We have been told that cost would not go up if the children were put into the public school system. Statistics just don't bear this fact out. How can you dump 3,000 pupils into the public school system without an increase in cost? We have been told that this is a form of discrimination. I am not a philosopher, I am not a lawyer, and educator, or a judge, so I am really the rabbit in the lion's den, but I don't think the legislation is equal or there is equal opportunity for every person in this city and the State and the Nation, because if everyone was exactly equal, then we would have a rather amazing society where we would no longer need a President or a Congress for the State of Rhode Island or anyone.

I think all children should have equal opportunity. As I said, I am not a lawyer and I won't presume to comment on the constitutionality. We have been told the voucher program stands and is standing this test and I could say that the first 16 words of the first amendment to the Constitution which I thought were well thought out by the men who wrote them, have grown into many, many thousands of words in recent years. I think all of us down in the grassroots level may be insignificant in many areas, but I think as citizens we have a right to question, we have a right to inquire, we have a right to wonder and we have a right to ask for a say in the direction in which these children of ours are going. Thank you, that is all I have to say, Senator.

Senator PELL. Thank you very much. In this regard, you know the voucher system can be brought into effect at local option, the State can do it, the community can do it if there is enough public support for it. The experiment, I believe, in Massachusetts is being partially funded by OEO, the Office of Employment Opportunity, but it can be done on local levels and this is one of the thoughts that I am glad to be ventilated in this hearing. From a Federal viewpoint it is going to take not only the support of the individual Senators and Congressmen, but also the support of the administration if we are to get through anything on a national level.

Mr. HEASLIP. It is not going to be done overnight and we are trying to implement it right now in the city of Pawtucket.

Senator PELL. Personally, I am not yet convinced that is the way, but one of the purposes of this hearing is to air that, and I would also want to see the results of the experiment in its use which is presently in effect. Thank you very much for your statement indeed.

Our next witness is an old friend, Mrs. Robert Finkelstein, chairwoman of the Committee to Protect and Strengthen Public Schools. Mrs. FINKELSTEIN. I would like to express thanks to Senator Pell for permitting me to present these views today.

Senator PELL. Delighted.

STATEMENT OF MRS. ROBERT FINKELSTEIN, CHAIRWOMAN OF THE COMMITTEE TO PROTECT AND STRENGTHEN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Mrs. FINKELSTEIN. I am a product of the public school system. I remember clearly that when I went to school parents were not only enthusiastic about enrolling their children in the public schools but also that students were eager to attend these public institutions.

It was the beginning of the century and the area in which my family resided was crowded with immigrants from many foreign lands: Italy, Ireland, Rumania, Poland, Russia, Syria, Lebanon, and even China. We lived not far from New York's Chinatown.

A large segment of the population in that neighborhood had departed their native lands because they saw no promise of a better future there for themselves. The new Americans in our area appeared at ease in their newly adopted country and it was equally evident that their children were very much at home in the public schools which offered them educational opportunities and hope unknown to their parents in their native countries. There were many diverse ethnic and religious groups among the student population in my public school but we were never segregated according to nationality or religion. To tell it as it was, race was not a problem in those days: blacks were hardly visable in that predominantly European environment. In school, all of us were Americans; I believe most of us would have resented and rejected a hyphenated American label and we developed among other commonly shared values a fierce loyalty to the institution that provided us the treasured educational opportunity and the chance for upward mobility not available anywhere else in the world. For years I was aware of the tremendous contribution made by the public school system to the growth and well-being of our country and I recognized its important role in unifying the diversified ethnic and religious groups in the United States but I never realized the full significance and contribution of our public school system until I and my family spent a summer in Quebec, Canada, in 1940.

For the first time we saw and experienced the corroding effects of antagonism between English-Canadian Protestants and FrenchCanadian Catholics, two ethnic religious groups native to Canada for centuries. We also learned at the same time that our English-speaking children were never safe from attack among French-speaking children when we turned our backs. We were aghast that our gentle 6-year-old daughter and her 3-year-old brother had to be under the protective care of an adult because the kids in that neighborhood had sized them up as "les Anglaise" and treated them like enemies.

The unexpected overt emnity we witnessed among the children in Quebec expanded our knowledge of the consequences of a publicly supported dual system of education. We personally viewed the effects of a dual system which perpetrated the differences that separated and divided the two ethnic religious groups living side by side for hundreds of years. It was that summer that my husband and I developed a profound new respect and deep gratitude for the uniquely American institution that had unified numerous diverse ethnic segments into unhyphenated, nonbeligerent Americans.

