Middle- and lower-income families need a way to pay for elementary and secondary school costs, according to Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. That’s why he sponsored a bill that would create tax-free education accounts — for families earning up to $150,000 a year.

Imagine the difficulty of a family making that sort of money, or an individual earning up to $95,000 a year, needing the tax-free account to pay for school uniforms or transportation to public schools. Now imagine the likelihood of a truly poor family taking advantage of the option to tuck away a spare $2,500 a year in the tax-free account. Who are these accounts really for? The Treasury Department estimates that three-fourths of the benefit would go to those in the top one-fourth in income. Private schools, too, would be the beneficiaries.

Despite its flaws, this tax cut for the comfortable passed the House last week, 230-198, with Maine Reps. John Baldacci and Tom Allen opposing the measure. The Senate will consider a similar bill soon and should reject it not only because it it provides an unfair tax cut under the guise of helping the poor, but also because it is a sneaky way of offering public funds — in this case, saved tax dollars — to private schools.

There may be a place to use vouchers to help students in desperately failing public schools, but the backdoor approach is not the way to test this. Congress currently has several more honest voucher proposals before it and can debate their merits without the subterfuge that accompanies this legislation.

If members of Congress are truly interested in offering a tax break to the middle and lower classes, they can begin by cutting the top income levels by two-thirds. Then they could take the private-school incentives out of the tax break. More simply, they could scrap the entire bill and try again.