which had one of the first voucher programs in the country) superintendent Howard Fuller, who admitted, "It hasn't worked like we thought it would in theory."

No, it definitely has not.

So Jay, don't you agree it's time for people to  face the facts of this failure, put this whole voucher business to rest and finally grant quality public education to every child?

To subscribe to "Lynn v. Sekulow" click here.

Advertisement
Comments
Your Name
August 9, 2009 11:27 PM

Taylor Anne was what I was going to name my daughter, she would have been beautiful. Too bad they erased her.

Taylor Anne

Your Name
August 9, 2009 11:30 PM

Beating people down is based in fear.

Cara Floyd

Boris
August 9, 2009 11:50 PM

Your Name
August 9, 2009 11:27 PM
Taylor Anne was what I was going to name my daughter, she would have been beautiful. Too bad they erased her.
Taylor Anne

Boris says: Who erased Taylor Anne exactly and why? What are you talking about? Who is Pippy? You remind me of Tony Perkins talking to his dead mother in "Psycho."

Your Name
August 10, 2009 10:49 PM

Well I suppose if you don't like to face the fact that there are so many problems in the world and people are always trying to hurt others in some way or fashion, you might want an escape either through a book, a movie, a fictional character, or some other form of escape instead of a bottle of boose or some other form of unhealthy behavior. Sometimes it is good to just vent some of your ideals and frustations, instead of taking it out in unhealthy ways, using a character to possibly put forth some of your ideas or views or maybe bring up subject matter for whatever reason that is. Like I wrote before, I am entertaining myself, possibly bringing parts of my personality or things I enjoyed in life as a kid , basically sharing parts of me. Not that everybody has to read or react to any of these blogs.

I always liked Pippy growing up as a kid. A very bright girl with a witty personality. Her striped socks and her red hair. It seemed that she entertained herseld because there weren't people around to love her. I found her humerous and unique. (basically funny)
Taylor Anne was a name I picked out for my daughter that I never had. As far as she being erased, well she is back now. They do erase children you know, Boris. One at a time with an abortion. Yes they are boys and girls. I had a boy instead named Nicholas. I had recently watched the O.J. Simpson trial and I saw myself in Nicole. Something about her, the way she looked, the abuse she receive the ferror in her voice. So Nicholas was pretty close to the name of Nicole. So I chose Nicholas.

Cara

Boris
August 11, 2009 12:20 AM

Okay I get it. You're nuts. I thought so. Everybody does.

Read All Comments

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Lynn v. Sekulow

About Lynn v. Sekulow

Lynn v. Sekulow is an ongoing debate blog--a blogalogue--about how big (or little) a role faith and religion should play in American politics and government, featuring the two leading voices of the church/state battle: American Center for Law & Justice Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow and Americans United for Separation of Church and State Executive Director Rev. Barry W. Lynn.

Please note that in discussing political issues, candidates’ positions and political party statements, the Rev. Barry Lynn and Jay Sekulow are offering analysis in their individual capacities as lawyers and commentators. They are not speaking on behalf of Americans United for Separation for Church and State or for the American Center for Law & Justice. Those organizations do not endorse or oppose candidates for public office. Nothing contained in this dialogue should be construed as the positions of the respective organizations.

About the Authors

Rev. Barry W. Lynn
Executive Director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a nonprofit educational organization that defends religious liberty by opposing government interference in religion
» Posts by Rev. Barry W. Lynn
Jay Sekulow
Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ), a law firm and educational organization focused on protecting religious freedom, American families, and human life.
» Posts by Jay Sekulow
More »

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.