a similar law written (Doerr 19). For example, in the Alabama state constitution, Article XIV, paragraph 263, states that, “No money raised for the support of the public school shall be appropriated for the support of any sectarian or denominational school” (Doerr 45) and North Dakota’s state constitution says almost the identical, word for word (Doerr 47). Michigan states in Article VIII, Section 2, of their constitution that, “No payment, tax credit, tax benefit, exemption or deduction, tuition voucher, subsidy, grant or loan of public monies or property shall be provided, directly or indirectly, to support the attendance of any student…where instruction is offered in whole or in part to such nonpublic school students” (Doerr 46). These states are just a small example of the states that strongly oppose the use of public funds for private use. In fact, Thomas Jefferson’s Bill for establishing religious freedom of 1785 states, “That to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he believes and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical” (Doerr 19). Vouchers cost too much for the purpose they would serve. They are supposed to reduce the cost of education for those who cannot afford private education. However, the cost of transporting these students to their desired school would be astronomical. The difference in transportation costs of local, public education verses a choice school would either have to be paid by the individual family, which would not be feasible by anyone but the upper class, or paid by the government who would be better managing the money that is going into public schools, than spending money on transportation for private schools. In the 1990-91 school year, 57 percent of all public school students that were transported to school cost over nine billion dollars nationwide. This may sound reasonable but the 1992 Carnegie F...
