Some People Will Use Anything as an Argument for Vouchers

Priority 7, ACS, OST, alphabet and number soup. Once again the Brooklyn frum community is campaigning to have funding restored to child care programs that are heavily used by the Brooklyn frum community.

Yet in the fight to restore this welfare program, VIN readers of this Press Release and this Press Releases, readers who are fighting for restored welfare funding make the case for private school vouchers!

Here are two gems:

If you realy want to save money and get a better education, just give 1/3 of the money used for public schools as a voucher directly to the parents to use for school. Each public school child cost about $15,000 per year! Our budget problems would be solved!

--AND--

I haven't seen any comments putting this issue into the following perspective:

Religious families are denied equal access to public funding. Why are we being denied a free and appropriate education?

We have no choice but the foot the bill and pay school taxes and then tuitions for all our wonderful children (which we should never be criticized for having!).

Our children become productive citizens and assets to society!

Why are we being inhibited from
our right to give our children a religious education?!

This is unconstitutional--and we should be fighting with this cause!

This is assistance we as a community deserve and have earned!

Please contact me to promote this cause.

Earth to the commentators! You are beneficiaries of private (yeshiva) education. Government dependency among such beneficiaries is ridiculously high. This is not a convincing argument for school vouchers! If anything, it is an argument against private education. But I guess when you are fighting the good fight, anything can and will be used as an argument for vouchers. . . even the threat of cuts to welfare programs. Goodness gracious. There are no words for such ridiculousness.

Reply »

Guest Post: Torah Umesorah Presidents Conference

Once again, I am thankful to readers who take their time to contribute to this forum. This morning a reader wrote me with some comments and observations on the Torah Umesorah Presidents Conference held in Miama over the past weekend. Guest post follows:

Hello, I thought that you might be interested in some observations on the Torah Umesorah Presidents conference held in Miami over the last weekend. The conference targets executive directors and lay leaders of day schools and focuses on non-curriculum issues.

Obviously the affordability issue was a point of discussion but apparently far less than last year where most schools were in real crisis positions. Most schools (that survived) seem to be in stable/manageable positions this year.

There were a few seminars on better business management of schools with a focus on leveraging the expertise of the community for purchasing, specialized services, etc and sharing of capital and service costs across institutions.

Although there was a lot of 'rah rah Torah!' rallying of the troops, here was also a small undercurrent of recognition that the current system is still unsustainable without some major changes.

There seems to be considerable optimism that the current political climate is as favorable as it has ever been for introduction of vouchers, tuition tax-deductibility or similar, and there was much discussion of the lobbying and political participation required to get there.

There were also a few (non-Torah Umesorah) invited speakers who proposed that the only real solution is for Jewish philanthropists who do not currently donate to Jewish causes to be convinced take up Jewish education as a cause. It was made clear that this would only be possible as a multi-denominational effort (i.e. the Orthodox movement would only have access to a significant donation from a Spielberg/Katzenberg/Zuckerberg-type as part of a 'movement' that would also be funding Solomon Shechter, community Hebrew schools, etc). A long the same lines, the successful low-pressure 'out-of town' Kiruv movement has developed somewhat of an uneasy natural alliance with the UJA and local Federations who need nominal Jews to remain slightly educated about their own religion in order to remain in the community another generation. There was was a presentation by the Kohelet Foundation, which funds non-Orthodox day school tuition on the condition of parental involvement in a special Partners in Torah program designed to increase parental valuation of traditional Jewish learning.

Disappointingly (to me), other than a few small-session questions, there was no discussion of the non-education lifestyle costs and opportunity costs in the Orthodox community and the resultant effect on the sustainability of schools. The biggest indicator of this was the food at the conference, which was ridiculous in its frequency, quantity and presentation (think New York wedding shmorg for every Shabbat and weekday meal including kiddush, breakfasts, afternoon snacks and a poolside melaveh malkah bbq). Although it's likely most of the costs were underwritten, the (at least) $150 over-spent on food for 400 participants could have provided full subsidy for 6 children or saved one school on the brink of bankruptcy. The menu at an education conference should at the very least be subject to the Agudah's wedding cost guidelines.

School Voucher Debate Worth Watching

From the Wall Street Journal: Douglas County, Colorado's School Board is debating a voucher plan that, by all means, is unique, both because of the proposals contained within and because of the demographics of the district. The district is a rather affluent one and schools rank high. There are 56,000 district students, and 4,000 private school or home schooled students. The median family income tops $105,000. The district includes 65 schools, 9 charter schools, 2 magnet schools, and 1 online school. Private schooling in the county is limited. With only one very small exception (a 21 student school), all private schools that go beyond the 1st grade are faith based.

Given the demographics, having a voucher proposal on the table is surprising.

Beyond the demographics, what makes the proposal of note includes the following:

1. the proposal would allow faith-based school to allow admissions based on faith,
2. (under consideration) is a proposal that would allows students to remain public school students while opting to take certain courses through private schools and/or private educators,
3. (under consideration) is a proposal that would expand public-funding for home schooled students.

Public opinion is mixed, especially on subsidizing private instructors for classes outside the regular curriculum as many parents already hire tutors for their children out-of-pocket.

The voucher plan proposal would subsidize students in private settings up to $5,000.

I don't have any comments on the story, except to note that the $5000 supposedly would cover 35-100% of tuition in the local private schools. Clearly there is good range of prices for private school consumers in the area and should a voucher proposal pass and be implemented, it would be interesting to see what happens to the private schools when government money (and regulation) gets injected into the market. I hope to watch this debate and I hope the private schools will weigh in.

Also, does anyone know what county the frum Denver schools are located?

Some reading that might be of interest:
Vouchers, and why a Conservative Might be Ambivalent
Economics and Education (ideas of Thomas Sowell)

Private Programs and Government Funding

A reader kindly wrote me today asking me to comment on the 4th school closing in Lakewood (turns out the second school to close has announced it is re-opening under new leadership in the same location. I have yet to figure out this works out in terms of numbers since it seems that none of the facts on the ground have changed, behind on payroll, same building/same mortgage).

If you have been reading some of the Jewish news sites (the blow-by-blow is at TLS), you might have run across a rather intriguing and confusing episode which I will attempt to piece together with some commentary below. Those who do not live in the tri-state area, particularly one of the more insular NY/NJ communities, will once again be rather surprised to find out about all the government funded goodies that are enjoyed by those who simultaneously scream about the massive property tax rates that they pay and the discrimination against private school students.

For a number of years, the Lakewood Board of Education has outsourced pre-school and special education programs. Starting this summer, the State of New Jersey, upon review of outsourced programs, made it clear to the Lakewood Board of Education that it would not continue to fund preschool programming (at a tune of $4 mil), should the Lakewood Board of Education continue their contracts with certain outside providers that did not pass muster. The Lakewood BOE voted to discontinue such contracts and bring the special education in-house. The BOE believes that outsourcing (at least outsourcing to these schools) was not a responsible and efficient use of taxpayer money.

