May 25th 1972
Dear Reverend Fathers and Sisters, Graduates, Parents and Friends:
Tonight is a night you will remember the rest of your lives. I can remember my own high school graduation from a private high school some 29 years ago. I can recall vividly that 83 of us graduated that night in the middle of World War II and there were fears and trepidation among all of us as to just what the new bold world would mean to us in the years ahead.
In many ways the atmosphere today is similar to what it was in 1943. Peace is on the lips of all citizens and yet war wages in the far corners of the world. People seek instant solutions from our statesmen and politicians. In 1943 we were concerned but optimistic, for we had faith in our education, our training and ourselves and our country. Hopefully you share the same thoughts and aspirations here tonight.
Graduates of Kennedy High School are armed with something which students of the public schools do not have. You have been taught and trained by the dedicated sisters, priests and laymen in a background of Christian principles. You have been instructed on how to help your fellow man and that material gains in life mean nothing if the intrinsic values of man are not satisfied. On behalf of the graduates I would like to say “Thanks” to your parents and teachers for a job well done.
Tonight, I would like to speak on the meaning of private education and the importance of maintaining it both in this state and in the country.
First let us ask the question, “Are private schools in the public interest?” To gain
prospective the question should be approached starting with fundamental concerns. Consider three urgent problems which should be of foremost concern to public policy makers: 1. In our mass society individuals experience a diminishing range of control and choice over major matters that affect their personal lives and communities. They perceive an increasing number of decisions made for them by someone else, resulting in an underlying psychological malaise and debilitation.
2. The poor and certain minorities face particular deprivations and inequities, in part an extension of the general lack of autonomy just stated, but qualitatively different in severity.
3. In a world of accelerating change there is increased need for institutions to be responsive to new conditions and aspirations, while simultaneously a mass society tends in the opposite direction, breeding massive systems inherently susceptible to stagnation. These mutually opposed trends abruptly sharpen the importance of any mechanism which enhances institutional responsiveness.
It is pertinent to recall that the Kerner Commission, investigating the epidemic of urban rioting in 1967, listed as one of its principal objectives for national action:
“removing the frustration of powerlessness on disadvantages by providing the means for them to deal with the problems that affect their own lives.”
It is pertinent for legislators to ask how the general public feels about the existence of private schools. Does the public believe them to be basically undemocratic? If one could begin again would most citizens favor a single system of public schools which all children would attend? In 1969 Gallup International surveyed American public opinion regarding non-public schools. The following question was posed:
“. . . there is talk about taking open land and building new cities in this country. New cities, of course, would include people of all religions and races. If such communities are built, should there be parochial and private schools in addition to public schools?’
Those who fear the divisiveness of private schools were thus given clear opportunity to register this opinion and yet, for the nation as a whole, 72% said that parochial and private schools should be included when building new cities, while only 23% preferred a single system. Students of public opinion will recognize that this is an overwhelming response - over 3 to 1 in favor - in a nation of independent-minded citizens where a presidential election is considered a landslide if 55% of voters favor one candidate.
Non-public schools give parents the opportunity to send their children to institutions they choose. The reasonable preferences of the parents in this matter should be respected by governmental authorities.
As we consider the non-public schools - whether they are Catholic, Protestant, Jewish or even non-sectarian, they often add a dimension of spiritual values in the educational process. Children who attend these schools are offered a moral code with which to live. At a time when the trend in education is too often toward impersonal materialism, I believe America needs more, rather than less, emphasis on education which emphasizes moral, religious and spiritual values.
The American people and their government cannot remain indifferent to the accelerating disappearance of such schools. No single school system, whether public or private, must ever gain absolute monopoly over the education of our children, because such a system, one that had a total monopoly, would never reflect the diversity and richness of our national heritage and character. It would lack altogether that essential spur of competition to innovate, grow and reform. It would lead inevitably toward mediocrity and dull uniformity in American education, conditions which this nation cannot tolerate.
The American public school system which is the greatest in the world and educates nine out of 10 children in the United States has nothing to fear and everything to gain from the presence of a vigorous, diverse competitive private school system, the kind of system which we still have today and which we can only preserve for tomorrow by decisive action now.
I think we all have to recognize the fact that too often in the past an atmosphere of mutual suspicion and hostility has divided the public schools and the non-public schools in this country. Yet such an atmosphere can only weaken both school systems and do a disservice to the public interest in quality education. Worst of all, it can only penalize the children whose future is our most sacred trust.
The education of our children is too important for us to be divided over it by party, by religion, by race or by region of the country.
More that five million children are attending private elementary and secondary schools across the nation. With relatively few exceptions these schools are in great financial trouble. The question must be faced: Is there any way under the Constitution to preserve so valuable a part of our total educational system? The problem arises because the great bulk of the private schools are church related. An estimated 83% of the private schools are Catholic parochial schools; other denominations also maintain elementary and secondary institutions. Thus far every effort at the national level toward public relief of their plight has foundered on the rock-like principle that demands separation of church and state.
