Linda Lyon, retired Air Force Colonel and President of the Arizona School Boards Association, responds again to our reader Charles, who tried to convince her of the virtues of privatization.
She writes:
“Dear Charles,
You’ve obviously given a lot of thought to your position on school privatization. At 666 words, you covered a lot of ground. I do though, agree with some of your points.
Yes, children can be educated in a diversity of environments and yes, some rich liberals send their children to exclusive private schools. So do, rich conservatives. I believe that anyone has the right to send their child to any school they want, (provided the education is adequate), as long as they pay for it. When my tax dollars are paying for it, I want full accountability, transparency and to know the return on investment. Yes, legislation could be enacted to provide more accountability and transparency, but that isn’t the direction our state legislatures and now, the federal government are headed.
Yes, when the number of students in a school decrease, the fixed costs also eventually decrease. The problem is, the decrease happens over time and the costs are not scaled back with each student that leaves. That means remaining costs must be spread out over fewer students which means larger class sizes, outdated curriculum, older technology and buses and inadequately maintained facilities.
But, you start to lose me when you say that privatizing our schools will not reduce the size of our government. In Arizona alone, we have 60,000 public school teachers. These are government employees. If every public district school is outsourced, that would result in 60,000 fewer government jobs. The goal of the privatizers isn’t though, to save taxpayers money, or to produce better education for our children. In my opinion, it is to increase profits and reduce our ability to self-govern.
You also say you, “cannot fathom the connection between publicly-operated schools and our democratic republic.” Are you really serious? America’s system of public education, where all children are educated (not just the elite), played an important role in creating the greatest middle class in the world and was critical to making the American Dream possible. As for pointing to our current government leaders, (who you infer went to private schools), as proof of the superiority of that option, current events tell me that’s not a real strong argument.
You are correct that non-public (that would be private) schools do not have to accept all applicants. Therein lies the rub! Just as with our military, our public schools provide for the common good. That means, as John Dewey said, “What the best and wisest parent wants for his child, that must we want for all the children of the community. Anything less is unlovely, and left unchecked, destroys our democracy.” I believe the relentless effort to privatize our public schools reduces the opportunity for EVERY child to be all they can be. This ultimately robs our nation of potential and is in the end, unpatriotic.
Linda M. Lyon, Colonel (ret.), USAF”

Reblogged this on Restore Reason and commented:
Fighting against the success of our public school students is unpatriotic!
LikeLike
“Yes, when the number of students in a school decrease, the fixed costs also eventually decrease. The problem is, the decrease happens over time and the costs are not scaled back with each student that leaves. That means remaining costs must be spread out over fewer students which means larger class sizes, outdated curriculum, older technology and buses and inadequately maintained facilities.”
The schools also lose a percentage of their purchasing advantage when they have less students. Buying in bulk reduces costs.
LikeLike
Yes, economy of scale is very important — and also a very basic concept.
Another good example is heating: you still have to heat a building even with 1 student to keep pipes from freezing in northern climes.
Of course, if you have zero students, you can drain all the pipes and turn off the heat and heating cost goes to zero. Voila’, the solution to all our problems!
LikeLike
Wait, what country am I in?
I feel disoriented, because i just observed a government official make factually-based, common sense arguments in favor of public education, and I’m so unused to that!
LikeLike
Country?
I thought I had entered the Twilight Zone.
LikeLike
Dealing with libertarians and their convoluted logic is like walking into a house of mirrors on a field of quick sand laced with land mines. Long story short, libertarianism is peachy keen if you are a billionaire or massive multimillionaire like the Kochs, Steve Forbes, Gates, DeVos, Bezos, etc. Otherwise libertarianism is toxic sludge for most of humanity. Just wait until the trillionaires start arriving on the scene.
LikeLike
I think it is going to collapse before the trillionaires arrive.
The whole system is now teetering on the hairy edge and can’t possibly withstand much (if any) more taking by the top with no giving to the majority.
The present billionaire-serving economy is a mirage.
The billionaires would be smart to cash out before the mirage reverts to desert sand dunes. I suspect some are already doing just that.
