Why I’ll Probably Sign The Anti-Voucher Referendum Petition
A petition is circulating calling for a Referendum on the voucher legislation passed in the recent session of Utah’s legislature. I’ll likely be signing it. I haven’t commented that much on vouchers on this blog lately. I guess I’m just not that passionate about them either way. I support publicly financed school choice for parents in areas where it is clearly needed but I think vouchers are a very messy way of obtaining that goal.
I first heard about the voucher concept when I was in Middle school (about 20 years ago?) when I read the copy of Free To Choose my mom gave me. I thought the idea was great and always planned on starting up my own private school when I grew up. I figured that if vouchers were available it wouldn’t be that hard to get a profitable school going in Utah where there will always be plentiful supply of kids. Now that I’m a little older and understand the economics I’m not as excited about the idea.
My problem with the current voucher bill in Utah is three-fold.
1. I don’t think Utah’s education system is broken enough that we have a burning need for school choice.
2. I don’t like the way the current incarnation of school choice was pushed through by the Republican legislature and its “sponsors” this year.
3. Vouchers have constitutional issues that will cost taxpayers when the lawsuits come.
Utah’s education system is doing a great job. There really isn’t any question about the fact that Utah gets more positive effect from each education dollar than nearly any other system in the country. During his race to maintain his seat on the Utah State School Board Kim Burningham wrote this great letter to the blog Education In Utah explaining why he was the right man for the job. The letter describes point by point why Utah’s education system isn’t broken and what is currently being done by those in charge of the system to improve it. I don’t think anyone should be allowed to comment on the performance of Utah’s school system without having read that primer. Utahs schools are doing a great job. The voucher proposal recently passed isn’t likely to improve things…and the added beaurocracy seems like resources poorly spent.
The current voucher bill was passed by a legislature that was heavily greased by an organization called “Parents for School Choice”. I’m never a huge fan of legislation that takes this much “investment” in members of the legislature in order for it to pass. Something like this voucher proposal would be best approved or rejected by the tax payers themselves in an election.
Vouchers have been and will continue to be a great source of ire to those who are intent on ensuring tax dollars are never used to indoctrinate kids in any religion. I understand this concern and to some degree share it. Parents can indoctrinate their kids in any religion or belief system they choose on their own dime but I’m not a big fan of them doing it on mine. (It should be noted that tuition tax credits would have solved this problem and would have been a much better parental choice option for Utah’s law makers to have adopted.)
I’ll sign the referendum and will probably vote against vouchers when they come up in the 2008 election. Utah just doesn’t need this right now. There are areas of the country that could benefit from school choice…I just don’t see how Utah will be any better off.
4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
The anti-voucher crowd loves to have it both ways, though. They love to say “our schools are great” when fighting against vouchers but change to “our schools are in crisis” mode when the budget discussions come up. Which is it, guys? Are you kicking butt or getting your butt kicked? It can’t be both ways. Since most of the anti-voucher movement resorts to dishonesty like this, they come off as desperate liars trying to cover their own hides.
Comment by Jesse Harris — March 3, 2007 @ 1:19 am
Typical of any government program. I haven’t read anything on your blog arguing against the pro-transportation lobby for constantly pushing for more projects and more money. I guess one interest is more obviously necessary to you than the other. Sounds like you may want to do a little more research. Try going to a school and asking the administration what they think could be done with better funding. I bet they wouldn’t have much problem providing you with an answer.
The fact that our school system is doing as well as it is on a shoestring budget doesn’t mean things couldn’t be even better if we fully funded our schools. There is no contradiction here. Come on man…this is simple common sense.
Comment by Jeremy Manning — March 3, 2007 @ 2:42 am
If your goal is to increase per pupil funding, then you should be thrilled with the voucher law. The public schools get to keep money for students they aren’t educating.
Your two points about the extra cost to the taxpayers in administrative overhead and legal fights may turn out to be legitimate problems with the system, though that is far from clear to me at this point.
Comment by Bradley Ross — March 3, 2007 @ 7:48 am
Jeremy,
You make some good points but your conclusions are wrong. Your issues are bold below:
1. I don’t think Utah’s education system is broken enough that we have a burning need for school choice.
You’re absolutely right. We have great public schools. Among the best in the nation. But there is room for improvement, there is a significant need to increase teacher salaries, reduce class size and build new buildings to accommodate an estimated 130,000 to 140,000 additional school age children over the next 10 years. While our schools are exceptional we must look for solutions and not merely fight for the status quo.
2. I don’t like the way the current incarnation of school choice was pushed through by the Republican legislature and its “sponsors” this year.
I’m a little confused by your one sided perspective here. The amount of money the UEA and NEA put into campaigns to push their agendas is amazing. Don’t forget they are unions who have very powerful lobbing efforts for their membership. The fact that their members are our fabulous teachers makes them much more palatable the most unions but they are a union and have the monopolistic motivations of any other capitalistic organization.
A quick view of the list of registered lobbyists shows the following among others.
Utah School Superintendents Association
Utah School Boards Association
Utah School Employees Association
Utah Retired School Employees Assoc.
Davis School District
Davis County School Board
Salt Lake City School District
Davis Education Association
Granite Education Association
Jordan Education Association
Utah Education Association
So if a lobbying organization named Parents for Choice in Education raised money to promote what they believe will enhance the education system in the state. How is it that they are evil and the rest of the education lobbying efforts are just good government?
3. Vouchers have constitutional issues that will cost taxpayers when the lawsuits come.
I’ve heard many say this, but I need to understand this concern better. I’ve heard that the concern is about not using public funds on a religious education, but many of my friends received a Pell Grant that helped them finance their BYU education so I fail to understand the difference.
For me the issues are pretty basic.
1. Who has the primary responsibility to education children. I think we all can agree that ultimately the parents are responsible.
2. Do the citizens of the State of Utah have a moral (and legal) obligation to provide an education for all of our children. Again, I think we all can agree with this.
3. We must find ways to better fund our public schools. Again, I’m sure we agree.
4. If the cost to educate a child in the state of Utah is more than the cost of the voucher, then the children remaining in the public schools will benefit because the cost savings exceed the voucher expense (i.e. more money per student is left in the public school system). If we could slow the public school enrollment growth a little, we could put more money into reducing class size rather then into brick and mortar.
As an advocate trying to improve our public education, the idea of vouchers for the cost savings noted above is very attractive. But if more families were empowered to have a choice in their children’s education, there would be more accountability in our public schools (see Public school choice will curb mediocrity Des News Feb. 4).
-Randy
DavisParents.org
Comment by Randy Smith — March 3, 2007 @ 10:29 am