What the Utah Voucher Defeat Does and Doesn't Mean

The article about the defeat of vouchers in Utah is quite mistaken to say that voucher programs have always failed at the polls.  School choice has regularly been adopted as a remedy for failing public-school systems: for example, in Wisconsin (Milwaukee), Ohio (Cleveland), the District of Columbia, and Florida (failing districts statewide).  It has mostly failed -- for example in California and Utah -- when the scope of the program is universal, covering even middle-class to wealthy parents in decent or better school districts.  While there are arguments of justice even for universal vouchers, the claim is significantly  stronger when the program is targeted at those who have no hope of affording private schools -- as Rick suggests by his references to "vulnerable children [trapped in] badly-performing schools" versus "wealthy families [who] are able to exercise 'choice.'"  The Utah program was somewhat targeted, giving $3,000 per child to the poorest families and $500 to the wealthiest, but it could have been more so (it didn't need to include the higher-income levels).  Targeting those in need allows the program to get closer to funding fully their tuition at private schools, even good ones, and thus not to require the school to kick in a lot more.  So again, while a universal school-choice program still has several things to be said for it -- and I would have voted for this program -- a real emphasis on empowering the poor calls for the program to be targeted at modest incomes.  The subsidiarity-based strategy of school choice should act in the service of a more progressive (i.e. modest-income-focused) allocation of government spending on education.  Do you agree, Rick?

Politcally speaking, Utah was in many ways an unlikely place for universal school choice to succeed; so I wouldn't draw broad conclusions from last week's result.  The state has relatively few Catholics and Catholic schools, and although the bishop of Utah endorsed the proposal, the Catholic Church did not throw a lot of weight behind it (or have much weight to throw).  The Church in Utah, the Mormon Church, for the most part does not operate its own general K-12 schools (there are "seminaries" for religious training but not general education).  Mormons, although conservative, are not alienated from public schools to anywhere near the same extent as many other religious conservatives -- especially since, because the LDS Church dominates culturally in most of Utah, the ethos of the public schools is usually relatively sympathetic to Mormon values.  Although Utah's public schools have their problems, particularly in serving minority and low-income children, they are not in any kind of statewide meltdown comparable to those in Cleveland, Milwaukee, and some Florida districts.  Before the referendum, there was talk that if the program failed, proponents might come back with a proposal targeted at low-income families, with respect to whom there are serious problems in the Utah public schools.  From what I gathered while in Utah last month speaking on the issue, it remains a distinct possibility that such a proposal would pass.

I also agree with Rick that it's rich for opponents of school choice to crow about how "the voters have spoken," when every time the voters enact a choice program the opponents fight tooth and nail in court to get it wiped out.

Tom B.