The timing, as in the other school closings, couldn't be worse. One program, frequented by a good number of frum parents, which goes under the name Tiny Tots simply closed its doors. Many Lakewood Tiny Tot parents are irate, even going to such (inappropriate) lengths such as holding a midnight protest in front of one BOE member's home. They are up in arms that FRUM board members would shut down "THEIR" program and force their children into PUBLIC SCHOOL. Employees and spouses are irate that the BOE, in these difficult times, would put a number of people in the kehilla out of work.

Here is my take: Like it or not, their children were enrolled in public school, but because the Lakewood BOE had outsourced pre-school services, parents were able to "have their cake and eat it too." Government funding essentially created a "frum" private school and parents were happy to have the government paying for their children's therapies and daycare, within a private environment. And until the State came to take a good look at the program, where they expressed concerns about the curriculum and facilities, everything was rolling along just fine.

But as we all know, when you aren't paying your own way, there is no such thing as "private"; strings are always attached. Certainly there was more freedom to include a Jewish education within the pre-school programming, but in the end, the program was accountable to the state because it was not independently viable. As one BOE member stated, "While they [parents who were receiving full time day care] were able to have the amenities of Tiny Tots at a reduced rate due to the profit made by Tiny Tots from the BOE contract, I don’t think the BOE is responsible to provide them with full day day care. If Tiny Tots closed down because they can’t turn a profit from that portion of the business, why should we be held accountable? "

Which brings me to another observation---their seems to be some confusion amongst commentors about the responsibility of the BOE members. While these members are often elected because of a cost cutting/tax cutting agenda, I think that the Orthodox community fantasizes that public programming cuts will be cut, while the community will see an increase in government goodies. Ultimately, BOE members have a fiduciary duty to represent the best educational and financial interests of all those who reside in the School District. And in this case, Board Members had to preserve a budget over the jobs and profits of owners and employees of an outsourced programs.

I feel terrible for the parents who have had the rug pulled out from under them, seemingly without warning. But amidst the yelling about PUBLIC SCHOOL and hurting people in the community, I think it is important to understand how government funding works. Should vouchers ever become a reality, as so many people hope for, be prepared for more of the same. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Oy! Second 11th Hour School Closing

Lakewood's school year isn't getting off to a great start. Last week, Yeshiva Bais HaTorah (350-400 students) announced it would not be opening the day before school. Today, shortly before school opening, Yeshivah Keter HaTorah (150 students) has announced it too will not be opening. It has been reported (see Matzav and TLS and VIN) that both schools had not paid their Rabbonim in months. I believe that the administration approached Rav Matisyahu Solomon for a psak on what to do regarding the budget. Shortly after, the Yeshivah Keter HaTorah Rebbes approached the same Rav and received the same psak.

There are some (ridiculous) comments I feel compelled to address. One commentator at Matzav asks:

I don’t understand: Is it better to have hundreds of kids without a school than to have rabbeim not paid? The rabbeim are either way not being paid bec. now they are out of a job. But we have hundreds of kids without school!

I've been covering non-payment since the inception of this blog and one thing I have noted is that Rabbonim feel as though they cannot walk, which is something I believe every single one of us in private industry would do should our employer fail to pay us. Some, like the commentor above, dismisses the opportunity that Rebbes would have if they were not working for free! I don't dismiss opportunity and I am a firm believer that Hashem puts opportunities in our paths. For a myriad of reasons, Rebbes as a whole seem to be held "hostage" by non-paying schools and acting as a group, or unorganized union, gives them much more power to do what should have been done months ago.

it's broken writes:
when are we going to real;ize that our system is broken
people are floundering
no money for food
no money for shcool
no money to marry off their kids
no money period
even people with job
seven p[eople who both wife and husband are working
we need a new system
we need housing
we need aubsidized food
we need help to support frum families
most frum families are struggling
moist people are not making ends meet
how long will it take till people realize
how many more mosdos will have to close


After declaring the "system" broken, the commentor calls for more of the same---welfare. Certain segments of the Orthodox community are highly dependent: dependent on parents, dependent on government programs, dependent on tzedakah. If such communities want to start solving their economic woes, independence is the answer, not (more!) subsidized food. I'd start paving the road to independence with a remediation campaign. Clearly, there are too many who lack basic skills, from basic English and vocational skills such as typing, to a lack of analytical thinking.

I think all the schools should enroll their children in the PS. What would happen is that the PS would have no room, and be forced to contract out for third party vendors. At that point the recently emptied private schools can become the third party vendor and receive generous compensation much like TT does. This would help fund the english dept costs, and tuition can be brought down to pay for the hebrew studies alone. This would help everyone, as the State would have to give more state aid since there are more children enrolled. In worst case, this should be done with the girl schools if not with the boys.

More predictable stupidity! To the residents of Lakewood and other heavily populated communities, public schools can handle some influx and they will do what they have always done when there are population shifts, use resources as efficiently as possible (and government isn't where I turn to for lessons in efficiency!).

In the last city I lived in, the elementary school down the stree from me ran two kindergarten schedules. The first session of the day started at 7AM, the second session started at 1PM. At one time my (public) high school had a far larger population than when I attended. The school was opened right as the baby boom generation started to enter high school. The school did not build its campus to accommodate the incoming class. They build the high school to accommodate the predicated future high school population, not the huge amount of students that they needed to accomodate in the first 10 years after opening, and the school squeezed classes into non-classroom areas until the school populations returned to normal levels. Other public schools have concurrent year round schedules to accommodate students. Sometimes, high schools in the same district, only offer certain electives, extracurriculars, or vocational classes, in one location, although all qualified students can attend such a course if they provide their own transportation.

Perhaps if schools in heavily populated Orthodox Jewish areas would form their own "school districts" to increase efficiency, some of these problems wouldn't be hitting with such vigor.

HOW COME THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE NOT CLOSING
OUR TAXES ARE FUNDING THEM!WE HAVE TO FUND OUR SCHOOLS, NO EXCUSES

The most intelligent comments are always in caps, right? I dare the commentor to leave his/her tax bill unpaid and see what happens. (A hint: the taxing entity can and will foreclose on your home).

UPDATED:

A comment from "Normal"
Yungerleit are paid 80 dollars per week only after being in Kollel for a few years [waiting list].
Women that teach are paid minimally.
For a family of eight children the tuition without camp is at least 28,000.00.
How are they expected to live?
Kollelim that pay higher wages should be welcomed into our town!

And pray tell, where in the world does this commentor think money for Kollel comes from? Clearly part of the massive remediation process needed must include an understanding of free market economics, wealth creation, and basic personal finance.

from destro613
maybe more tuition is needed

Maybe if we charge more for the same product that the average parent couldn't pay for to begin with, money will start to grow on trees? I think part of the remediation process must include the younger set running a joint lemonade stand with the older set. Any 5, 6, 7, or 8 year old who has ever thrown up a sign and a table in the front yard understands that charging more doesn't magically produce more. They don't need Algebra I to understand that functions don't always follow a straight line.

Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste

In an almost predictable fashion, within two days of a school closing, a "solution" is brought to forward. What is the solution? None other than (drum roll please) vouchers (!). In an editorial by the New Jersey Agudath Israel leader titled "We Know the Problem--What We Need are Solutions", the reader is left wondering if leadership can actually delve deep enough into the Orthonomics to do more than make simplistic declarations such as this one: "The problem is that we simply can’t afford to pay for two school systems – the Public and Non-Public Schools," much less actually offer solutions.

Now I don't mean to sound overly harsh or critical of leadership, but I find it horribly troubling that in the midst of dominoes beginning to fall, and in the midst of 350 students surprised by a school closing on the first day of school (including students with parents who have always paid their way), that nothing by a cry to lobby for vouchers is offered. That's it? It is so helpless! And, who wants to associate with helplessness?

You see, I'm not really interested in "imagining" all of the fantastic possibilities that could develop should this bill or that bill pass, anymore than I'm interesting in imagining all the possibilities that could develop for our family should my husband pick up his phone at work today with an incredible job offer that could potentially double his salary.

To be fair, two other solutions are named:
A. We have to find ways to encourage those in our community that don’t have children in Yeshiva or Day School to help fund these important institutions.
B. We have to find ways for the schools to pool their purchasing power in a consortia to generate better prices from vendors (and a great debt of gratitude is due to all vendors who have extended a great deal of credit and understanding to the schools).

Regarding Solution A, unless I'm the one living on an alternative planet, I think the author both fails to recognize their challenges. Parents who have managed to cut their children loose must often make up for lost time (paying off debt incurred during the Yeshiva years, marrying off kids, catching up on retirement savings). Those who have yet to enroll a child in Yeshiva (that do have regular income) are usually trying to pay off student loans, get ready to put a kid in Yeshiva, and/or save for a downpayment. I believe the vast majority of people (make that grandparents or future grandparents) without their own current tuition bills ARE either contributing directly to yeshivot (actually contributing towards tuition costs, babysitting grandchildren while their children work) or indirectly (supporting Bikur Cholim and Tomchei Shabbos, paying for the education of adult children so that they will be able to pay tuition, etc).

But, there is nothing wrong with pursuing this avenue, just like it is high time to pursue Solution B. But note, in solution B, a possible reason why tuition payments might not be coming in as expected.

Regarding this statement "over sixty percent of our Property Taxes are used to fund public education and we receive very little in return for our children’s education" I do have to note the irony given the other big Lakewood issues of the week where funding was cut from a private pre-school program serving frum children in a private school environment. Outside of the tri-state area, there are virtually no grants to private pre-schools. Transportation for private school students simply does not exist. Taxpayer funded special education and therapy services are not normally available within the confines of private school. Government funded meal programs are not a hallmark of private schools. Personally, I like low tax rates a limited government and I vote likewise. But if you continue to vote for candidates that support every imaginable pet program, expect high taxes.

Feel free to offer your suggestions for solutions that don't require imagining or a Sugar Daddy. I'd like to wake up one day and find leadership supporting educational alternatives that require parental investment, but enjoy some official support. Where general studies are not taken seriously, a good red pen and support from current administration would go a long way. I don't know of a public school district that doesn't offer an Adult Ed program. Those with very limited skills, need to be pushed into improving their situations.

In conclusion, the dominoes are falling and I think leadership efforts are best utilized in-house rather than knocking on the doors of the House. But what do I know? Perhaps the NJ Senate will pass a voucher bill by the end of September?

Would You Really Wish For Public Funding in an Ideal World?

Rabbi Shafran has published an article called "Who is a Briton?" He takes offense regarding a decision of a British Court over the question "Who is a Jew?" But the article is a bit misleading. Rabbi Shafran finds the court's decision an outrage as a religion should be able to define the terms of entry into the religion on its own terms, not on those of a secular body.

While others argue over the court's decision and its implications, I will detour and ask, if the State did not subsidize religious schools, would the British Court system be involved in determining whether or not the school's admission policies are in compliance with British law?

The call here in the US is to increase our lobbying efforts to secure public funding for religious schools. The call is getting increasingly loud as the "tuition crisis" looms large. If that battle is won (doubtful), are we prepared to deal with the inevitable aftermath? Are we prepared to relinquish independence and just how much independence are we ready to relinquish and in which areas?

Strike 2: Laundering it Kashers It?

The 5 Towns Jewish Times Times Editor has published an interview with the Toldos Avraham Yitzchak Rebbe and his Rebbitzen. The article came off sounding a bit like a free public relations piece as the trip stirred up controversy and scrutiny. I have no interest into covering subjects other bloggers are likely covering including whitewashing the opposition to the Medinah. But, I can't help but declaring "Strike Two" for the editor over this exchange (see Strike One here). Talk about twisting yourself into a pretzel.

One area in which this is played out is in chinuch—the education system. This sect, as well as others, refuses to take money from Israel’s Education Ministry for their schools, because they do not want their Torah studies financed by a government that openly and deliberately violates Shabbos. Therefore, their institutions are seriously in debt. And that’s why they are in New York now, to raise money for the considerable education system that they administer.

I suggested to the Rebbe that since he was here in New York seeking vital funding for his educational institutions, perhaps we could arrange for the Israeli government to send us—here in the Diaspora—the money, and then we could in turn give it to his organization. The Rebbe said, with a smile, that itsounded like a good idea, but they have not yet encountered a person who can successfully effectuate that type of arrangement.


So if you take "unkosher" money and send it through a third party it is magically transformed into kosher money. Don't strain any muscles trying to get yourself out of that pretzel!

The irony of the editor's comments is incredible given this recent poll on the 5TJT website. The poll asks readers: "When comes to the issue of Yeshiva tuitions, what is the best formula for the future?" The four choices are:

1. Parents should pay full tuition for each child
2. Parents should pay whatever they can afford
3. Yeshiva education should be free and supported by community
4. Public education funds should be able to be used for Yeshiva education

Granted the choices don't have a fully array of choices, but the overwhelming number of those who have voted in the poll have voted for choice #4, receiving public education funds for a Yeshiva education.

Receiving public funds beyond what is already received (and it isn't nothing in the state of NY where there is busing, remedial tutoring, and Priority 7) is a pipe dream. But while the community dreams of vouchers/public funding, the kehillah is asked to send limited funds that are desperately needed at home outside of the kehillah so that a sect that refuses government funding of their schools can pay off their debts!

It is time for Synagogue Boards and Community Rabbonim to cut a stop to traveling contingents that roll through town and leave with funds another banquet can't raise. Perhaps it is high time to tell them to jump on the solution that our own parents are salivating over. For us it is a pipe dream; for them a realistic possibility.

