Thoughts before the voucher vote

Soon the issue of taxpayer funded vouchers for private schools will be decided by Utah voters. Most of us would say "not soon enough" after having been bombarded by radio and TV commercials, and having hauled pounds of mail out of our mailboxes, and seen the newspaper ads, etc. etc. etc.

After having written about the media observations of vouchers, and various other aspects of this campaign for several weeks, tonight I am making a few observations without links to this or that.

First is that this whole voucher campaign was not a Utah-driven effort. It was thrust upon Utahns by out of state groups that continue to seek out "small states" that they can "use" to experiment with this Libertarian driven concept. (See accountabilityfirst for details.)

My second observation is that a lot of really good Uthans - teachers, parents, business people, civil rights leaders - recognized that this out of state voucher effort was not in keeping with the values of Utah. So they organized a huge effort to ensure that voters would have a say - yes or no - on the issue.

From that, a host of people and organizations weighed in and the whole issue became one of intense interest and emotion.

Now, my position from the start has been clear. You can tell from the title of my blog.

What has had me riled through this whole debate is that the pro voucher advocates have used "dirty tricks" and intimidation and obfuscation to keep the underlying issue at bay. They've tried to put up the teachers association as some bad entity when all the association really is is - duh - an association of teachers. They even went so low as to steal yard signs and send spam e-mail. Good grief.

The pro voucher campaign was single-handedly funded by Patrick Byrne, a childless bachelor, CEO of a struggling (to say the least) company, and paranoid who thinks the "Sith Lord" is out to get him. What was his stake in this effort? It certainly hasn't been the interest of children.

No, the whole underlying effort is truly about dissolving public education and public schools. It is a philosophical tug of war about how our children should be educated. It's a difference of opinion about the public good and the "free market."

Should we be a state, a nation, a democracy where children gain their opportunities through education? Should we fulfill the vision of Thomas Jefferson, who fought for a public school system open to all that would help teach generations about the values of freedom and democracy so that they could intelligently participate in that democracy and stand up to defend freedom? Should we continue and value our public schools and our teachers in their quest to, despite all bureaucratic obstacles, ensure that every child has a chance?

OR, as the pro voucher folks believe, but won't say, should education - the ability to think critically - be reserved for a few? Should the education of our children be open to the "free market" where those perceived to offer a better product be subsidized by state taxpayers? Should a "free market" compete to teach our children? Teach our children what? We know, and we influence, what our public schools teach. There is no influence like that in a "free market."

Utah voters will answer those questions for themselves on Tuesday.

So, however you chose to vote, please do vote. It is a lesson important to our children.

Beyond "dirty tricks"

The "dirty tricks" in the Utah voucher campaign have really had me steamed. As you can tell. And, I intend to keep an eye out and continue investigating when these things happen. But, there also is a point, I guess, where these things get turned over to appropriate folks who deal with campaign finance enforcement and/or damages.

So I want to focus the false notions being foisted on us from the other side.

Take Sutherland for example (PLEASE take them).

One of the press releases they cranked out this week, as a part of their PR machine worked up for the pro-voucher side (and, they are a 501(c)3 organization, with IRS limitations on their "advocacy" activities - but that's another story) claimed in the thinnest of veils that private schools are "accountable."

No they are not. And, as several folks have pointed out, that really is kind of the point - from THEIR perspective.

BUT you really can't have it both ways - if we are going to be called upon to spend the tax dollars everyone pays into the state on a whole other education system - the private system - then we should expect they will meet the same standards that the public schools meet.

Under HB 148, private schools do NOT have to hire teachers who meet state standards -- or even have a college degree, they do NOT have to give the SAME tests that public school kids take, they do NOT have to account for money the SAME way (public schools must report budgets every year), they do NOT have to have the same coursework that public schools have, and they do NOT have to even have attendance standards.

THEREFORE, under a private school voucher sytstem, tax dollars would go to private schools that are unaccountable to the PUBLIC.

Sigh. I am just venting here. What is fair is fair. If it is fair for public schools to meet standards, then private schools should have to meet those same standards if they are going to take public money.

Amazingly, the "father" of private school vouchers, the late Milton Friedman, agreed with this assumption, as you can see from Dan Liljenquist's guest editorial today here:

"In the context of the voucher referendum vote this fall, it is important to consider the following:

* Friedman expected governmental oversight of educational curriculum to ensure common, appropriate content.

* Friedman expected extensive financial oversight by government agencies to ensure proper use of funds, citing the possibility of a greater abuse.

* Friedman does not address what forms of education have the greatest social advantage and how much educational funding is appropriate, except to say that these are questions to be decided "by the judgment of the community through its accepted political channels."

House Bill 148 represents a clear departure from the voucher program envisioned by Milton Friedman. First, the bill does not establish curriculum oversight to ensure appropriate use of government funds; this is contrary to Friedman's approach."

Friedman wrote that even under a fully privatized education system, schools should meet agreed upon standards. So here we are in the throes of a bitter fight that even the "father" of vouchers probably wouldn't have waged.

Go figure.

Vouchers create no value

Despite claims from pro-private school voucher advocates, a new study of the Milwaukee voucher program confirms what many previous studies have shown: Students who use vouchers to attend private schools do not show significant increases in academic achievement.

Nor, as the new Economic Policy Institute study reveals, do vouchers create a climate of "competition" that improves public schools.

Today's Salt Lake City Tribune story can be found here, and directly refutes Parents for Choice in Education's (PCE) claim that vouchers will create "competition" that will make Utah's public schools better.

In fact, the only thing Utah's private school voucher system will do is increase what taxpayers pay for education because they'll be called upon to fund two systems - one public and one private.

This sets up a situation where money that could be used for our PUBLIC schools will be diverted to unaccountable private voucher schools.

As the leader of the teachers' association in Milwaukee stated:

"The only competition that we've really seen between public schools and voucher schools in Milwaukee has been competition for resources," said Dennis Oulahan, Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association president. "Public schools lost big time."

About the only thing pro-private school voucher folks can say about this and other studies is: Vouchers don't seem to "hurt" public schools.

Well, yes they do! Vouchers for private schools drain precious resources away from public schools - resources that could be used for textbooks, supplies, teacher aides, and teacher training.

This research isn't the only report verifying that students achieve as well in public schools as they do in private ones. The pro-voucher U.S. Department of Education quietly released a study last summer that came to the same conclusion after examining student performance over time. You can download and read the entire study here (pdf format).

So if Utah's proposed private school vouchers won't help students achieve more but will drain resources from public schools and cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, why have private school vouchers at all??