On Sept. 18, key members of the state Senate and Assembly Education Committees held a special legislative hearing on Proposition 38 to examine the implications of the voucher initiative on the Nov. 7 ballot.
Expert witnesses testified that the ballot measure will harm neighborhood schools, provide no accountability, and cost taxpayers more than $3 billion. They warned lawmakers that Prop. 38 would have devastating effects on public education and allow voucher schools to use public money to support religious and even cult schools.
Only two witnesses testified in support of the voucher proposal.
Presenting its cost and policy analysis of Prop. 38, the non-partisan legislative analyst's office noted, "In the long run, Proposition 38 would cost $3.3 billion dollars for the 650,000 students already in private schools." The analyst's office could only estimate the per-student savings the initiative proponents say the measure would generate. They said the initiative could provoke a "huge range of potential outcomes... A lot of this will be driven by the capacity side," specifically, whether any private or religious schools would have the capacity to take in new students.
At the same time, the analysts said the measure would not require the Legislature to boost per-student funding to the national average, as its proponents claim. The proposition would simply allow lawmakers to approve the increase, something they can do under current law. They pointed out that Prop. 38 - if passed by voters - would require three-quarters of lawmakers to approve any new accountability regulations on voucher schools.
Superintendent of Public Instruction Delaine Eastin testified that California has worked hard to hold children and adults in the education system accountable. If accountability is what people are after, she added, Prop. 38 is the "last thing" they would want. There is no requirement that state standards be followed, no curriculum is set forth and "nothing happens if kids don't do well on tests."
"There is no financial accountability for the $3 billion," she continued. "This measure doesn't even require a college education on the part of the teacher." Even a high school dropout could teach.
Eastin also pointed out that Prop. 38 would allow voucher schools to discriminate on the basis of gender, religion, language and the ability to pay. "Parents don't have choice."
She forecast that "we could have all sorts of fly-by-night schools springing up around the state," if Proposition 38 passes. "Even skinhead schools would be permitted under the measure."
A dozen other witnesses excoriated Prop. 38 for its potential to undermine accountability, derail public education's progress toward excellence, and violate the constitutional separation of church and state.
"If Prop. 38 passes, you're going to hear a loud sucking sound - $3 billion going to pay for kids who already are in private and religious schools," said Carol Kocivar representing the State PTA. "We don't believe you improve public education by taking money away from public schools.... Not a penny will go to pay for things that will improve public education....textbooks, class size reduction, technology, and salaries of qualified teachers in public schools."
Representing the California School Employees Association, David Low cautioned that, under Prop. 38, local schools will lose funding. Low also faulted the measure for its lack of accountability. "Anyone who receives public money should be accountable to the taxpayers, and Prop. 38 doesn't make them accountable."
Len Feldman
