Editorial: School choice a matter of human dignity
It is an inexplicable failure of our country that American families still do not have full and equal access to educational choice. Instead, the vast majority of our children are subjected to a form of education feudalism: Their ZIP code determines what schools they attend.
Thankfully, instead of surrendering our children to learn as vassals before their union lordlings, some states have implemented legislation empowering parents to give their children a chance at a better education.
These laws often come in the form of voucher programs, where parents receive money from the state to cover the cost of sending their children to an institution of their choice.
And yet not all programs are created equal. While many states tout their advances toward school choice — some 13 states and the District of Columbia have voucher programs — the truth is that program specifics vary widely. A new study from the Center for Education Reform breaks ground by ranking the laws of these states according to the level of choice being provided to families.
The intent of the study is clear from the start: “Simply stated,” the report begins, “we need MORE. More choice in the types of education available to families, more children sitting in more schools made available by more choice.”
In other words, it’s not enough to have a law on the books — it needs to offer a significant choice and flexibility to a large number of eligible families.
Unfortunately, the CER study finds serious shortcomings in the programs of many states. In Wisconsin — one of the cities the study rewarded with an “A” grade – the statewide voucher program has a cap of 1,000 new vouchers that can be awarded every year. This is in a state with over 850,000 students enrolled in elementary and secondary schools.
It gets worse the further down one goes. Colorado, which received a “C,” has launched a voucher program in Douglas County, but it offers only 500 vouchers to a school-aged population of around 62,000.
Further, the voucher’s value is about 75 percent of what the state spends per pupil, limiting options for families who embrace choice in education.
On the other hand, the nation’s highest-ranked state, Indiana, received praise for placing no limits on the number of vouchers that could be awarded. While it does place a ceiling on incomes for eligible families and allow for considerable government oversight of course content, the reach of Indiana’s program is something the CER would like to see replicated.
The ideal school choice program is relatively straightforward: wide eligibility, compensation comparable to state per-pupil spending, flexibility in the use of vouchers and a freedom from government over-regulation of private institutions. And yet political opposition makes implementation a challenge in many states.
It befits the dignity of human beings to receive a quality education. And school choice programs, while almost always a step in the right direction, still have a ways to go. Legislators nationwide should pursue laws that empower parents to seek the best option for their children.
