Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Regretting President Obama's lack of support for choice and opportunity in DC
The White House -- despite the occasional encouraging sign of openness to education reform -- continues to oppose even D.C.'s small experiment in school-choice for low-income kids in D.C. Sad.
UPDATE: The Washington Post gets it right.
We understand the argument against using public funds for private, and especially parochial, schools. But it is parents, not government, choosing where to spend the vouchers. Given that this program takes no money away from public or public charter schools; that the administration does not object to parents directing Pell grants to Notre Dame or Georgetown; and that members of the administration would never accept having to send their own children to failing schools, we don’t think the argument is very persuasive. Maybe that’s why an administration that promised never to let ideology trump evidence is making an exception in this case.
https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2011/03/regretting-president-obamas-lack-of-support-for-choice-and-opportunity-in-dc.html
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the
comment feed
for this post.
The idea that "the program takes no money away from public or public charter schools" is naive. While this specific bill or proposal may not, the more we shift towards a voucher system, the less money will go to public education. Those so poor as to not be able to afford private education, even with vouchers, won't have the political clout to ensure proper funding of public education, and public schools will quickly deteriorate as the money dries up.
Vouchers cannot be pursued unless we commit to making them available to 100% of students within a few years. And if we do that, the cost of private education will skyrocket while the quality drops.
Voucher programs sound nice in rhetoric. Everyone likes the thought of integrating in the "rich kids' school" rather than improving the quality of the run-down PS 138. But the sad fact is that such integration just won't happen. There are always great success stories when vouchers are tried on a small scale. But the disruption they'd cause in wide-spread use would eliminate all of the purported benefits.