Support local institutions first!

Remedial Education Funding Would Not be My Argument for Vouchers

VIN has published another pro-vouchers article from Josh Pruzansky (Executive Director of Agudath Israel New Jersey), as has Rabbi Boteach. Two in one day. This might be a record.

My regular readers know that I support vouchers from an ideological standpoint. And while I have addressed the subject of educational choice, which incidental extends far beyond the subject of school vouchers as Josh Pruzansky points out, I'm not holding out any hope of seeing a voucher in my lifetime. Despite my support for politicians who share my ideological view, I'm not quite sure that vouchers would be a blessing for our communities. But this is perhaps a subject for a future post as the subject is sure to rear its head from now until the day when the community decides that perhaps it is time to concentrate efforts on solving the tuition issue more internally. Perhaps a concerted effort to consolidate schools, throw support behind present and potential future homeschoolers/groupschoolers, enacting minimum tuitions or at the very least collecting agreed upon tuitions (see my last post).

But back to the articles at hand. If you are lobbying for public education funding to be earmarked for private schools, particularly yeshivot, what arguments do you think will be most effective in winning the hearts and minds of politicians and taxpayers who are on the fence so to speak? What arguments might sway parents who might fear adding more students to the role of the taxpayer? What arguments might help convince taxpayers that private schools can do a better job than public schools at a lower cost?

Personally, I would 'vote no' on using the $24 million of earmarked funds in New York that are funding remedial tutoring for *10,000* yeshiva students as an argument for why the taxpayer should hand over governmental funding for parents desiring a yeshiva education. Now certainly where remedial tutoring is needed and where there are outside funds available, I would see no reason not to lobby for remedial education funds for the sake of remediation. But as an argument with the ultimate goal of securing support for the elusive school voucher and/or greater funding for yeshivot. . . no way! The taxpayer isn't interested in a superior gemorrah shiur. The taxpayer wants students graduating with a strong grasp of the three R's. If you aren't able to provide that, I'm afraid the taxpayer isn't going to be too impressed, even where "the government saves by having children in a values-based education system which produces far lower delinquency rates. [Rabbi Boteach]" .

And, to finish up a quick post. . . . . perhaps VIN should reconsider its choice of photo for an article on educational choice. The photo of choice was taken on the day that FBI agents went into the Deal Yeshiva to seize records to investigate a money laundering ring for which community Rabbis were arrested. Not a smart choice for a photo in my opinion.

(Perhaps a kind reader can email VIN with this commentary. I've never got very far on posting comments there).

Update: Google Alerts alerted me that the Agudah had the article published in the Asbury Press. It should be interesting to see the comments that get published. At this time only one comment is in with the introduction "entitled?" This type of article simply does not speak to the American public. It is far too centered on one community.

An A for Effort?

YWN is reporting that Rabbi Genack, of the OU, put out a letter in support of Governor Corzine's bid for re-election. The goal of the letter appears to be to explain to the Orthodox community why the Governor is best for the community, but the letter is rather puzzling to say the least.

For example, the Rabbi states that the Governor does not support private school vouchers on constitutional, policy, and financial grounds, he would be willing to put together a commission to look into how to support private school students. Correct me if I am mistaken, but New Jersey provides busing to private school students and New Jersey also gives small amounts per students for textbooks and other educational resources.

I view vouchers as almost a pipe dream, despite my ideological support for vouchers (i.e. parental choice in education and competition through the private market). But, nonetheless, every Orthodox group that is politically connected wants vouchers and claims it is a major issue! Officials in both the OU and the Agudah and people who write on the tuition issue have placed their hopes in solving the "tuition crisis" on vouchers. So why, pray tell, would you throw support behind a candidate who has clearly stated that he opposes vouchers? If vouchers are a top issue, endorsing candidates who are open to and/or supportive of vouchers, or at the very least are strong supporters of parental say in education, would seem to be more logical.

Secondly, my understanding is that New Jersey property tax is a huge financial burden. I can't even imagine being faced with property tax bills that exceed the annual payments on our first mortgage. The Rabbi gives the Governor a pat on the back because property taxes haven't risen in the past year as much as previous years writing "last year, the increase in property taxes across the State was the lowest in 10 years." I don't know if this letter was proofed before sending it out to those in the New Jersey Orthodox communities, but I can't see how a lower increase of an already massive burden is of any consolation to families that have seen their property taxes skyrocket. Having to work increased property taxes into an already strained budget wouldn't give me a reason to cheer.

Interesting enough, a school I know of also pointed out the same thing to parents in regards to the last tuition increase. Know your audience! Fine, you didn't raise tuition 7% like in previous years. The parents who are paying still feel soaked!

And speaking of knowing your audience, Rabbi Genack endorses the Governor because he has "delivered nearly $7 billion in property tax relief to New Jersey families. And, this year, even while he cut the budget, he preserved rebates for seniors and those who need it most – families with incomes $75,000 and below."

Now this letter didn't go out to families in blue collar neighborhoods or upwardly mobile lower to middle income neighborhood, it was directed at modern Orthodox families. Like honestly frum who is "disturbed" by the letter, I have to ask, how many families make a combined income of "only" $75,000? Certainly some families do. But the majority of the families receiving this letter that are desperate for some tax relief likely make into the six figures. Those families already carry a high tax burden at the federal and state level, and they would like some tax relief too, not an assurance that the Governor is trying and that he deserves an "A for effort" because the percentage increase wasn't as steep as in past years.

Know your audience is a prime rule in politics and public relations. Unless I am sorely mistaken, I can't imagine that Teaneck residents are going to be terribly impressed by a commission on how to help private schools while there have already been cutbacks, increased property taxes (even if the increases are lower than in past years, and proposed tax relief for households making less than $75,000*.

Letters like this make me wonder if those representing ours interests in the halls of government actually understand the difficulties being experienced.
Comments please.

*Note: This is not to endorse not granting tax relief to families making such an income, just a note that few families reading the letter will see the potential for relief as applicable to their household.

Just Sad

Last week I wrote a post about the potential elimination of an after-school voucher program intended for families unable to care for their children for mental health type of issues. The program seems to basically benefit yeshiva/Bais Yaakov type schools and the proposed elimination has the Agudah screaming bloody murder. While the Agudah screams about funding cuts (delivering 30,000 letters from community members), I'm screaming about the tremendous level of dependency which is quite detrimental to the Orthodox community, certainly as detrimental as funding cuts.

Now the NY Times is running yet another installment on this budget issue and I can't help but just feel a great amount of sorrow. Here are some quotes on record:

• A mother of 11 who has 5 children on Priority 7 vouchers says: "If I didn’t have it, my head would spin. It gives me time to take care of my other children.”
• An administrator of a school with an after school program: “People don’t earn a lot of money. In some small apartments, some children come home to 11, 12 people in the family. I really think without after-school care, the children will probably go crazy. There will be parents and children who have to start taking pills. It’s really going to affect them tremendously.”

