SACRAMENTO, CA - It’s quiz time. Identify who recently said the following: “But on the local, state, and national levels, the leadership of the teacher unions has led the resistance against many reform efforts designed to enable parents to choose the most appropriate schools for their children. They influence legislators not only through millions of dollars of direct contributions to political campaigns each year, but also through their own political activities designed to elect legislators who will support them and defeat those who will not.” A Republican politician? A conservative think tank? Try the Roman Catholic bishops of New York State.

In a pastoral letter entitled “Every Parent, Every Child,” the New York bishops make an eloquent and forceful case for school choice and the rights of parents. First, the bishops attack the notion that government should be the sole education provider. They quote Pope John Paul II who has said: “In comparison with the role of all others, [parents’] role is primary; it also irreplaceable and inalienable. It would be wrong for anyone to attempt to usurp that unique responsibility.” The bishops cite top secular authorities as well.

For instance, the U.S. Supreme Court, in its unanimous 1925 decision in Pierce v. Society of Sisters, said that based on a “fundamental theory of liberty” a child “is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.”

If parents and children have this right, then, say the bishops, it naturally follows that “The state, our local communities, and indeed the Church have an obligation to empower and assist all parents in exercising this fundamental right.” The bishops also make a key point: “The purpose of parental choice is to enable parents - all parents - to exercise their inherent right and responsibility to direct the upbringing and education of their children. Even if all schools were high performing, the rationale for a system of parental choice remains.”

The bishops observe that while a compulsory education law ensures that all children receive an education, “it essentially forces countless parents to send their children to schools not of their choosing.”

Many parents, if they had the means, would not choose government schools “because their academic performance is questionable or even failing, they are devoid of the moral standards that are important to parents and, in some cases, they present a clear danger to the health and safety of children and teachers.” Furthermore, it’s in “impoverished and minority communities where, statistically, government schools are most likely to fail the children.”

The bishops, therefore, call upon elected officials to “establish programs such as tax credits, vouchers, and/or scholarships to ensure that all parents have the financial means to select the appropriate school for their children.” To achieve this goal, the bishops urge the “creation of strategic alliances with members of all religious faiths, minority and ethnic communities, the business community, and others to speak with one voice to uphold the rights of parents and to bring about fundamental reform of our education policies.”

The clarity and common sense of the bishops’ arguments should act as a trumpet call that helps topple the wall of Jericho surrounding the government education monopoly.

Lance Izumi is a Senior Fellow in California Studies at the California-based Pacific Research Institute for
Public Policy. He can be reached via email at lizumi@pacificresearch.org.