LikeLike
Bezoar will be the first trillionaire.
LikeLike
Thank You Linda Lyon!
LikeLike
What a great, thoughtful response! I hope Ms. Lyons gets a chance to serve the people of Arizona. She will bring her considerable experience and reasoned leadership to the state.
LikeLike
What if proclaiming the “success” of our public schools, inhibits the fingers, at
the end of the “long arm”, from doing “what” they could do, in time of a crisis?
The banking crisis, showed all that cared to look, what could be done.
The Fed key-stroked funding for the banks. It wasn’t TAX first, then SPEND on
the banks. It was SPEND, then key-stroke. In a word, PRIORITIES.
The auto crisis: The car makers didn’t get bailed out claiming “success”.
There could be a public school “crisis”… The flow of testimon(e)y requires tests.
No tests given, no flow of testimoney…CRISIS
It should be known by now whose interests are being served by using “scores”
to articulate the function of education.
LikeLike
Arizona is having a state-wide referendum this November. Proposition 305, see
https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Proposition_305,Expansion_of_Empowerment_Scholarship_Accounts_Referendum(2018)
This is the first time (that I am aware of) that a state-wide referendum for the expansion of ESAs will be held.
The (majority of) the people of Arizona, will make their wishes known at the ballot box.
If the proposition receives a majority of support, any politician opposed to school choice, will be operating at variance with the will of the majority!
LikeLike
Sorry Charles, but Prop. 305 is really about allowing the people of Arizona to vote down the full expansion of vouchers our lawmakers passed in 2017. This is NOT a referendum for the full expansion of vouchers; our lawmakers already passed that. This is for the people to correct the actions of lawmakers who aren’t listening to them.
LikeLike
Q privatizing our schools will not reduce the size of our government. END Q
I should have made myself more clear. When a portion of the public school population opts-out of the system ,and relocates to alternate schooling, the size of the government work-force required to deliver educational services to the smaller student population will, of course, decline.
BUT- The COST of delivering educational services, on a per-capita basis, will not change. The per-pupil expenditures that were formerly going to the publicly-operated school, will now go to the alternate school system.
Government in this nation, is a matter of cost. That is why we have a national debt of $20 Trillion dollars. The size of government, and the cost of delivering services, is in the money.
LikeLike
Charles,
You are debating someone far more knowledgeable than yourself.
The object of schooling is to educate the population. Public schools have served our nation well. We have the largest economy, the most dynamic culture, the greatest technology, and the most powerful military in the world. This is because we have a successful education system, which has done a great job of educating the population to a high level. Like every other nation, we have some students who are unable or unwilling to do school work. Our schools are not perfect but no nation’s are. Our urban schools suffer because of high poverty and high levels of racial segregation.
But it is a public responsibility to provide equal educational opportunity. This is not a job that can be done by private schools, chain schools, home schools, or religious schools.
Thank goodness for patriots like Colonel Lyon.
LikeLike
Charles, You say: The per-pupil expenditures that were formerly going to the publicly-operated school, will now go to the alternate school system.
You are wrong. There is no one-to-one transfer.
LikeLike
You are right. In Arizona, the ESA provides the participating families with 90% of the per-pupil expenditure, that the state would have otherwise spent in the public system.
In some states, the monetary amount of the school voucher/ESA is closer to 100% of the per-pupil expenditures.
The entire concept of school choice/voucher is that the “money follows the child”.
LikeLike
Every dollar for Choice is a dollar taken away from public schools, hurting the education of the majority of kids.
LikeLike
“When a portion of the public school population opts-out of the system ,and relocates to alternate schooling, the size of the government work-force required to deliver educational services to the smaller student population will, of course, decline.”
Charles, this is always the point where you quit the argument, and then you come back a few weeks later and state the same nonsense over and over, without any support whatsoever.
Despite what you seems to think, this issue is not a religious one where it’s a matter of faith what you believe. No, the issue is purely mathematical, requiring very low level calculations to see whether your statement is accurate or not.