Let me make this clear. I like large families. But this is just a sad "report" (if accurate and in context) on the State of the Union. I can't even imagine being an elementary school child and being unable to return home after school to my own home where my own mother/father is because she can't handle having me around.

If there are so many families are truly in over their heads (article mentions another 1422 families on the waiting list in addition to the 2000 using the program), I think the community leadership needs to actually deal with that issues beyond trying to protest funding cuts. The solution to all problems can't be to spend money, either government funds that might be cut or personal funds that might run short.

I don't have the solution on how to raise a family of 11 or 12 children in an apartment in Brooklyn. I do know that when you are facing difficult issues, that it is ultimately better to learn a new skill set.

Taxpayers aren't going to be happy to read this report either.

Dependency is Ugly

I never heard of this Priority 7 program until I saw a small blurb in the Hamodia (my husband's friend gave my husband a copy for reading on the bus). Now VIN is running the story about the same program. As a non-NY'er, I'm always flabbergasted by the number of programs NY funds.

The Priority 7 is a welfare program that provides vouchers for after school care to private school students demonstrating a particular need (as per Hamodia the public schools already provide "free" aftercare). Apparently, the overwhelming number of recipients are Orthodox Jews, likely concentrated in select communities and the Agudah is running terrified that if this program is cut off it will spell doom for certain yeshivot.

While the Agudah is calling the elimination "unfair," what I believe is unjust is how such a great level of dependency has been allowed to develop within the klal. The $15 million entitlement program gives up to $7000 per student. That means there are a minimum 2,143 students benefiting from this program, most of whom are Orthodox according to the Agudah.

Yes, we have funding issues for our schools. But there is a bigger issue looming in an increasing number of communities and is the level of dependency on entitlements. From wic, to food stamps, to government health care, to welfare entitlements that funnel through the federal, state, and even local tax systems, to section 8, to childcare vouchers and aftercare vouchers, to the numerous government grants funding social services. . . . . one must wonder what kind of financial/social collapse would happen if the rug were pulled from underneath. Government can't continue to expect "the rich" to keep opening their wallets.

While I have nothing but sympathy for the schools scrambling to save themselves as an outside source of money potentially dries up, I am increasing upset by the level of dependency that has developed (not passively, mind you). This level of dependency is far more threatening to the klal than any cut will ever be.

Another Tuition Event

Guest posters welcome. Wednesday, May 20, 7:30 PM at the Edmond J Safra Synagogue in New York. Join Rabbi Shmuely Boteach, Rabbi Kobrin (Ramaz), and Rabbi Adam Siegel (Ben Gamla Charter School) to discuss the Tuition Crisis and solutions. Moderated by Gary Rosenblatt of the Jewish Week who just wrote an op-ed with his own analysis and proposals to 1) rethink public/charter schooling and 2) push for vouchers, i.e. what I call the "same old, same old."

Here is hoping that one of these tuition events will result in the proposal of some new ideas, perhaps radical ideas, that don't involve the "same old, same old" of more fundraising and getting state governments to pass vouchers (not going to happen).

How about I dedicate my next post to a brainstorm of some radical ideas that don't include sending kids to public schools (although if we sit around chatting about vouchers, rather than taking radical action, that might just be what happens)?

Mind Blowing: A Charter School Was In the Works

In previous posts, we learned that Catholic Schools in financial trouble have been taking some unconventional routes to save themselves. One such route in inner city Catholic schools, which largely serve non-Catholics, is to convert the schools to charter schools. Such is the case in NYC and DC.

I was shocked to find this article in the Jewish Press. According to the article, the Yeshiva Elementary School in Miami Beach, a K-8 institution of 450 students was in deep financial trouble that the administration secured a heter to divide the school into two separate divisions. Behind on payroll and in significant debt, the administration wanted to spin the general studies division off into a charter school (which would be open to all students of all religious backgrounds).

The plan to divide the school was spoiled when the parents were informed of this plan and rallied prominent Rabbis to speak against the idea. The school does not want to go against "the gedolim." The parents also quickly raised over $100,000 to help the school remain solvent. But, anyone who has ever worked with a budget should realize that such a sum is likely a short term solution, rather than a long term solution. Of course the irony is that the parent body, who likely not completely blame free vis a vis the insolvency, were the ones to rally the opposition.

The general sentiment amongst both the Modern Orthodox and the Yeshiva Community is opposition to charter schools. At least for the Agudah (and you can see Rabbi Shafran's comments), the only 'solution' they support is vouchers, which is basically DOA.

The reporter draws this important conclusion:

Though the plan was shot down, the very fact that an institution like Yeshiva Elementary - a school on the right of the religious spectrum - would even consider such an option underscores the scope and urgency of the financial challenges facing the Orthodox world as it attempts to maintain its decades-old commitment to universal day school education. And it also reflects the growing willingness of some parents and school officials to consider more affordable alternatives.

I think the bottom line is that the years of plenty are drying up, the hurdles being currently faced by Jewish schools are large, and parents are impatient. Imagining money will magically materialize like manna in the dessert I think is a delusion. I can't say I'm gun-ho about charter school or dual language public school programs. But, I'm a realist and you can't opposed all alternatives to a comprehensive day school education when the bank is knocking on your door and you haven't made payroll in months. Insolvency, by definition, requires ACTION, not hopeful wishing. Agudah, what do you suggest besides vouchers? How many months behind on debt repayment and payroll should a school be before an alternative is worth pursuing (remember, an alternative need not be a permanent solution).

Your comments please. . . . .

It's Only As Expensive As You Make It

I believe it was none other than Rav Moshe Feinsten who warned a generation not to say "It is hard to be a Jew" saying such sentiments killed a generation. It might seem ironic that a blog dedicated to examining the economics behind the Orthodox Jew is hear to say that we need to be careful not to fall into the same trap and say, "It is too expensive to be a Jew."


Rabbi Shmuley Boteach recently made such a statement in his most recent column opining that being a frum Jew is both too expensive and too lonely (also see comments at VIN). Too lonely refers to his comments on the so called shidduch crisis and too expensive refers to the following named culprits:

• Day school/Yeshiva Education, "the killer"
• Cost of Kosher Food, including restaurants
• Cost of Jewish Festivals
• Cost of Jewish Ritual Article
• Cost of Smachot
• Cost of Housing in Jewish neighborhoods
• Cost of Shul Membership
  

He proposes the following solutions vis a vis the financial issues:

• School voucher should be the #2 political issue for the Klal, after political support for Israel.
• Marketing Kosher as mainstream to take advantage of economies of scale.
• Communal norms for smachot to bring down the level of competitiveness.
• Moratorium on capital projects

If Rabbi Boteach was the only person saying being Torah observant is simply too expensive, I'd ignore it. But, he is not alone in singing this refrain and I feel the need rebut with the following:

Rabbi Boteach, please get a hold of yourself and repeat after me: I have choices and I can choose to make living an Torah observant life significantly less expensive by
exercising free choice and free thought. A little free thought would go a long way in alleviating some of the shidduch issues too.

I'll ignore tuition during this post, although I do believe tuition is the single issue that we as a community need to take by the horns (and, no vouchers are not going to materialize in our hour of need. . . . which is NOW). We've beaten this horse, and will continue to beat this horse to death on this blog. In the meantime. . .

Let's look at Kosher food. If you base your diet around the proteins, kosher can easily cost a fortune. But, if you base your diet around grains, legumes, and produce, adding the proteins as enhancements, it will not cost that much more more than a non-kosher diet. And, I'm not going to claim that seeing uncertified cheese on sale at around half the price, e.g., doesn't get me a little hot on the collar. It does. But, as kosher consumers we can make choices. We can choose to eat different foods. We can choose to make more by scratch. We can learn to be a smarter shopper. We don't have to go out for pizza regularly. (Note to some of the Yated letter writers: the cost of pizza is where it is because people are willing to pay the price being charged. . . . . can someone please incorporate a basic microeconomics course into the high school curriculum in our Yeshivot and Bais Yaakov classes?) And, dare I say this a month before Pesach, but perhaps not every strictness is appropriate for everyone? I do know of a family that experienced a lay off and well paying employment was replaced with low paying work. They did speak with their Rabbi and ended up dropping many a strictness. It was hard for them, but getting their food budget where it needed to be allowed them to stay afloat.

Like Rabbi Boteach, I do believe that our communal organizations can help to promote kashrut as the rule rather than the exception. Truth be told, a great deal of progress has been made in the past 15 years. Today we have so many national products with certification (E.g., remember when Oreos were treif gamur?) Store brand products increasingly boast certification. Long gone are the days when Hunt's tomato sauce was the only choice. More work could be done in this area. It would be nice to see more vegan restaurants and bakeries go under the certification of the main city Va'adim. It would be incredible if a major brand of cheese (one that hits the weekly circular) would 'go kosher.' And perhaps we need to express our desires more strongly to local va'adim and national kashrut organizations. But, in the meantime, we need to remember that we hold the purse string and we can make choices.

Let's talk about the holidays. This family spend over $250 on a Purim seudah for 12 people (7 adults and 5 kids), **not** including wine or liquor. One poster thought $25 per person seemed about right. Another agreed. Perhaps we just don't eat that much. But my guess is that their seudah doesn't quite look like our seudah which cost significantly less. Festive meals can be brought down in price. It can be done. Perhaps the next kosher cookbook that goes out on the market should be titled Frugal and Kosher Cooking! In fact, let's start writing the cookbook right here. Send me your inexpensive Shabbat menus and I will feature them right here on Orthonomics (at gmail dot come). I know many of my readers are interested in what is cooking in your frugal and kosher kitchen.

On the note: Pesach is Coming. If you are putting Pesach on a tight budget, consider yourself invited as the next guest poster (also see here and here). Don't join the group of post-Pesach slaves: Avadim hayinu l'Mastercard b'America.. You can make a budget Pesach, but you will have to skip the non-gebrochts pasta that tastes more like paste than pasta.

Smachot could easily be brought within reason considering much of the excess. We've beaten the chatunah to death already. So, I'll turn my attention to the brit milah. A popular caterer is advertising a bris special package that runs over $1,200 (mohel not included!). A brit milah seudah simply shouldn't cost that much. And, it doesn't have to. If you don't want to fork over that much money, order your own bagels, send your parents/in-laws/friends/neighbors to the grocery store to pick up some items for a simple seudah. One of the nicest brit milahs that I've ever been to was organized for a family that was flat broke. The coordinator asked families in the community to contribute one item to the seudah. Quite frankly, this seudah was the best brit milah seudah I've ever been to (I guess I'm not too keen on the regular tuna and egg salad fare). What if community catered brit milahs became a norm and the kashrut barriers could be overcome? What would happen if a family where to slice some bagels and set out store bought cream cheese and some cut up fruit, vegetables, and dips on the side. Before crying out that smachot are unaffordable, perhaps we can look for alternatives. Rabbi Boteach wants the Rabbis to take the bull by the horn. I don't know when I'm going to make my next simcha, but I don't plan to spend money I have no business spending. No Rabbi need to involve themselves. The laws of physics and the laws of economics apply in our household. Scarcity of resources is the main principal of the study of economics. I'm not embarrassed that such a truism reigns true in our household. There are alternatives beyond liquidating savings or turning to a HELoc. Simchas need not be spelled $imcha.

As for the price of ritual objects and shul membership, I look at this as the price to join the club. Perhaps if we weren't Orthodox Jews we would look to join a social club or pursue a pricey hobby. But being part of a Torah observant community is a top priority, and as a top priority we can't expect it to be free. But while we choose to make ourselves a part of the Orthodox community, we can still choose to live more than 3 blocks away from the shul.

Rabbi Boteach, I agree that we need to get the cost of living a Torah observant life under control. Let's not forget that we aren't helpless. Now, off to bake my own challah. Savings: at least $150 annually. Probably more.

Could Public Schools Handle An Enrollment Increase?

There is a large group of people who believe that if the Orthodox community could come together and enroll all of its students in public school for one year that the public schools officials would start to sweat profusely and would start asking for school vouchers as there is no way that they could handle the influx of new students.

Perhaps it is only because I have a bit of passing familiarity with public schools, but I have yet to buy into this theory which I have seen thrown about. My friend MominIsrael sent me this article which hopefully will help put this theory to rest so that we can start to move from the dream mode that with a bit of achdut/achdus we can make vouchers a reality,* and into the reality mode that (at least for now) we are on our own, cannot rely on a miracle, and are going to have to keep funding our schools on our own.

The author of this article was responding to the assertion in a previous letter that objected to the half day public, half day religious model for many reasons including: "Lastly, the absorption of the yeshiva students to the public school would overwhelm the public system in Teaneck and other locations in North Jersey as well in parts of New York City. How does Ms. Citron suggest that the public schools deal with the special requirements imposed by the absorption of a large number of Orthodox students?" The author writes about a time when he had sat down with previous superintendent of the Teaneck schools to talk about some sort of half day school plan that could accommodate the Orthodox student. The superintendent liked the plan and, surprised, the author asked "Won’t it strain your system?”

The answer: “Yes," “That would happen in the short run. But the thought of having all those bright kids and their involved parents is extremely appealing. Those parents care deeply about their kids’ educations, and the entire school system would benefit from their input and involvement.”

I think it is time to put the theory to rest that the public schools would throw vouchers at us if we were to enroll our student in mass in the public school system to make a statement. As it stands now, many public schools facing crowded conditions have implemented alternative schedules. E.g., one school I lived near had two kindergarten schedules a day, early morning start and afternoon start. Somehow, they accommodated these students in older grades too. If the community where to buy into the theory that the public schools would throw funding and/or vouchers to keep our kids should be enroll in mass in public school, I'm afraid the joke would be on us.

