Francis on School Choice

340. Because of its significance and scope, this non-transferable right (of parents to serve as first and primary educators), which entails an obligation and expresses the freedom of the family in the realm of education, must be firmly guaranteed by the state. Hence, government, which is charged with protecting and defending the freedoms of citizens, in keeping with distributive justice, must spend public aid—which derives from taxes from all citizens—in such a manner that all parents, regardless of their social condition, may choose, according to their conscience, from within the wide range of educational options, the schools suited to their children. This is the fundamental value and the juridical nature that grounds aid to schools. Therefore, no educational sector, not even the state itself, may claim for itself the power to bestow on itself privilege and exclusivity for the education of the very poor, without thereby undermining important rights. From the concluding document for the CELAM Conference at Aparecida, principle author Cardinal Bergoglio.

There you have it, from the man who has become pope. In retaining for itself exclusive taxpayer funding for education, and denying that funding for very poor parents who would prefer another option, the state violates a fundamental human right.

Read Section 10.2 Education as Public Good. The Cardinal makes a powerful argument for the indispensable role schools play in the formation of conscience for children. In restricting that formation to secular values and leaving no openness to transcendence as a dimension of human life, as is increasingly the case in our own public schools, children are denied the right to full, integral formation. If religion teachers are not to be allowed in public schools, then parents must have a right to place their children in schools where they are allowed. Bergoglio would have made a great constitutional lawyer.

The CELAM Bishops don't really address the issue of failing schools, the issue most often raised in arguing for school choice in the United States. The Texas Catholic Conference supported legislation in the recently ended legislature that would have provided school choice tax credits for low income families but, despite broad public support and a joint lobbying effort with the Texas Association of Private Schools and the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, the bills didn't make it out of either chamber. 

School choice has slowly been making progress elsewhere around the country with more charter schools, vouchers, and tax credits. They generally report good results measured in terms of educational outcomes. But the argument for school choice as a human right is not one I think I have seen before. It is not one TCC made in its lobbying efforts. But of course access to a quality education is a fundamental human right.

The question of whether forcing poor parents to send children to strictly secular schools is a violation of the 1st amendment right to free exercise of religion is an interesting one. I wonder if the argument has ever been put forth as a counter to the common objection that the use of vouchers in public schools is a violation of the establishment clause. I'm glad the CELAM Bishops raised the issue. I hope Francis goes on to raise it as pope.

Let me restate it. The Bishops are saying that if public schools do not teach religious values then they will teach secular values. That is a violation of the child's right to the proper formation of conscience. If poor parents are forced to send their children to such schools that is a violation of their right to choose what is best for their children.

In a nation obsessed with rights, this is an argument that could resonate.