After that summer in Canada, my husband and I committed ourselves to protecting and strengthening our public school system. Recent events in Northern Ireland reinforced our commitment to the American system and fortified our resolve to save American children from the traumatic experiences of their peers in Canada, Ireland, and elsewhere. My husband's untiring efforts in behalf of the public schools continued until his recent death. Shortly before he died he wrote a statement on the nonpublic-school issue. He was chairman of the

Committee to Protect and Strengthen Public Schools at the time and I am taking the liberty of reading his testimony as representative of our organization's policy. I am now quoting my husband:

There is a firm belief among many Americans that the public schools have a unique and vital function. They serve as no other institution does, to fashion a cohesive society, to instill loyalty in our country, and to teach democratic values. Unlike their non-public counterparts, the public schools are dedicated to serve children of all races, colors, creeds; of all ethnic, cultural, social, economic backgrounds.

Our public schools make education available to all. The non-public schools are quite different: they are operated by a special group to serve special private purposes. At this point it is important to make unequivocally clear that opposition to tax aid to non-public schools in no way implies a lack of respect for their right to exist and flourish. A parochial school is as different from a public school as a Christian Science Reading Room is different from a Public Library and this difference makes the Public Library eligible and the other, ineligible for tax support. The parochial school is actually the church engaged in one of its most important activities, education. It is a place of sectarian indoctrination operated for religious ends and purposes. Doctor George N. Shuster, a well known Catholic educator, expressed it this way: "The major purpose of the Catholic school is primarily to develop religious knowledge and practice." Father Mullen, who you heard speak today, Superintendent of Catholic Schools in Rhode Island has made similar comments as have a number of church leaders at various times. It can hardly be denied, therefore, that parochial schools are maintained to preserve and strengthen the faith. Tax aid to church schools eases the financial burden of these schools thereby enabling the church to continue and to expand its program of religious instruction.

If the constitutional free exercise of religion means anything, it means that each of us has the right to support only the religious institution of our free choice and the right not to support any institution of religion. It is apparent that cohersing citizens to support the doctrinal teachings and the spiritual objectives of a particular church violates the fundamental principle of freedom of religion. A successful attempt by the church to secure public funds for its schools would undermine not only the freedom of religion principle, it would destroy another cherished American tradition, separation of church and state.

In addition to the constitutional issues involved, tax aid to non-public schools is contrary to sound public policy. There is just so much tax money available for education. The diversion of public funds to non-public schools would disastrously weaken the fiscal foundation of the public system that is already critically under-financed. Public schools increasingly deprived of urgently needed funds would become the dumping grounds for racial and ethnic minorities, for the low income, the handicapped, the retarded, the problem students, and others not acceptable in non-public schools.

The non-public schools are racially segregated schools. Nationwide, less than one percent of the students in non-public schools are black In New York City, statistics reveal that while less than 10 percent of the children in non-public schools are blacks and Puerto Ricans, more than 48 percent of the total school population are blacks and Puerto Ricans.

The parochial schools have been segregated schools. The courts have held that tax supported schools may not practice segregation. The focus of court decisions has been on racial segregation but racial segregation is only one form of student isolation practiced by parochial schools. One of the purposes of the church school has been to isolate the children of a particular religion from others holding different beliefs. The evidence speaks for itself. How many Catholic or Protestant students attend Jewish Parochial schools? How many Jewish or Catholic students are enrolled in Seventh Day Adventist Parochial schools? Denominational control and religious dogma offer effective barriers to those who do not share the same beliefs.

Tax aid to non-public schools would be unsound public policy because it would tend to undermine interfaith harmony on account of calamitous competition. There are approximately 250 known religion sects in the United States. Under a system of tax aid for non-public schools, religious groups would have the right to establish their own schools. Consider the arm twisting that would occur as

clergymen and lobbyists of the various faiths put pressure on politicians for larger shares of the tax dollars. Will schools operated by Jehovah Witness', Seventh Day Adventists, Mennonites, the Amish; by the Buddhist, the Hindus, the Black Moslems be treated fairly and equally when funds are disbursed by elected officials?

Our society is split as never before; the generation gap, the drug problem, the Vietnam war issue, the black-white conflict. There certainly is a limit to the amount of diversiveness a society can endure before complete collapse. Those who would risk such an eventuality in their pursuit of public dollars must bear an awesome responsibility for the consequences.

Mrs. FINKELSTEIN. To my husband's concerned testimony I add only the plea that we perpetuate the America in which he believed, the same America in which President John F. Kennedy believed, an America "where separation of church and state is absolute and where no church or church schools is granted any public funds for political preference." I respectfully urge you to use your influence and authority to assure that no church school is granted any public funds. Thank you, Senator. Senator PELL. Thank you. I think the question of aid is probably one where the aid would follow the children not directly to the school. I want to go back for a second to one statement that you mention which was that the prime purpose of a church school, of a nonpublic school or a church school was the promotion of the faith, is that correct or not?

