JUST about every responsible conservative and Republican in America seems to be pushing choice at public and private schools through government vouchers. I have in hand “The Educational Freedom Amendment” now proposed for the California Constitution; one of the proponents is Milton Friedman. William Bennett, NATIONAL REVIEW, Focus on the Family, the Wall Street Journal, Newt Gingrich, the Heritage Foundation, the Christian Coalition, and countless others endorse full choice. Their arguments are compelling, as far as they go, but all stop short of presenting the full argument, including the price to be paid, the downside if choice includes government vouchers for private schools. Yes, competition is desperately needed to improve public schools by eroding the monolithic control of government and unions. Yes, inner-city youths desperately need educational options. But the full price for these solutions, if private schools are included, is the virtual abolition of private education through government or judicial control.
Let’s examine the major arguments of full-choice advocates and apply them to legislative and judicial history:
Comments