So let me repeat, for the 100th time, why you are wrong: let us say 5% of the kids get vouchers to go to private schools. This means that a class of 20 kids in a public school loses 1 child, hence 19 kids remain in the class. These 19 kids per class require the same number of teachers, classrooms, janitors, libraries, librarians, bathrooms, secretaries, principals, security guards, printers, computers, IT staff. But now they have only 95% of the funding since that 1 kid per class took away that 5% in his “backpack”.
The same problem presents itself if the kid takes the money to a charter school: he takes 5% of the school’s funding with him to the charter school, while the public school he left is still stuck with the same costs.
To use your language: since the public schools cannot reduce their size just because 5% of the kids left, the government workforce supporting public schools cannot be reduced either.
You could have a meek remark that trying to operate on 95% of the budget is a small price to pay for the freedom of choice for the 5%—but I wonder how many parents of the remaining 95% of the kids will listen to you.
So instead of repeating ad nauseam the same religious statements about choice for the few will reduce costs and government, please take the above numbers and try to explain yourself to a public school student’s parent whose budget you propose to reduce. See if they want to buy you a beer for enlightening them.
LikeLike
“The fixed cost argument, does not cut any ice.”
As I indicated, instead of testing your arguments by yourself, please try to see how convincing you sound to the vast majority of public school parents. What would they say when you tell them: “Hey, I want to introduce a new interesting dynamics into your community. Namely, I plan to destroy your public school so that a very small percentage of kids can go to private schools. Isn’t this a worthwhile sacrifice for their freedom of choice?”
LikeLike
That is similar to the right wing’s take on health insurance. Don’t mind if a small percentage of poor children die in order for your middle class children to have cheaper health insurance while the rich continue to pay one of the lowest tax rates in modern history. For Charles, it’s better than some sick and useless children die so that the rich can pay low taxes. As Charles would say, those are just the tradeoffs you have to make for “freedom”.
Just like Charles says better for a bunch of poor kids to have terrible schools so that a few rich kids’ parents can save even more on their already low taxes.
LikeLike
Lynda
Great insight and defense of public schools for the preservation of democracy and a strong middle class of diverse Americans.
LikeLike
A great response to a man who can write, and write and write — lots of words –but all of them emanating from his bubble of alternate facts. He ‘thinks’ this or that, but in the end, it is all just HIS ‘take-away’ — DISTORTED, and without value in a world where observable reality show the truth.
I have no patience to dispute this with ‘no-nothings’.
“These days calling someone a “know-nothing” could mean one of two things, but.
most likely, you’re suggesting that said person is willfully ignorant, someone who rejects facts that might conflict with his or her prejudices.”
“The sad thing is that America is currently ruled by people who fit both definitions. And the know-nothings in power are doing all they can to undermine the very foundations of American greatness.”
And DeVos and ALEC are in power, undermining the very foundations of democracy shared knowledge.. http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/hirsch.pdf
if Charles cannot see the destruction at play, he is willfully blind and nothing you can say will change him, but thanks anyway, for putting the real FACTS out there, so his bubble-wrapped opinion does not stand alone as ‘truth’. ..after all everyone is entitle do an ‘opinion,’ but not to have that personal ‘world-view’ stand for OBSERVABLE REALTIY….ie. TRUTH!
LikeLike
So called “libertarians” who insist that every single child costs exactly the same to educate are also promoting vouchers instead of Medicare. See, every senior gets a voucher for the same amount to purchase health insurance.
There are plenty of insurance companies who will woo the healthiest seniors with extras and then dump them when they are too expensive. Those companies whose only motive is profit will make billions from the public trough. I guess that’s the kind of “free market” that sounds so great to Charles — getting rich because the taxpayers are funding your “dump the expensive patients and let them die” health insurance that no one except the corrupt politicians you bought with your riches really wants once they understand how it really works.
When you “let the market decide” it INCENTIVIZES bad behavior because bad behavior — dumping the more expensive patients or children — is the most highly rewarded and trying to teach them is punished the most.
I think if you asked most Americans — Charles excepted — whether they would prefer to see the very sickest children left to die in exchange for their own children having absolutely free health care with a doctor free to visit their home at a minute’s notice, none of them would think that was a good exchange. Especially when they understand that this is a false choice offered by the greedy billionaires who won’t pay even close the the taxes that the richest Americans paid in the 1950s despite being even richer than them. The false choice offered by the greediest billionaires (and the people whose generous salary they subsidize to tell the public that this choice is the only one).