Mrs. FINKELSTEIN. I was quoting Doctor Shuster, a Roman Catholic educator and also at different times, Father Mullen has made the very same statement as we listened at numerous public hearings and when we had this issue come up before the General Assembly in Rhode Island, so this I believe was what my husband meant when he said that.

Senator PELL. I do not believe that that is the main purpose of a church school. I know certainly the church school that I went to, did not have that as its main purpose at all. I regret to say probably religion was too far incidental to the whole purpose of the school. This is the question of different men and different views. I think we have another representative of the Catholic school system coming up and we will ask him that. What would be your view as to aid to nonsectarian private schools such as the Providence Free School?

Mrs. FINKELSTEIN. Senator Pell, we are completely devoted and dedicated to public education. I would like to see the concept of free education and free schools brought right into our public schools. There is nothing that our public schools cannot do if we have the will to do it and that is the concept which some people believe in and which I agree may serve the educational needs of a certain segment of our population. I am all for it, but within our public school system. I am for diversity in our public schools system, Senator, Senator Pell.

Senator PELL. Your view then is that no Federal support should go to any private schools at all, church related or not church related?

Mrs. FINKELSTEIN. Right. I believe that our moneys, all the money that we can get should go into the public school system and we should develop them to their very fullest potential and if we ever do, we will have a system as no other country in the world has and we really can set an example of democratic living and American living, Senator Pell.

Senator PELL. I thank you very much indeed for coming and as you know I had a huge regard for your husband and appreciate your quoting his words to us.

Mrs. FINKELSTEIN. Thank you.

(The prepared statement of Mrs. Finkelstein follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT TO THE SENATE SUB-COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION, JANUARY 18, 1972, BY AUGUSTA P. FINKELSTEIN, ACTING CHAIRWOMAN, COMMITTEE TO PROTECT AND STRENGTHEN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

SUBJECT: NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS

I am a product of the public school system. I remember clearly that when I went to school parents were not only enthusiastic about enrolling their children in the public schools but also that students were eager to attend these public institutions.

It was the beginning of the century and the area in which my family resided was crowded with immigrants from many foreign lands: Italy, Ireland, Romania, Poland, Russia, Syria, Lebanon, and even China. (We lived not far from New York's Chinatown.)

A large segment of the population in that neighborhood had departed their native lands because they saw no promise of a better future there for themselves. The new Americans in our area appeared at ease in their newly-adopted country and it was equally evident that their children were very much at home in the public schools which offered them educational opportunities and hope unknown to their parents in their native countries.

There were many diverse ethnic and religious groups among the student population in my public school but we were never segregated according to "nationality" or "religion". (To tell it as it was, "race" was not a problem in those days: blacks were hardly visible in that predominantly European environment). In school, all of us were Americans; I believe most of us would have resented and rejected a hyphenated-American label and we developed among other commonly shared values a fierce loyalty to the institution that provided us the treasured educational opportunity and the chance for upward mobility not available anywhere else in the world.

For years I was aware of the tremendous contribution made by the public school system to the growth and well-being of our country and I recognized its important role in unifying the diversified ethnic and religious groups in the United States but I never realized the full significance and contribution of our public school system until I and my family spent a summer in Quebec, Canada, in 1940.

For the first time we saw and experienced the corroding effects of antagonism between English-Canadian Protestants and French-Canadian Catholics, two ethnic-religious groups native to Canada for centuries. We also learned at the same time that our English-speaking children were never safe from attack among French-speaking children when we turned our backs. We were aghast that our gentle six-year old daughter and her three-year old brother had to be under the protective care of an adult because the kids in that neighborhood had sized them up as "les Anglais" and treated them like enemies!

The unexpected overt enmity we witnessed among the children in Quebec expanded our knowledge of the consequences of a publicly-supported dual system of education. We personally viewed the effects of a dual system which perpetuated the differences that separated and divided the two ethnic-religious groups living side by side for hundreds of years. It was that summer that my husband an I developed a profound new respect and deep gratitude for the uniquely American institution that had unified numerous diverse ethnic segments into unhyphenated, non-belligerent Americans.

After that summer in Canada my husband and I committed ourselves to protecting and strengthening our public school system. Recent events in Northern Ireland reinforced our commitment to the American system and fortified our resolve to save American children from the traumatic experiences of their peers in Canada, Ireland, and elsewhere. My husband's untiring efforts in behalf of the public schools continued until his recent death. Shortly before he died he

85-871 0-72- -29