School Choice: Game-Changers


*This post is pretty serious inside baseball, but it’s representative of a debate that is taking place in state capitals across the country.

Many of South Carolina’s rural and poor schools are failing miserably at their mission: educating our children. Despite increasing funding exponentially over the last 30 years and trying every fad that can be dreamed up at education colleges, our education system overall does a poor job of keeping kids in school and a poor job at educating the ones who stay.

Implementing school choice programs, especially at failing schools, has been a goal of conservatives for several years. In 2005, moderate/liberal Republicans in South Carolina allied with the Democrats to defeat a Governor Sanford-supported comprehensive school choice bill by one vote. Since then, school choice supporters have engaged the status-quo Republicans in bloody primary fights in each cycle. Winning primary fights (as well as open seat campaigns) has put enough school choice supporters into office to give school choice a real chance of passage this year.

In a game changing move, Senator Robert Ford, a black Democrat and civil rights activist, came out in support of the most recent version of school choice. It’s difficult to underestimate the impact that his support could have on this debate–by breaking the perception that school choice is the goal of wealthy white parents who just want taxpayer-subsidized private school tuition.

The current bill is similar to a program operating in Arizona for several years, which allows corporations and individuals to make tax-deductible contributions to fund scholarships to needy students in failing schools.

School choice may not solve all of America’s education woes. But these programs have largely met success where they have been tried–and the status quo clearly is not working.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “School Choice: Game-Changers

  1. I actually saw that last night right after I posted. Since the decision only applied to the special-needs scholarships, do you think it will affect the larger program?It’s unfortunate that the decision was based on the AZ constitution because US Supreme Court precedent clearly weighs in favor of such a program. See Witters v. Washington Dept. of Services for the Blind, Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District, Agostini v. Felton, and most importantly, Zelman v. Simmons-Harris.

  2. Yes, but don’t forget the Blaine Amendments that were required for our western states to enter the union–much more strict on any public funding for religious purposes.I think the larger program is likely safe. It’s been in place for quite some time. Though, the unanimous decision here may spur some on to challenge the program-at-large.

  3. That’s what you get for arriving late to the party.It is unfortunate, though, that anti-Catholic animus led to a whole host of bad laws and court decisions that conflicted with our history of church/state cooperation, i.e., the Blaine Amendments or Justice Black’s dicta in Everson.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s