As a final wrap-up to the recent Anoka-Henepin School District Levy Vote, I wanted to throw out some ideas regarding how we fix education in this country.
Earlier I wrote that the solution was to "Give all children the choice to pick the school they want, then give them the money to go do it." This would be infinitely better than the current system of forcing everyone to pay exorbitant (and ever increasing) prices for a sub-par education, and then forcing them to pay again if they want something better.
(If anyone believes that we are not receiving a sub-par education despite many good and well intentioned teachers I encourage you to read Dumbing Us Down)
Allowing school choice would bring accountability to the schools system, remove the bureaucracy inherent in government run programs and necessarily improve education through healthy school competition. Monopolies cannot do these things, its why we generally believe monopolies are bad and our dislike of them are the reason for the many anti-trust laws (which are bad too, but that is another topic). However, somehow when it comes to education, suddenly we believe that monopolies are great and we go to the polls to support them. Yeah, it doesn't make sense to me either.
Let me state unequivocally that I do believe in taxpayer support for some education. Education is a public good, the past 100 years has demonstrated that as an undeniable fact, even if it benefits the individual who receives the education more than it benefits the society as a whole. However, tax based support for education should not be provided by the Federal Government, because doing so would violate (as it already does) the entire idea of having a federal vs. national Government. (but that is another topic too!). The question then becomes how does the State (or local) government support education without instigating a monopoly?
Currently education in the US is funded in the way no other system of it's kind is. Firstly not everyone needs funding from the state, yet everyone does, or at least can take advantage of our 'free' education despite the need. This would be like the Government setting up food stamps for everyone, just come in and pick them up, no need to check your income. We don't do that for those who are in need of food, why do it for education? Secondly, there is no reason why the schools need to actually be run by the government. Using the food stamps example; Government does not own the grocery stores to give the food away to the people who cannot afford it. Of course not, instead they give stamps to people that can be used at privately run grocery stores. If the government did propose to take over grocery stores (one may argue food is more necessary than education) in order to provide food to those in need there would be a public outcry if not revolt. Why is it different for education? Why are we not revolting?!!
Now we come to the question of exactly how the government should pay for education, and still allow for school choice. I am not going to propose that I have the perfect answer as there are several good ideas (and having several states workout what is best for them and using each state as a little democratic experiment which other states can look to in order to flush out what works -- is one of the best reasons to keep the Federal Government out of education). There are generally two flavors of how to do this: Tax credits or Vouchers.
Interestingly enough Utah just voted down (62%-38%) what would have been the nations first School Voucher program. I cannot speak to the reasons to the failure, but there are some who believe it was due to an overconfidence of voucher supporters. Likely three other factors were involved as well: 1) It was an off-year election and unions can drive people to the polls better in off years 2) Teachers unions have a built in propaganda machine having the children of voters in their classroom every day. People who are forced into public education will always be propagandized in this way and it needs to be fought against. 3) Some of those in favor of school choice may not like vouchers because, unlike tax credits or deductions, vouchers may come with additional strings attached.
I can sympathise with problem #3. The government does have a right to regulate that which it funds, and there is a need to be vigilant against even further encroachment of the government into our lives. The argument for Tax Credits (or deductions) is that it does not come with as much baggage.
I would argue that either would be better than the current system and any program instituted need to work actively to eliminate all publicly run schools. But despite their disadvantages, a voucher system is probably the best way to provide education to everyone who needs financial help with K-12 education. Vouchers can be used in a way that does not bring down the heavy hand of government upon us. We need to be vigilant, yes, but that is true even now, vouchers would not change that.
I am saddened to see the voucher system fail in Utah, however I believe that it will simply be the first attempt among many in the US and I would hope that we could all agree that we need to work towards the separation of School and State.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Fixing Education
Posted by
Franklin
at
10:09 AM
Labels: Politics, Public Education
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment