The End of School Choice
The Mutation of the School Choice Movement into a Deadly Anti-Public School Virus
Civic Way continues its look at public education. This essay is about universal vouchers and the corruption of the school choice movement. The author, Bob Melville, is the founder of Civic Way, a nonprofit dedicated to good government, and a management consultant with over 45 years of experience improving public agencies.
To get universal school choice, you need … universal public school distrust. – Chris Rufo
Introduction
School choice is popular among many families because they want the best for their children. It is popular among certain politicians because they crave power.
As Chris Rufo, one of the far right’s youngest leaders, has confirmed, the far right decided to hijack the school choice issue for political purposes. To publicly fund private and religious schools, the extreme right knew it had to first seize political power. To seize power, it had to destroy public trust in public schools and teachers.
In the hands of far right politicians, the mutated school choice campaign has become a cynical political gambit for dismantling our public education system. As a result, the school choice crusade has become the single biggest threat to our public education system, not because it will expand educational options but because it won’t. And in forsaking its initial mission, it will do irrevocable damage to the nation’s public education system.
The School Choice Movement
School choice was once about creating an array of options within the public education system, promoting ideas like open enrollment, magnet schools and charter schools. It offered an alluring bargain, more school management latitude (with accountability) for improved academic outcomes.
However, the far right grew impatient with the pace of public school reforms. And it saw—and seized—an opportunity. Instead of reforming public schools, it decided to vilify them. Instead of fully funding public schools, it decided to divert public education dollars to private schools. Instead of strengthening accountability measures for public funds, it decided to abandon them altogether.
Their plan? Spread misinformation. Sow public fears about public schools. Undermine public trust in school officials, teachers and librarians. Divert public tax dollars from public schools, including charters, to private schools, including fundamentalist church schools. Give families, including wealthy families, public funds to attend private schools.
Their program? Universal vouchers and their companion education savings accounts (ESAs). More informally, backpack funding, the elitist notion that public funds should follow the students no matter where they go, even religious indoctrination centers and home schools. Private interests over public interests. Traditional public and charter schools—and the common good—be damned.
The new school choice movement is no grassroots campaign. It is led by such beomoths as American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Heritage Foundation, Americans for Prosperity, Walton Family Foundation, Stand Together (the Charles Koch foundation) and American Federation for Children Victory Fund (Betsy Devos’ initiative). Its mission is to achieve universal school choice in most states regardless of the costs[i].
The Rebranding of School Choice
One of the conceits of the school choice movement is that, before it arrived, the nation’s public education system offered little choice. This conceit overlooks several facts starting with the reality that most wealthy families have access to—and can easily afford—private school without the benefit of vouchers. It also ignores the diversity of traditional public school alternatives, such as magnet school programs[ii].
The school choice movement also seems to have mysteriously lost interest in charter schools. Since their inception in the 1990s, charter schools have enjoyed strong bipartisan support, including the support of former presidents Bill Clinton, George Bush and Barack Obama, and governors and mayors from both parties. They also have received strong federal support[iii].
Why have school choice leaders turned their backs on charter schools? Is it because charters are still public schools? Or it is because charters, like traditional public schools, aren’t allowed to discriminate? Or that most charters are subject to public accountability and oversight? It certainly isn’t because their quality is inferior to that of the private religious and home schools funded by vouchers.
It can take years to fairly assess a school’s success or failure and the evidence on charters has been mixed. Initial studies left charter advocates disappointed[iv]. However, recent independent studies suggest that charter school performance may be improving[v]. The public seems to agree. Public charter school enrollment continues to rise, outpacing traditional public schools since 2020.
This is not to suggest that the traditional public school model is as diverse and dynamic as it should be. Too many public school districts still limit transfers using outmoded district boundaries. And, while over 40 states offer some version of open enrollment at traditional public schools[vi], many jurisdictions still discourage open enrollment[vii]. And many jurisdictions continue to resist charters, some by barring charter co-location at public facilities[viii] and some by investing less in charter schools than traditional public schools[ix].
Universal Voucher Programs
Universal vouchers and education savings accounts (ESAs) treat K–12 education as a commodity that can be unbundled. A product that can be parceled and sold like retail merchandise. A la carte academic offerings for individual families without regard for our common national needs.
The whole concept of backpack funding—in which public education dollars accompany each student—is
based on two premises. The first is that some children don’t need the full bundle of traditional public school services. The second is that no children need civic education to become good citizens, and its corollary premise democracy does not need public education to thrive.
Over 30 states have voucher programs. These programs have many differences but two merit special scrutiny.