LikeLike
Status quo defense of publicly funded public education was will done. But, I am arguing for a future education system without a division between private and public managed schools.
I am arguing that it would be best to have one education system indivisible funded by the government. In other word all students are educated in government schools without exception.
Government can end the illusion of choice by families picking privately managed schools paid fully by families, partially or fully by government by requiring all students to attend government managed schools.
Without equal funding all families don’t have choice. And the choice policy has increased the segregation of our Nation’s students in their education. Too often the reality is segregating schools, not families, have the power of choice.
LikeLike
Jim, mass education is needed and suitable for the vast majority of the people, and hence everybody should pay for it in the form of taxes. But mandating that all kids go to public schools is a different issue. Just to start the doubts: do you propose that prodigies take part in the same mass educational system?
LikeLike
More perfect union was sought by change from weak central government under Articles of Confederation to strong central government. The purpose was a more perfect union as stated in the Preamble to the Constitution. Split between those paying and separate from education system of today to one government education will be a move toward greater union.
Highly unlikely that the current move toward will provide greater union but constant conflict between publicly managed government schools and privately managed government schools. Who controls the payment for the education controls the schooling.
LikeLike
Mr. Wierdl: Prodigies have not stopped being prodigies within mandatory government education systems.
LikeLike
Schools lose funding because of choice, and programs for the gifted are cut, along with the arts.
Charles, you are thick headed. Or Pretending to be stupid.
LikeLike
Linda “When my tax dollars are paying for it, I want full accountability, transparency and to know the return on investment. ”
This is not good enough: no tax dollars should ever be taken away from public education and be given it to alternative education. The whole thing has nothing to do with accountability, transparency. See my post above: just because you reduce the public school student population by a small percentage, the expenses of the public schools remain the same, so they cannot afford less funding.
There are only two choices: either a kid goes to public school and tax dollars will pay for it, or the kid goes to a non-public school but tax dollars won’t pay a dime for it.
LikeLike
There is a third choice. Permit the child to attend a non-public school (or be home-schooled), and then allow the family to save their own money, in an Educational Savings Account, and get a rebate on their state income taxes, of an equivalent amount.
This way, no tax money, not one dime, goes into a non-public school.
The family pays the entire amount, and no one goes away dissatisfied.
LikeLike
Money that was owed to the state goes instead to a religious school.
LikeLike
“and then allow the family to save their own money, in an Educational Savings Account,”
It’s not their money, it’s tax, and tax is everybody’s, hence individuals cannot decide what happens to it. Why can’t individuals manipulate “their share” of taxes? If 5% of the families do what you suggest, then they reduce the current public school budget by 5%. The problem has remained the same.
Charles, instead of thinking about these schemes, just focus on the essential, unchangeable issue which won’t go away: first explain to yourself, how public schools can provide the same service on 95% of the current budget: how they can pay the same number of teachers, janitors, security personnel, how they can maintain the same number of buildings, classrooms, libraries, bathrooms. Once you convinced yourself that this is feasible, then try to convince just 20 public school parents that it’s in any way beneficial for their children to reduce their school’s budget by 5% so that your child can go to a private school. Once you did this, come back and report on your adventures.
This is the 101st time I am asking you to finally think over the elementary math instead of coming up with schemes how a few people can get their hands on the general public’s tax money.
LikeLike
Why can’t I save my taxes and spend them on a private security guard?
LikeLike
I’d like to direct my taxes towards a private fire prevention and extinguishing service, myself. They have a sale going now which gives me a 15% discount on a sprinkler system that will cover 7/16th of my home.
LikeLike
Charles,
As Colonel Lyon said, it is unpatriotic to attack public schools, as you do on this blog about ten times a day.
No one objects to the use of public money to support college scholarships for needy students.
