|
|
|
Jewish World Review Feb. 5, 2007 / 17 Shevat, 5767 Somewhere, Milton Is Smiling: Utahns win a hard-fought victory for school choice By John H. Fund
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
The late Milton Friedman, who was the nation's foremost advocate for school
choice, would be more than pleased with the news coming out of Utah. By a
vote of 38-37, the Utah House last Thursday approved the first-ever
statewide universal school choice plan.
Despite the close vote, the program now faces relatively smooth sailing.
The bill now goes to the state Senate, which twice before has voted for a
similar program. Gov. Jon Huntsman, a Republican, won election in 2004 in
part by campaigning for school choice, and he has said he will likely sign
the final bill.
Until now, school choice has been an idea that works but has only been
spottily implemented, in part due to the fierce opposition of teacher
unions and the rest of the educational-industrial complex. Maine and
Vermont have allowed students in rural districts without their own high
school to attend private schools for over a century. Struggling inner-city
school districts in Milwaukee, Cleveland and Washington allow low-income
parents to obtain vouchers. My colleague Jason Riley has noted the
extensive academic research finding that where choice is allowed, parents
are much more satisfied with their children's education, and local public
schools have improved their performance.
Utah's plan is modest, and at the
same time revolutionary. It would reimburse parents sending their children
to private schools between $500 and $3,000 a year based on their family
income. Parents whose kids currently attend private school would not
be eligible unless their income was low enough. But all new kindergartners
would qualify, so that by 2020 all private school students would be
eligible for vouchers.
State Rep. Steve Urquhart, the bill's chief sponsor, says the breakthrough
in winning House approval was the realization that it wouldn't harm public
education. The bill stipulated that for five years after a voucher student
left the public system, the district would get to keep much of the money
the state had paid for his education. Given that the average district gets
$3,500 from the state and the average voucher is expected to be $2,000, a
typical school district would gain some $1,500 every time a student
left its system.
Mr. Urquhart was so confident of his math that he started an interactive
Web site modeled after the interactive encyclopedia Wikipedia. He posted
his bill on it and invited comments. Thousands of people logged on to www.politicopia.com
and participated. "If anyone can show evidence (not just alarmist rhetoric)
that public education does not come out financially ahead with this bill,
post your arguments and data in the comment section," Mr. Urquhart
challenged his readers. No one was able to effectively rebut him.
By the time the bill came up for a floor vote, the debate was more
philosophical and substantive than demagogic. "The debate was of the
highest caliber that I've seen in my 13 years here," said Speaker Greg
Curtis. "I find it fascinating that not a single person spread the myth
that [choice] would be harmful to public education."
There are other reasons that school
choice supporters were able to surmount the political odds and win in Utah.
It's worth pondering them as the battle to offer parents alternatives to
the one-size-fits-all public-school model moves to other states.
• School choice supporters were persistent and relentless. Doug
Holmes, chairman of Parents for Choice in Education, and Patrick Byrne,
chairman of Overstock.com, are both passionate believers that every child
deserves a quality education. Although Utah is known for its large Mormon
population (62% as of 2004), Mr. Holmes points out that the biggest
beneficiaries from the enhanced options parents will have in Utah will be
the state's surging Hispanic population, now about one-ninth of Utah's 2.6
million people.
Mr. Byrne gave $500,000 last year to fund private scholarships for
low-income children. He also gave money to a political action committee
that leveled the playing field in education politics by ensuring that
school choice supporters wouldn't be steamrollered out of office by the
powerful Utah Education Association. "It's no longer a question of
legislators asking if they should vote their conscience or vote with the
union," says Elisa Peterson, the director of Parents for Choice in
Education. "Legislators who vote for school choice know we will be there to
defend them — and if they vote against choice, they know there will be
consequences. The teachers union isn't the only game in town anymore."
• A profile in courage. The choice bill would have gone down to
defeat had Rep. Brad Last not changed his vote. Just last month, Mr. Last,
himself a former public-school official, voted against the bill as a member
of the Education Committee. Last Thursday, he voted "yes," prompting gasps
from the visitor's gallery.
"I believe history will demonstrate to supporters and detractors that this
is a good choice," he told a hushed chamber. "To those of you in public
education who want to kill me right now, I'm really sorry. I understand
your pain. I would ask you, go read this bill, and don't say a word to me
until you read this bill."
Another surprise supporter of the bill was freshman Rep. Keith Grover, a
vice principal at a junior high school, who said during the floor debate
that "everyone knows how I make a living" and that he had wrestled with his
conscience on how to vote. He said he believed public education needed the
innovation that choice could bring.
• Public opinion matters. Over several years, school choice
supporters were able to shift the debate in their direction. A poll taken
last month for Salt Lake City's Deseret News and KSL-TV found that 48% of
Utah residents favored a government voucher or tax-credit for private
school tuition and 46% opposed the concept. A year earlier, the same poll
gave choice opponents had the advantage by 54% to 40%.
Groups such as the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation were tireless
promoters of the benefits of choice. They helped sponsor trips by public
officials and civic leaders to Milwaukee, where they could see a
functioning education alternative in action. "Public-school officials in
Milwaukee told them that the city had redefined the concept of public
education," says Robert Enlow, executive director of the Friedman
Foundation. "It had become education that truly served the public, whether
it be more flexible public schools, charter schools or private schools."
Gradually, the message sank in that choice was all about making public
education work, rather than dismantling it. "I come from a family of eight
children," says Ted Gardiner, a student from Taylorsville, Utah. "Each one
of my siblings is a very unique individual. My mother has often said she
wanted to sent me to a private school. However, eight children is a lot of
mouths to feed, and it was never feasible for us." When school choice
becomes law, it will be.
Rep. Urquhart said the public also responded to the argument that no school
district would be docked money if students left for private schools, and
indeed that such districts would actually gain income. He said it was a
necessary political concession. "It doesn't make a lot of sense, if
[districts] lose a student, to be financially rewarded," he told the
Deseret News. But he said it was essential to communicate that the bill was
about enhancing opportunity and not taking money from public education.
• Leadership counts. Rep. Curtis made it clear after he became
House speaker in 2004 that school choice was a major priority for him. He
steered a choice bill to within a few votes of victory in 2005 and vowed to
try again. "We do not reward excellence in education," he told State
Legislatures magazine. "We don't fund it, we don't demand it, and don't
encourage it. If we did we would have every ability to compete at the
global level in math and science."
Unions representing teachers and other government employees took notice of
his apostasy and vowed to punish it. Last year, they mounted a concerted
effort to defeat him. They came close; Mr. Curtis won re-election last
November by only 20 votes. But far from being intimidated, the speaker
realized that the best way he could survive politically was if he passed
choice and made people realize it worked.
Rob Bishop is a former speaker of the Utah House who also worked as a high
school teacher for 28 years before being elected to Congress as a
Republican in 2002. He told me Mr. Curtis is demonstrating all the
qualities of leadership voters say they want but don't always demand. "He
understood he was on the right side of history," he says. After all, Mr.
Bishop notes, that "choice in education is already all around us."
He's right. Kids under 5 now get federal day-care vouchers. College
students get Pell grants. Even at the elementary and secondary levels, many
kids with special educational or behavioral challenges are sent to private
schools at state expense. Mr. Bishop says, "It makes sense to expand the
existing choices we offer to every child in K-12, and that is what Utah is
now leading the way in doing."
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
JWR contributor John H. Fund is author, most recently, of "Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy". (Click HERE to purchase. Sales help fund JWR.) Comment on this column by clicking here.
© 2006, John H. Fund |
Arnold Ahlert | |||||||||||