First, there is the distinction between vouchers and ESAs. Voucher programs limit the use of public funds to private school tuition. ESAs, the fastest-growing private school funding program[x], are voucher-plus programs that allow public funds to be spent on other activities[xi]. While most ESA funds appear to have been used for tuition thus far[xii], the weak controls inherent with these programs could lead to spending abuses.
Second, there is the eligibility chasm between universal programs and other voucher programs. The initial voucher programs were designed to benefit low-income families and those with children in failing public schools[xiii]. Universal voucher programs eliminate or weaken such eligibility requirements, opening the program doors to all families, including those who can easily afford private school and those with children already attending private[xiv]or home school[xv].
Universal voucher advocates have enjoyed great success in recent years. At least ten red states have enacted universal—or nearly universal—voucher programs based on the ALEC-approved model. In 2022, Arizona and West Virginia became the first states to adopt universal vouchers. In 2023, eight more states adopted universal voucher programs.
But this success is built on the sands of sophistry and lies. That universal vouchers and ESAs will magically create new markets. That wealthy parents deserve to benefit financially. That public schools and their remaining students will be unharmed. That government budgets will be spared. That favoring one religion over others is constitutional. That throwing public funds at private schools without oversight is sound stewardship.
Many Republicans, especially from those rural areas, are contesting unaccountable voucher plans. In Georgia’s last legislative session, 16 House Republicans defeated an education voucher plan. In Tennessee, many rural lawmakers questioned the Governor’s universal voucher proposal. In Texas, 21 rural GOP House members joined Democrats to defeat Governor Abbot’s signature voucher plan. Abbott and his megadonor allies have since defeated many of them in GOP primary races.
The False Choice of Universal Vouchers
Right-wing school choice leaders argue that parents—not government—should choose the best school for their children. This argument, the primary rationale for universal voucher programs, is absurd.
Wealthy families may have the resources to easily move their children among schools. However, even wealthy families—excepting religious zealots—have to assess the many factors that determine the best fit for their children. School quality, offerings, class sizes and graduation rates. Admission, diversity and discipline policies. Teacher quality and retention rates. Access and convenience. Without a reliable tool for navigating these factors, families may lean on subjective factors.
In many counties, school competition is scarce and school choice an illusion. In many rural counties, for example, there are few private schools of any kind. In some counties, the private schools have long waitlists. In other counties, the choice may be limited to substandard or overpriced schools[xvi]. For special needs students, private school options may be more limited. Fully assessing school choices only makes sense in counties with robust educational competition—mostly prosperous urban and suburban counties.
Private religious schools, especially the fundamentalist church schools promoted by many megadonors, do a lot of things but they don’t diversify school choices. Essentially, such schools are for the true believers. Universal vouchers merely pay families to stay put—to keep their children in religious schools they already attend. Recent US Supreme Court rulings provide legal cover and church organizations have been quick to exploit this gift from on high. In Miami, Florida, for example, the Archdiocese School Superintendent said, “We are moving into growth mode.” In Oklahoma, state officials just approved the nation’s first religious public charter school[xvii].
Home schools offer a wide range of options to parents, but their performance is largely unregulated[xviii], and their quality is anything but certain. Public interest in home schooling doubled during the pandemic[xix] and could rise even more as vouchers become available to homeschooling families[xx]. The advent of corporate-run micro schools could bring more change, threatening the dominance of fundamentalist Christian options. In any event, homeschools was not the kind of option the initial school choice advocates envisioned.
The Abandonment of Accountability
Universal voucher advocates have a well-deserved reputation for opposing public oversight and accountability. According to Forbes Magazine, universal voucher legislation often includes clauses banning government oversight or accountability. Universal voucher advocacy groups, like EdChoice and the Heritage Foundation, regularly criticize school choice programs that include even the most basic guardrails[xxi].
Universal voucher programs, such as those in Arizona and North Carolina, reject reasonable accountability, transparency and safety standards. Florida’s voucher program allows private schools to teach creationism and other religious propaganda. Voucher advocates argue that standards and oversight are unnecessary, that parents can hold bad schools accountable by simply moving their children to better schools.
Really? Will parents have the means to help them distinguish good schools from bad? Does it make sense for most families to endure this kind of disruption? Without data, will it be possible to assess the cost-effectiveness of the universal voucher program (let alone individual schools) over time?
One thing we do know. Publicly funded vouchers without standards or oversight are a virtual invitation to inferior schools, unqualified teachers, and half-baked curricula, if not nepotism and fraud.