The future of the program, the only state-based program of educational assistance for children enrolled in private schools, may be in jeopardy, according to program supporter Senator Mike Foley, a member of the Legislature’s Appropriations Committee. Senator Foley’s support of the Textbook Loan Program was instrumental in protecting it during Appropriations Committee deliberations during the special session.

Aid to K-12 education comprises almost 25% of the state’s budget, with a huge majority of that spending taking the form of state equalization aid to public school districts. This aid was essentially left untouched during the special session. Other education programs that fall into the same "non-equalization aid" budget category as the textbook loan program include school breakfast and school lunch subsidies, early childhood education programs, and funding for high-ability learners programs. It is likely that many of these programs will be scrutinized first in order to lessen the impact of budget cuts on "core" education programs funded by state equalization aid, which also impacts property tax levels in many districts.

In addition to the other education-related cuts mentioned above, another program of interest to the NFCSP that was on the receiving end of budgetary adjustments during the special session is the Attracting Excellence to Teaching Program. The NFCSP has supported the Attracting Excellence to Teaching Program since its introduction two years ago by Senator Nancy Thompson. The program would provide student loans to prospective teachers, with such loans forgiven if the recipient goes on to teach in any Nebraska K-12 school, public or private.

This program, adopted two years ago but never funded, was in line to receive $1.6 million per year from the state lottery beginning July 1, 2003. As a result of a last minute amendment filed by Senator Ron Raikes, Chairman of the Education Committee, the lottery funds allocated to this program will be diverted to the State’s General Fund for at least the next two years.

On June 27, the United States Supreme Court handed down its long-awaited decision (Zelman v. Simmons-Harris) regarding the constitutionality of providing tax-funded tuition vouchers for use in religious private schools. By a 5-4 split, the Court held that the voucher program implemented in Cleveland, Ohio, pursuant to a sweeping school reform law enacted by the Ohio legislature, does not offend the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In so holding, the Court reaffirmed its long-standing principle that a government aid program is not readily subject to challenge under the Establishment Clause if it is neutral with respect to religion and provides assistance directly to a broad class of citizens who, in turn, direct government aid to religious schools wholly as a result of their own genuine and independent private choice. Under such a program, government aid reaches religious institutions only by way of the deliberate choices of numerous individual recipients. The incidental advancement of a religious mission, or the perceived endorsement of a religious message, is reasonably attributable to the individual aid recipients, not the government, whose role ends with the disbursement of benefits.

The program at issue was enacted as part of an effort by the Ohio legislature to address a chronically failing public school system in Cleveland. The City’s school system had been taken over by the state pursuant to federal court order in 1995. Serving 75,000 students, mostly from low-income and minority families, the school

district had failed to meet any of the 18 state standards for minimal acceptable performance. Only 1 in 10 ninth graders could pass a basic proficiency examination, and students at all levels performed at a dismal rate compared with students in other Ohio public schools. More than two-thirds of high school students either dropped or failed out before graduation. As a result, the Ohio legislature enacted several initiatives, including the Pilot Project Scholarship Program.

The program provides two basic kinds of assistance, tuition aid for students whose parents choose to send their children to another participating public or private school, and tutoring aid for the children whose parents choose to continue enrolling their children in the Cleveland public schools. The tuition aid for a parent choosing to enroll his or her child in a private school located within the school district boundaries was limited to $2,250. For each child enrolled in a public school in an adjacent school district, the adjacent suburban school district received the $2,250 tuition aid on top of the per pupil state funding attributable to each additional student, resulting in the public schools receiving between $4,750 and $6,544 in state funding per program student. In addition, students could enroll in community (charter) schools or magnet schools located within the Cleveland school district. These schools received $4,518 and $7,746 per program student, respectively. Because all of the surrounding suburban public school districts refused to participate in the program, even with the incentive of extra funding, the majority of students receiving tuition aid enrolled in private, predominantly Catholic schools.

In rejecting the Establishment Clause challenge to the program, the Court noted that the lesser value of the tuition aid payable to parents choosing a private school obviously provided no financial incentive for the parents to choose a religious school, and therefore did not have the impermissible effect of advancing religion. The program creates financial disincentives for religious schools, with private schools receiving only one-half the government assistance given to community schools and one-third the assistance given to magnet schools. Adjacent public schools, should any accept program students, are also eligible to receive two to three times the state funding of a private religious school. Families too have a financial disincentive to choose a private religious school over other schools, because parents that choose to participate in the scholarship program and then enroll their children in a private school (religious or nonreligious) must co-pay a portion of the tuition. Families that choose a community school, magnet school, or traditional public school pay nothing.

