I am a bachelor who lives in Houston, Texas. Part of the money I pay in rent goes toward property taxes, which support Texas’ public schools. I have no children who benefit from Texas public schools- but I am glad to have some of my money support the common good in this way.
Now- imagine I had kids, and I sent them to attend Catholic schools to give them formation in our religion. I would be “taxed” for education twice- first in paying the state property taxes each march, and then in paying the tuition.
That’s a heavy burden- that many Catholic families in Texas are willing to pay because they care about their kids’ education so much. But the poverty that can result is an injustice- it would feel similar to paying social security for everyone else but never receiving the benefit yourself when you retire.
This double taxation argument for Parents getting to choose where their education tax dollars go is one that Catholic families have made for a century and a half, going back to Bishop “Dagger John” Hughes of New York.
Here in Texas, a discriminatory provision in our Constitution attempted to prevent religious schools (but no other sorts of schools) from getting tax dollars from the outset in 1876. These “Blaine Amendment” provisions in the Texas Constitution are the remnants of anti-Catholic discrimination which were prominent at the very time of its ratification. However, Texas Courts and AG’s have more or less interpreted its Blaine amendment out of its Constitution because it conflicts with other provisions upholding religious liberty (see the “relevant case law” section below). What’s more, the United States Supreme Court explicitly affirmed such voucher programs did not violate the establishment clause beginning in 2002, and in last year’s Carson v. Makin (2022) even struck down Maine’s Blaine Amendment for violating the free exercise clause. Texas’ Blaine amendment may also be struck down, if Catholic school children continue to be deprived of funding.
This is all relevant to 2023 because the Texas Legislature is writing a law to provide Texas parents’ vouchers which could be used at Catholic schools (S.B. 8). Texas AG Ken Paxton recently affirmed this law would not violate the Texas Constitution as it has been interpreted, and Governor Abbot is beginning to voice support for it. No wonder, considering that a peer governor like Ron DeSantis in Florida has already implemented such a program. Catholics choosing whether to live in Florida or Texas will seriously have to consider the ~$6,000 per student, per year benefit they receive in Florida- but not so far in Texas. With several kids going to Catholic schools, that is a virtual raise- a raise they deserve because they were doubly taxed before.
The Texas Bill sponsors are Sen. Brandon Creighton [R], Sen. Paul Bettencourt [R], Sen. Donna Campbell [R], Sen. Phil King [R], Sen. Mayes Middleton [R], Sen. Tan Parker [R], Sen. Angela Paxton [R], Sen. Charles Schwertner [R], and Sen. Drew Springer [R].
Where are the Catholic Democrats on the list? Perhaps they get support from Public School Teacher associations, who don’t want the added competition from Catholic Schools. But Catholic Democrats in Texas ought to support the bill, because of the double taxation argument.
Will home schooling parents be eligible? Money following the child is the principle, yes? I think about what we could have done with such riches as followed my children to public school!
Vouchers, charter, and other forms of public assistance that enable better quality schooling are rejected on what grounds? Harm to students? I doubt it. I suspect that we as a society may have forgotten who is supposed to benefit from public schooling. To me the answer is common sense—public education serves children. But our discourse totally avoids this question. Why?