Most Americans object to spending public dollars for non-public schools. That’s why the public has overwhelmingly rejected vouchers whenever they were put on the ballot. That’s why the Koch brothers are spending millions in Arizona right now to knock the voucher referendum off the ballot. When Jeb Bush tried to change the Florida State constitution to allow vouchers in 2012, he called his amendment the Religious Freedom Amendment, and 58% of bothers opposed “religious freedom.” Imagine that.
I have said this to you at least 20 Times. I’m bored saying it. I’m bored responding to the same comments. I’m annoyed that you never engage with anyone and just reiterate your talking points.
I think I have had enough of your repetition for a while.
Please tune out and come back when you have something new to say. But not too soon.
LikeLike
“With a reduction in funds, there must be a concurrent reduction in expenditures. When a reduction in student population (for any reason) occurs, school systems have to down-size. Teachers/staff may have to face layoffs. Depending on the size and distribution of the reduction, physical plant may have to be closed and/or sold. Schools may have to consolidate.”
That’s a pretty cavalier attitude, considering the many people and families, both inside and outside of the school, that these “reductions” would effect.
And the ripple effects (or aftershocks, to be more precise) that actions like this would create, nationwide.
Sorry, Diane…I know you want a hiatus, but I just had to say that.
LikeLike
Hi Mate, I don’t disagree with your ideal, but at least here in Arizona, that horse is out of the barn and headed out of the corral. At this point, we just need to ensure that anytime our tax dollars pay for private education, that we know exactly how those dollars are used and what the return on investment is.
LikeLike
Linda, I keep hearing the same thing here in TN, but no, that’s not a horse out of the barn or a train that left the station, but a foot in the door.
Ensuring accountability and transparency for the public seems incredibly difficult in this country, especially under the Belt. Success stories are very hard to come by—right now, I can’t even recall one, can you? Laws, on the other hand, come and go, as the first year of our president amply demonstrated. What remains is stepping on that foot and push it out into the cold.
LikeLike
While I agree with Mate that we shouldn’t even be entertaining the option of putting taxpayer dollars towards private or parochial schools, I think that the reality of the situation, at this time, trumps the philosophy of no tolerance.
They’re here and they’ve imposed their will in some key areas of our country. Put their feet to the fire and see how long they stick around. Transparency will reduce profits.
LikeLike
Actually, I didn’t try to be a philosopher here. My feeling is, it’s easier to reverse a voucher or charter school bill than to implement transparency. Do you know of a state where the ed department can be trusted with implementing transparency?
What I know is that even public universities are secretive: about enrollment figures, campus crime, student evaluations, salary changes and sources, contracts, expenses, budget structures and policies.
Even where they try to be honest, there is this fear that if they are transparent, they lose funding.
LikeLike
Ok…I oversimplified, Mate. My apologies.
But at least there has to be an attempt on the part of the organizations in question. Not true in the case of the charters, on-line schools, etc. It’s like the Wild West out there.
LikeLike
Transparency is a value that needs to be pursued as vigorously as defense of public education and the defeat of charter schools and privatization.
LikeLike
Idea implemented in a system tends to give rise to its antithesis which I believe in the charter school deformity would be mandatory government education for all without exceptions.
The Gulen network of over 150 charters in 26 states and District of Columbia, governed by male followers of Turkish religious leader is an example of the charter school experiment gone awry that demonstrates that wide-open, unregulated market decisions, left up to parental “choice” is inferior to public school system regulated by education code of states, because with all its faults, the state education systems prior to charter education reform were not systems that a cult could capture and govern across state lines.
But, charters are an opportunity that came after the deaths of Jim Jones and David Koresh or they well may have taken advantage as the followers of imam Gulen have.
LikeLike
Charles: “This cannot be done. A school system cannot spend on programs that cost X dollars, with 95% of X dollars. ”
Thanks for the admission, Charles.
Charles: “Something must be cut.”
But why should something be cut? Why should class sizes increase or teacher salaries decrease, or bathrooms be filthy? So that 5% of the population can go to private schools?
In other words, why should 95% of the population be screwed for the happiness of 5%?
This is the issue we have been talking about since the very beginning, not general population fluctuations and other unrelated stuff you bring up to avoid explicitly explaining your position in the above.
LikeLike