Note: This post should not be construed as supportive of a half day public-half day religious model. I am ony looking at the assertion that the public schools wouldn't be able to handle the enrollment increase.

*I happen to support school vouchers, but the widespread public support needed is simply not there at this time, nor do I believe it is likely to materialize in the middle of a recession when public school students are seeing their own programs cut.

Homeschooling: Will The Agudah Join this Battle?

The State of the Union Address was hardly over before the Agudah released a statement on President Bush's proposal to increased educational choice via school vouchers for children from lower income families who are stuck in failing schools. Instead of calling this proposed program a voucher program, President Bush called it "Pell Grants for Kids." The Agudah's spokesman Rabbi Avi Shafran quickly penned a letter saying in short that educational choice shouldn't be just for kids in failing schools and commenting that calling the proposed idea "Pell Grants" is misleading. I never commented on this letter because frankly I'm quite exhausted by the voucher debate within the frum community. Why not pen a letter giving full support to a voucher program for needy children in failing schools, which the wish that once a voucher program is off the ground that it be expanded to include more children, rather than showing opposition to the idea because it just isn't inclusive enough, etc?

On Friday, I heard about a battle brewing over homeschooling in California as reported by the Los Angeles Times here. After hearing about the case on the radio, I did a little research of my own.

A case came before the Second Appellate District Court, Division 3, which involved a home schooling family, a Christian umbrella school, and some allegations of abuse in which the Appellate Court ruled there is no right for parents to home school their children and that California children must be either 1) enrolled in a public school, 2) enrolled in a private school, or 3) be tutored by a credentialed teacher who is credentialed for the appropriate grade level. Incidentally, California does not require private school teachers to be credentialed, only requiring them to be "competent." Justice H. Walter Croskey signed the decision and was joined by two other judges.

According to this article, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger "denounced a state appeals court ruling that severely restricts homeschooling and promised Friday to change the law if necessary to guarantee that parents are able to educate their children at home." He stated "Every California child deserves a quality education, and parents should have the right to decide what's best for their children," "Parents should not be penalized for acting in the best interests of their children's education," and "This outrageous ruling must be overturned by the courts, and if the courts don't protect parents' rights then, as elected officials, we will."

According to the article quoted above, home schooling is an issue that has come up for debate amongst state lawmakers before:

"In 2002, then-state Superintendent of Public Instruction Delaine Eastin said homeschooling was illegal and that she would enforce the law. Eastin then
asked the Legislature to take up the issue. It declined. Six months later, [Jack] O'Connell took over as state schools chief and opted for a hands-off approach, directing homeschooling families to the forms required to create a private school and telling local districts that truancy was their issue. For five years, homeschooling remained politically dormant."

How many are affected? It is estimated that there are 166,000 known home schoolers in California. There are also a total of 18,352 students attending private schools with 5 students or less.

The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), for which the original family are not members, is planning to file an amicus brief on behalf of 13,500 member families in California arguing "that a proper interpretation of California statutes makes it clear that parents may legally teach their own children under the private-school exemption." Should that route fail, the Association plans to argue the decision "violate[s] the constitutional rights of parents to direct the education and upbringing of their children."

The HSDLA also may "seek to have this particular decision “depublished.” Depublication is a decision that can only be made by the California Supreme Court. If the Court determines that the decision should stand, regarding this family, on the facts presented, but that the general pronouncements of law for all of homeschooling should not be determined by this case, then the Court has the option of “depublishing” the Court of Appeal’s decision. This would mean that the case is not binding precedent in California and has no effect on any other family."

The HSLDA is also asking "other organizations and persons to assist with the amicus process so that a full defense of home education, religious freedom, and parental rights can be given to the California Supreme Court."

I love to see the the Agudah (the OU, or any other Orthodox umbrella organization) file their own amicus brief and/or petition for depublication. This battle also involves "educational choice," which Rabbi Shafran and the Agudah write in favor. It is a battle over whether a parent has the right to take full responsibility for the education of his/her child(ren). Of course, there is no governmental money involved in homeschooling and those who homeschool do so on their own buck. So the potential "nes" factor isn't a primary motivation to become involved.

My husband points out that frum organizations would have little interest in getting involved in this battle. While there are frum home schoolers in California (mostly among Chabad shulchim), the Orthodox umbrella institutions are there to advocate for Orthodox institutions.

I would argue that while the right to home school in California might not seem particularly relevant to the Orthodox Jewish community in the present. In fact, many Jewish Educators are extremely biased against home schooling. But, as the costs tuition spiral out of control, it could become increasingly relevant (whether or not anyone likes it) sometime in the not so far off future.

Readers, your thoughts?

JO Review: These Are Solutions?

I got sidetracked from my Jewish Observer "Tuition Dilemma" Review, but now that Yeshiva World News has re-posted an article from that edition, I thought I would try to return to the review, at least temporarily.


At one time I had a draft on file regarding this article, but I deleted it because I couldn't hold myself back from making very rude comments in regards to assertions such as "Yeshivos have become very creative and entrepreneurial in finding ways to close their budget gaps." And "To an honest and realistic person, our school administrator knows his business very well. He has been successful in steering the ship through very choppy waters. This same executive director or administrator has become so talented at balancing the budget, his skills match those of any corporate CFO. The fact that he stays at the yeshiva is in itself real mesiras nefesh." While I don't doubt there is some stellar financial management going on, I would say this assertion is over-gratuitous. I'll hold try to hold my tongue, but we have discussed non-payment of Yeshiva employees and unsuccessful and even loosing fundraisers. Hopefully the author had something else in mind in regards to "creative and entrepreneurial ways to close the budget gap."


The main thrust of the article was to offer "solutions" to the problems of funding yeshiva educations. These "solutions" were put forward:

1. Solicit Big Money Donors.
2. Lobby for Tax Relief.
3. Lobby for Tuition Vouchers.

Oy! If this is the level of thinking that we are seeing, then I can only fear that nothing will be done to make a dent in tuition. Regarding #3, vouchers were just defeated on referendum in the State of Utah. Regarding #2, a frum family in Los Angeles already tried to deduct tuition for religious subjects, 55%, and fought their case up the latter in tax court with the backing of Agudah. They lost on appeal and in over 10 years there has been no light at the end of the tunnel. Vouchers and tax relief are just not happening (sorry to be so pessimistic and/or realistic). To put all of our eggs in this basket would be like adding a line item into the budget to buy lotto tickets weekly. I do believe we should lobby for vouchers and tax relief, but we cannot rely on a miracle and have to take a different approach.

