Is Choice Cap Too Tight?

The advocates of Wisconsin's Parental School Choice Program see no need for a limit ( or "cap") of 15% of MPS enrollment; Milwaukee Teachers Education Association (MTEA) sees no need for the program at all. As this is written, Governor Doyle and legislative leaders are working on a compromise that would lift the cap to about 22.5% and require choice schools to become accredited in the next few years. Doyle must have seen some of the ubiquitous "Lift the Cap" signs along 51st Blvd, and saw the need to take action before this year's election.

The dispute is really about two different goals: quality of education, and religious instruction. The voucher program was sold to the Wisconsin Legislature as a way for poor children in Milwaukee to get a better education in a private school than they could get in Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS). Religious schools were admitted to the program several years after its inception, and both the Wisconsin and US Supreme Court have ruled that their eligibility for funding is Constitutional.

Wisconsin spends about $95 million on the Program now, and would spend about 50% more with the new higher cap. But is this Progam a good use of tax dollars?

The trouble is that the Program never specified any criteria for the Choice schools to meet. As a result, no one knows if the Choice students are really getting a better education than MPS students. It is certain, however, that crooks and charlatans have opened Choice "schools" where little or no teaching was going on, unqualified "teachers" and administrators were hired, and loads of money were embezzled. About six such enterprises were forced to close, leaving students stranded in mid-semester. Although such travesties could have easily been anticipated, the State imposed only minimum standards for a school to qualify for the voucher.

The time has come to demand verifiable results from these schools. Accreditation should certainly be required, and soon. Even more important is the need for all Choice students to take standardized tests (at least in reading and math) used in public schools, and these tests should be administered by employees of the State Department of Public Instruction (DPI). Any school whose students are performing substantially below the levels of MPS pupils at the same grade should be dropped from the progam. Only then will it be clear that the schools that meet this challenge are at least providing a basic education in exchange for the vouchers. If enough substandard schools are cut from the program, the enrollment cap will be less of a problem.

But even if quality questions could be answered by accreditation and testing, is it right for tax dollars to subsidize religious education? My answer is that virtually any school, whether public or private, inclulcates some sort of general philosophy or "world-view". For example, public schools typically forbid boys from wearing head-coverings (i.e. yarmulkes) and girls from wearing head-scarves (in the Muslim tradition), celebrate Christmas with songs and pageants, and pressure students into reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. These activities embody a philosphical concensus that no longer exists in America.

American society in our time is becoming increasingly "Balkanized" along religious and ethnic lines, and the schools reflect this trend. The Choice Program merely allows parents to choose the ideological framework that governs their children's education, instead of simply accepting the "one size fits all" option of the public schools. Instead of the childrens game "Choose Your Own Adventure", we now have "Choose Your Own Ghetto."

The teachers unions (MTEA and WEAC) object to the Program because the funds to pay for it come from the budget of MPS; MTEA estimates that MPS funding has been cut by about 10% as a result. While the diversion of about 15,000 students from MPS has reduced overcrowding at some schools, it has done little to reduce costs. That is because MPS must still operate the same number of schools with about the same number of staff, despite enrollment reduction. Moreover, the most expensive students (special education, disabled, and disruptive) are not accepted by most Choice Schools, and so are left in MPS. The funding formula has created a conflict between Choice advocates and MPS staff that is tangential to the main issues. This formula should be changed so that the cost is borne primarily by the taxpayers of the entire state.

Mad Muslims

"The people who insult Muhammad are hostages of the Zionists."
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran (1)

"The Danish editor behind the publication of the caricatures said Wednesday that he's trying to co-ordinate with an Iranian paper soliticiting cartoons on the Holocaust.....'we would run the cartoons on the same day'." (2)

As sure as night follows day, the publication of cartoons ridiculing Muhammad in Denmark would inevitably be followed by attempts to blame it on the Jews, which would then spur efforts to seek revenge against the Jews by all concerned.

One of the difficulties of writing political satire (e.g. the Glazerbeam) is that some actual events in the world are so outrageous and absurd that one cannot ridicule them by exaggeration. The quotes above are good examples.

It is ironic that Denmark should be scene of this bizarre travesty, since Denmark was one of the few places in Nazi-occupied Europe in which the local population saved the Jews. A very liberal democracy, Denmark has admitted about 200,000 Muslims since World War II. Until now, the country has avoided international controversy. In the wake of the cartoons, Danish embassies were burned by angry mobs in Beirut and Damascus. Despite violent protests across the Muslim world, the Prime Minister of Denmark has courageously refused to apologize for the offending cartoons.

Why didn't angry Muslims get even by simply publishing nasty cartoons featuring Jesus or Jewish religious figures? The trouble is that Islam considers Jesus a prophet (although not divine, nor even in the same league as Muhammad) and accepts Jewish Biblical figures such as Abraham (Ibrahim) and Moses (Musa) as worthy precursors of Islam. They could ridicule post-Biblical Jews such as Matisyahu, Rabbi Akiva, or Maimonides but cartoons of these men would not be instantly recognizable by the average Muslim reader. Arab and Iranian media do often print caricatures of modern Israelis such as Dayan and Sharon, but they lack the iconic stature among Jews that Muhammad commands among Muslims.

Islam forbids any depiction of Muhammad, even the most respectful, so the cartoons drive Muslims bananas. The violence that has been used against Europeans for this is nothing less than an attempt to impose Sharia (Islamic Law) on the entire world, by whatever means necessary. When Salman Rushdie published The Satanic Verses some years ago, which also satirized Muhammad, the government of Iran offered a prize for killing him. Although he managed to avoid death by spending years in hiding, and the fatwa (edict) to kill him has been cancelled, the Muslim threats seem to have achieved their purpose: how many writers that you know are working on books that ridicule Muhammad?

Maybe you wonder if Christians and Jews would react the same way if their icons were trashed. It is instructive to review three actual incidents of this type:

1. The Brooklyn Art Museum displayed a portrait of the Virgin Mary covered with elephant manure in 1998. Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, a Catholic, cut city funding for the Museum, but there was no violence. (Yes, there were noisy demonstrations, but the Brooklyn Art Museum still stands.)

2. The National Endowment for Arts (NEA) sponsored an exhibit including a photo of a crucifix in a glass of (alleged) urine. In response to Congressional protests, and a changed national political climate, the NEA would probably not exhibit that photo now. But there was no violence, and the NEA still gets federal funding.

3. In a 1978 skit NBC's Saturday Night Live (SNL) joked that if Superman had landed in Germany, instead of fighting for "The American Way" he would have rounded-up the Jews of Europe single-handedly. Maybe some Jews turned off their TV sets, but there were no protests at the ghastly joke, and SNL is still on the air. (And a Jew still produces it.)

People were offended by all three of these incidents, but none led to violence. The Muslims are different; the rise of militant Islam since the 1978 Iranian Revolution has been responsible for nearly every major conflict in the world since then, including most terrorist attacks. If we cannot persuade the Muslims to cherish freedom for themselves, at least we must resist their attempts to limit ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Feb. 12, 2006, page 6A.

(2) Same paper, Feb. 6, page 3A.