This was the objection raised a month ago by a three-judge federal court, in nullifying Pennsylvania’s latest effort to get around the church-state barrier. In earlier litigation, upheld by the Supreme Court last year in the Lemon v Kurtzman, the courts voided a Pennsylvania plan by which the state contracted directly with the private schools to provide certain non-religious educational services. The courts said no to that.
Pennsylvania tried again with an approach that appeared to hold great promise. The state undertook to provide financial grants to the parents, not to the schools. In this fashion it was hoped the state could avoid the entanglement with religion that had drawn the courts’ fire before. On April 6, a District Court again said no.
It was immaterial, in the court’s view, that the state funds were intended to aid the parents. The effect, nonetheless, is to aid the schools. And even if this were not so, the court continued, it would still be found that the act supports religion because it aids parents in providing a religious education for their children.
From every standpoint, the court’s decision was highly regrettable. Pennsylvania was attempting , after all, to apply the rationale by the Congress for veterans under the GI Bill of Rights. For under the GI Bill of Rights a veteran receives direct grants toward his college education. If he takes that education at Seattle University, Seattle Pacific College, so what?
To get around the Pennsylvania case, Congressman James A. Burke of Massachusetts and Wilbur Mills of Arkansas, Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, introduced a plan in the Congress whereby an eligible parent would continue to pay his child’s tuition fees directly to the school. These might amount to, say $300.00, for one year. In computing his federal income tax, he would then be permitted to deduct half the sum or $150.00 from his tax payment. The Burke-Mills bill would limit the tax credit to $400.00 a year per child.
Under this bill the revenue loss to the United States would be substantial - some $500 million dollars a year. However, if the private schools collapsed altogether, their five million children would be transferred to public schools at a national cost averaging $858 per pupil, or $3.9 billion dollars per year.
Private schools contribute the indispensable element of diversity to our educational culture. They provide some competition, however, modest, to the monopoly the state maintains upon shaping the minds of children. They help to preserve “fundamental parent rights in education.” Finally, the government itself has contributed to the crisis in private education through the mounting tax burden imposed at every level.
In the State Legislature, your legislators who believe in the desirability and preservation of the private school system have also fought hard to preserve our private schools.
Article I, Section 11 of our Constitution provides:
“ No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or the support of any religious establishment.”
However, within the framework of this constitutional requirement and interpretation, successful legislation at the state level has been accomplished. After many years of failure at the legislative level, in 1969 we were able to pass the college scholarship bill for needy and disadvantaged students with an original appropriation of $600,000, which provided tuition and books and living supplementation of up to $900.00 per month to needy and disadvantaged college students who can qualify in either a public or private school. During the last biennium this appropriation was raised to 1.3 million dollars per biennium.
Our next success was in 1971 when we passed the student supplemental tuition bill which provided that the state would give $100 to each college student who attended a private college or university. This helped abridge the great disparity between tuition in public colleges and universities of approximately $450 a year, as compared with some $1,500 in private schools which are not subsidized by the state. Last session $1.7 million dollars was appropriated in this category. The legislative session in 1971 as far as private schools go was a banner session as we passed House Bill 105 which provides moneys for speech therapy, remedial reading, physical testing, driving training and health care services for students attending non-public schools.
However, I feel the most significant bill passed in the private school sector in the history of our state was the scholarship bill in the K-12 program, that is from the first to the twelfth grades, which bill was passed in the 1972 session, provided state aid up to $300 to students in high school and $100 in elementary schools to those needy and disadvantaged students whose parents have a poverty level of income, which funds can be used for tuition, books and even food and clothes. This law will become effective September 1, 1972. I understand some 1,100 to 1,200 students per year will be able to take advantage of this program, although it is estimated that there are some 14,000 students in this category who could qualify if the funds were available.
I have been in the legislature for some 19 years and during the first 16 years, although many bills affecting aid to private schools were introduced, not a single bill was successfully passed. In the last three years the successful passage of four non-public school aid bills, previously enumerated, are hopeful signs that maybe private education can survive with some timely help from the state. For legislators have finally come to recognize the importance of non-public school education and its desirability to continue and make our city and county and country strong. It is essential that all of us here tonight make a contribution to its success. We can do this by continuing to send our children to private schools, to those among us who are more affluent they can contribute generously and to continue to educate our elected officials at both the state and national levels for continued aid to our non-public schools.
You graduates tonight have taught new math, new science and new technologies. You have also been taught the values of honor, morality, love of country and that America’s religious faith has always kept us strong in times of testing. Yours is a legacy of private education. Use it well.
Again, congratulations and best wishes.