Should Congress give vouchers to D.C. school kids?

Cleveland, Ohio, has long rivaled Washington, D.C., in running some of the worst public schools in America.

By 1995, it got so bad an activist federal judge essentially fired the Cleveland school district and placed the city's public schools under direct control of the state government, which, in turn, enacted a voucher program giving Cleveland students up to $2,250 in state aid to re-enroll in a participating private school of their parents' choosing.

To participate in the program, private schools had to agree not to discriminate on the basis of race, religion or ethnic background and not to "advocate or foster unlawful behavior or teach hatred of any person or group on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin or religion."

Eighty two percent of the schools that participated were religious, and 96% of students receiving vouchers chose to attend those religious schools.

Not surprisingly, a liberal federal judge and then a panel of liberal appellate court judges ruled that this program violated the 1st Amendment to the Constitution-as "incorporated" into state law by the 14th Amendment, according to earlier Supreme Court rulings. By enacting school choice, these judges basically argued, Ohio had established an official state religion.

On June 27, the Supreme Court reversed these absurd lower court rulings. The court divided 5 to 4, with Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy , joining the three conservatives. William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Rehnquist delivered the court's opinion, but Thomas delivered a more poignant argument in concurrence, underscoring the hypocrisy of liberals in distorting the 14th Amendment. "While the romanticized ideal of universal public education resonates with the cognoscenti who oppose vouchers," he said, "poor urban families just want the best education for their children, who will certainly need it to function in our high-tech and advanced society."

In 1998, Congress passed a voucher bill for D.C. schools, acting under its constitutional authority to govern the federal city. President Clinton vetoed that bill. Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D.-Calif.-who, as noted below, tells HUMAN EVENTS she is "not able to talk about" the issue " just off the cuff'-voted against that 1998 bill.

How would members vote on the issue now? HUMAN EVENTS Assistant Editor David Freddoso went to Capitol Hill to find out.

Given the recent Supreme Court decision on the constitutionality of school vouchers for private and religious schools, should Congress enact legislation granting vouchers to D.C. schoolchildren?

REP. CHRIS COX (R.-CALIF.): I've long supported scholarships of this type for D.C. students. Congress is the mayor under the Constitution, and it's high time in the nation's worst, failing school system that we give kids and parents a choice.

Given the recent Supreme Court decision that school vouchers are constitutional for private and religious schools, should Congress enact legislation to give D.C. schoolchildren vouchers?

SEN. MARK DAYTON (D.-MINN.): I'd have to think about it. It's the first time anybody's asked me that question. I don't know. I'll think about it.

Given the recent Supreme Court decision that school vouchers are constitutional for private and religious schools, should Congress enact legislation giving vouchers to D.C. schoolchildren?

SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY (R.-IOWA.): I have supported that. And the reason I've supported it is because, first of all, I thought it was a good demonstration project for the entire nation, number one. Number two, Congress has direct responsibility for kids [in the District]. And then I found interest by a lot of the parents of schoolchildren in the District because there was a private entrepreneur who was offering to have scholarships for kids who wanted to go to another school because they felt like they were locked in to not a very good public school system. And there were a thousand such scholarships offered, and there were 9,000 applicants for the 1,000. This told me that there was a public feeling here in Washington, D.C., that parents just had to have an alternative....

I think the church-state arguments are very weak now, considering the Supreme Court decision. But I would think that the Supreme Court decision is really going to open up opportunities for states. And I think when it comes to public education or any sort of K-12 education ... it's better to have 50 different policies than one national policy.

Given the recent decision by the Supreme Court that school vouchers for private and religious schools are constitutional, should Congress enact legislation to give D.C. schoolchildren vouchers?

REP. MELISSA HART (R.-PA.): Yes.

Given the recent Supreme.Court's recent ruling that school vouchers are constitutional for private and religious schools, should Congress enact legislation giving D.C. schoolchildren vouchers?

REP. J. D. HAYWORTH (R.-ARIZ.): Without a doubt. District of Columbia schoolchildren need to have equal opportunity in education. We'd be giving D.C. school kids and their parents the same opportunities that a lot of U.S. senators, some former Presidents and Vice Presidents have had: to send their kids to the best schools they can go to. That's what we need to do here. We need to empower a child's first teachers--the parents-with the opportunity to send their kids to the school that they decide is the best And really, we're offering by this equal opportunity in education.