The immediate impact of the Court’s decision upon Nebraska will be minimal as Nebraska does not currently offer any type of tax-funded K-12 scholarship program. Also, since most Nebraska public schools would not be considered dismal failures like the Cleveland public schools, the same incentive for the Nebraska Unicameral to enact a similar measure is not currently present. Moreover, Nebraska law already

offers parents the opportunity to enroll their children in adjacent public school districts, with any per-pupil state-aid attributable to the student following the student to the new school district. Finally, the public school establishment is adamantly opposed to any tax-funded support of private-school options for parents and children, and will vigorously oppose any effort to enact a voucher program in Nebraska.

Though vouchers may not be on the immediate horizon for Nebraska parents desiring a private-school education for their children, the Court’s decision is important in several respects. First, it further clarifies and reinforces the Supreme Court’s position with respect to state-sponsored school choice measures, and provides guidance on how such legislation must be drafted to avoid constitutional landmines. Second, the decision will likely invigorate school choice efforts in many states, including Nebraska, as the debate will now focus on the merits of proposed school choice programs instead of the red-herring of constitutional uncertainty. Third, and most important, it reinforces the fundamental precept that parents, not government entities, are in charge of directing their children’s education, and that the role of government is to play a supporting role by ensuring equal opportunity for all parents to obtain a quality education for their children in the schools they deem best.

The Court’s decision provides encouragement to achieve a more comprehensive model of school choice beyond the limited public school choice option currently available. Whether that comprehensive school choice model would take the form of tuition vouchers, tuition tax credits, scholarship tax credits, or some other mechanism, the goal remains the same. Parents should be able to choose the school that they think will provide the best education for their children, including private and parochial schools, without incurring a significant additional financial burden beyond the payment of the taxes they already pay to support K-12 education in the state. Currently, parents who are unable to assume the added financial burden are often stymied in their ability to exercise their fundamental parental right to direct their children’s education. Now that the Court has definitively cleared away the last vestige of constitutional smoke relied upon by opponents of school choice, it is up to state legislators and citizens alike to work toward an educational finance system that respects and supports every parents’ right to direct their children’s education.

As reported in the March issue of Parent Advocate, the NFCSP undertook efforts to have the proposed teacher post-graduate tuition reimbursement program, introduced by Senator Deb Suttle (LB 880), amended to include private/parochial school teachers. However, time ran out before the proposal ever found its way onto the General File agenda. Since this was the second session of the Ninety-Seventh Legislature, any bill not passed before the end of the session automatically died. If the tuition reim-bursement proposal is reintroduced at the beginning of the 2003 session, NFCSP will continue working for the equitable inclusion of all teachers. q

Three Omaha Creighton Prep seniors, Simon Charlow, Matthew Gonderinger, and Andrew Hoffmann, were selected by the Omaha World Herald to be named to the 2002 Nebraska Regional All Academic First Team. Catholic school seniors selected to the All Academic Second Team were Nathan Charlow, Omaha Creighton Prep, Margaret Ann Gorski, Omaha Marian, Kathryn Gutschenritter and Kevin Smith, North Platte St. Patrick, and Eileen Sullivan, Omaha Mercy. To be nominated, the student had to be one of the two top-ranked students in his/her school, or have a score of 32 or better on the ACT or a 1390 or better SAT score. 703 students were nominated, and 36 were selected to the Academic First Team and 36 were selected for the Academic Second Team.

The Peter Kewit Foundation awarded 100 Nebraska high school seniors a Distinguished Scholar award. Students in the top 10 percent of their graduating class were eligible, and 1000 applied. Catholic school students receiving the award were Jenny M. Grose, Lincoln Pius X, and Diane L. Rossbach, Omaha Marian.

Lincoln Pius X sophomore and speech novice, Noelle Bohaty ranked in the top 12 nationally for the event of Declamation at the National Catholic Forensic League contest in Pittsburg, PA held in May. Previous Nebraska public and private school contestants have only reached as high as the top 48. q