Solution 1 is the best of the 3 that has been put forward by the author. But in my opinion there are major, major, major impediments to inspiring both major and minor donors. We have too much to support and no priorities. Kollelim and Kiruv have won out over day schools. Donors have been alienated. There is little to no financial transparency. There is duplicity and little to no unity (e.g. an Orthodox School Region/District). Donors/Parents have little control (elected boards for our regions/districts). For related reading see: Eliot Pasik (and here) and George Hanus (founder of the Superfund in Chicago).

Let's be honest. If you had millions to give, would you turn your money over? And to what school?

To be continued.

Tuition Vouchers: Perhaps it is Time to Stop Dreaming

Hat Tip: Charlie Hall

Bring up Orthodox day school/yeshiva tuition in a conversation and without fail someone will suggest lobbying the government for school vouchers. Nearly every tuition feature in nearly every major Jewish publication puts forward vouchers as the elusive solution.

While I support lobbying efforts on behalf of vouchers by major Orthodox organizations and while I, a lifelong conservative, am a supporter of vouchers even where frum interests are unconcerned, I think it is time to say loud and clear, "stop dreaming." Let's not pin our hopes on a pipe dream.

I don't want to wave a white flag, but the news out of Utah, probably the most conservative state in the Union, should provide a wake up call to the Orthodox community, most of whom live in some of the most liberal states and locales, that widespread vouchers won't be coming to a location near you anytime soon (even if some frum Jews in Milwaukee have benefitted).

Read the article yourself. It is well worth your time. With over 60% voting down vouchers of between $500-$3000 in a referendum, I think it is time we start looking at other pieces of the puzzle to put a dent in the Tuition Crisis.

Elliot Pasik: Two Building Solution

My last guest post on tuition created a bit of discussion in the comments. Another idea that is being floated in regards to tuition comes from the New York State Yeshiva Parents Association lead by Elliot Pasik. In a February 2007 letter to various NYS Senators and Committee Chairs, the association writes these points about the cost of Yeshiva Education and how the NY governments can partner with religious parents to help alleviate the costs associated with a Yeshiva/Day School Education. (Note: This is NOT a push for a miracle such as vouchers. It is a long read for a blog post, but please hang in there. . . especially since I couldn't remember how to copy text from a PDF document and I typed this manually. . . . thank goodness I type fast, my parents insisted I take typing in summer school, which I did more than once). And, of course, add your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The tuition burden for nonpublic religious school parents is well past the breaking point. The norm is for middle-class orthodox Jewish families, with two full-time working parents, and three-to-six children, annually paying between twenty and forty thousand dollars per year, every year, for k-12 yeshiva/Hebrew day school education. This backbreaking tuition burden contributes to numerous negative social consequences including, debt, substance abuse, family instability, divorce, and kids-at-risk. The Jewish media is filled with recent articles addressing the yeshiva tuition problem, but unfortunately, little of practical nature is being done on a comprehensive basis. See, “The Tuition Squeeze: Paying the Price of Jewish Education”, Jewish Action, Fall 2005, Vol. 66, No. 1 (published by the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America); “The Tuition Dilemma”, The Jewish Observer, Jan/Feb. 2007, Vol. 40, No. 1 (published by Agudath Israel of America)’ Pasik, “Resolving the Tuition Crisis”, The Jewish Press, January 11, 2006, p. 1.

Government intervention, through the rule of law, can help. Public schools are, of course, required to reveal their finances, budgets, and salaries. Public scrutiny and Government oversight can and has led to taxpayer savings, and wiser spending.

Nonpublic religious schools should be subject to the same rules of financial transparency. Again, as required by law, education, whether public or nonpublic, is a public trust. How can nonpublic school parents determine whether their hard-earned tuition money is being wisely spent unless we see the financial books and records? How can the professional parents amongst us, with backgrounds in business and accounting, make suggests that will reduce spending, and lower tuition? Financial transparency is simply common sense.

9. The tuition burden for orthodox Jewish families can also be alleviated by a “two-building” solution for many. The First Amendment clearly prohibits religious instruction within public school buildings during the school day (McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948)), but there is no constitutional impediment for religious children studying secular subjects (e.g., arithmetic, reading, spelling, etc.) in public schools during, let’s say, the morning hours, and religious subjects in a yeshiva building in the afternoon. A two-building program like this could cut religious school tuitions by nearly half, and revitalize numerous public school districts by brining in new students. Educ. Law 3210(b) provides that, “Absense for religious observance and education shall be permitted under rules that the commissioner shall establish.” Under this statute, it would appear that public school districts could arrange for a program for the children of religious families to attend public schools for the study of essential secular subjects for a portion of the day, and then release them for religious education.

The is, however, a regulatory obstacle. Rule 109.2 of the Rules of the Commissioner of Education (8 N.Y.C.R.R. 109.2(e)) onerously provides that released time for religious education shall be a maximum of one hour per week. The rule states, “(A)bsense for a released time program, grade K-12, shall be for not more than one hour each week. . . “

We believe this is a patently unconstitutional regulation, that interferes with the First Amendment guarantee of Free Exercise of Religion. One hour per week for the study of the Jewish religion is simply not enough. We would expect that members of other faiths may feel the same about their religious educational needs.

Released time for religious instruction was held to be constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in, Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952), affg. 303 N.Y. 161. Justice William O. Douglas wrote the following, for the majority:

“We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. When the State encourages religious instruction or cooperates with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public events to sectarian needs, it then follows the best of our traditions, for it then respects the religious nature of our people and accommodates the public services to their spiritual needs. To hold that is may not would be to find in the Constitution a requirement that the government show a callous indifference to religious group. That would be preferring those who believe in no religious over those who do believe. We find no constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence.”

According to the web site, ReleasedTime.org, 31 states do not establish any hourly maximum for religious study released time. These 31 states flexibly allow public school districts to establish their own policies. Only 9 state, including New York, set a rock bottom maximum of one hour per week. The remaining states establish varying amounts of maximum released time.

We respectfully submit that New York should repeal its rule limiting religious study released time to one hour per week. New York, with its long history of commitment to civil liberties and civil rights, should joint he majority of those states that wisely allow local school districts to flexibly establish their own policies and rules, and thereby meet local needs. This would be particularly appropriate in New York, where we have significant orthodox Jewish populations venued in certain regions and neighborhoods throughout New York City, Long Island, Westchester, and Rockland County. Local school districts arranging for a “two-building” program could simultaneously alleviate the tuition crunch facing orthodox Jewish and other religious families, and revitablize their public schools. The recent October 24, 2006 annoucement by the U.S. Department of Educaiton that same-sex public schools will be allowed under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 gives impetus to this proposal. Orthodox Jewish children, and children of other faiths, can thereby partially attend same-sex public schools for the study of required secular subjects, without compromising their beliefs.

10. Finally, we support Gove. Spitzer’s proposal of $1,000 per child tuition tax credits for nonpublic school parents. This proposal can do much to alleviate the crushing tuition burden faced by nonpublic religious school families.