At a recent meeting at the Heritage Foundation, conservatives warned that federal control of school choice would be very dangerous.
“A panel of education policy experts agree the Trump administration appears to be moving toward some form of federal management of school choice, but warns that attempts to influence school choice policy from Washington, D.C. could undermine the president’s stated goals of returning education decisions back to the states and local governments.
The panel convened at the Heritage Foundation in the wake of Trump’s statement during his address to Congress that education is “the civil rights issue of our time.” The school choice theme that Trump has adopted since the tail end of his presidential campaign has been largely directed at minority children who are stuck in failing public schools and whose parents or guardians may not have the financial means to transfer them to a private or religious school.
“Trump’s choice for U.S. Education Secretary – Betsy DeVos – worked in her home state of Michigan primarily on school choice and school voucher programs, which allow families to use taxpayer funds for tuition at private and religious schools.
“On the campaign trail, the president proposed block granting $20 billion to families for school choice, and in his recently released budget, he proposed an additional $1.4 billion be spent on school choice programs in 2018.
“Trump also urged Congress to design legislation that funds school choice for low-income families. One such bill, H.R. 610, introduced by Iowa Rep. Steve King (R), has been vehemently opposed by homeschooling families across the country because of concerns the legislation will result in regulation of homeschooling nationwide.
“The panel, led by American Enterprise Institute education fellow Gerard Robinson, discussed ideas on how the federal government might attempt to actually implement school choice policy, whether through financial mechanisms such as school vouchers, education savings accounts, or tax credit scholarships, in which organizations obtain tax credits for donating scholarship funds to individual students or groups of students.
“When I hear folks talking about getting Washington involved in tuition tax credits for scholarship-granting organizations, and I hear the proposals that are being broadly floated, it makes me extraordinarily nervous,” said American Enterprise Institute education policy director Frederick (Rick) Hess. “It takes me very much back to 2000, and the 24-page document that the Bushes drafted that was the original No Child Left Behind.”
“Hess also pointed out the tremendous effects a federal tax credit scholarship program could have on the demands for private schools in the education market.
“If we get into Washington doing scholarship-granting organization tax credits…this is going to have enormous effects on private schools, because it’s going to distort the marketplace,” he said. “They’re going to need to be eligible for these funds.”
“Hess also explained the potential “strings” attached to federal taxpayer dollars as they go to private and religious schools, especially those that are strapped for cash and are willing to go to great lengths to obtain the funding. He warns that a future, more liberal Congress and administration would likely attach greater regulations to those schools.
“When you get a Democratic administration, an Elizabeth Warren administration, and they decide that eligible schools … need to have anti-bullying programs and other accommodations?” he said. “We will very quickly wind up and wonder, ‘What the hell were we thinking, inviting Washington into these decisions?’”
Hmmmm.

What kind of mentality sees ‘anti-bullying’ as a liberal plot?
LikeLike
they pretty much achieved their goal, though:
“If Tennessee private schools want to take advantage of public money that could soon be flowing their way, they might have to become more like public schools — especially at testing time.
After years of near-misses, the state appears poised to approve a voucher program that would allow public funding to be used to pay private school tuition.”
Politicians are now as obsessed with vouchers as they were with charters.
What they don’t do is anything that benefits children in public schools.
We’ll now debate vouchers for the next 4 years and none of them will lift a finger for the schools 90% of kids attend other than to try to sell us garbage ed tech product.
http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/tn/2017/03/30/for-the-first-time-tennessee-school-voucher-advocates-are-pushing-for-tnready-in-private-schools-heres-why/
LikeLike
Chiara is not actually a real person as this blogger never responds to any rebuttal posts to her. Chiara, while I do support her statements repeats the same things over and over that public schools are not a favored discussion topic among reformers and I agree. However, I believe that Chiara is actually a computer generated post because there never is any response from Chiara responding to ANY other posts. However, do not be mad at me as I am on your side computer or not!!
LikeLike
Maybe Chiara just doesn’t like to debate? Some people like to comment just because they are accurate with their information. No rebuttal required when correct, so Chiara can CHOOSE not to respond.
LikeLike
And your point is…?
LikeLike
The ed reform debate is now limited to privatization enthusiasts who want to regulate and privatization enthusiasts who DON’T want to regulate.
Trump has either succeeded in moving them very far Right or they were always there and are now more comfortable admitting it.
There are no public school advocates at all. The best we can hope for out of these folks is a minimally regulated privatized system where public schools are a disfavored “default” useful only to act as a backstop for the “choice” schools.
LikeLike
Agree, Chiara: it appears to be a quasi civil war of extremism between two extremist right wing groups. Trump and De Vos propose horrible ideas for education but it’s not extreme or punitive enough for the Randists at Heritage, AEI, CATO, Hoover or whatever far right corporate-controlled so called think tank you can come up with. There are so many of them, they are ubiquitous in the media, they are always portrayed as impartial scholars. Ha, ha, ha, what a joke. They are as impartial as the Koch brothers or the Walton family allow them to be. On a side note, it is these very same “think” tanks that constantly propagandize against universal healthcare/single payer or Medicare for all. They lie about masses of Canadians coming to the US for healthcare. Absolutely false, Canadians do not come to the US for health care; they come here for tourism or business not to get health care.
LikeLike
“Hess also pointed out the tremendous effects a federal tax credit scholarship program could have on the demands for private schools in the education market.
“If we get into Washington doing scholarship-granting organization tax credits…this is going to have enormous effects on private schools, because it’s going to distort the marketplace,” he said. “They’re going to need to be eligible for these funds.”
I must say, as a public school parent I so appreciate the complete and utter disregard for children in public schools in ed reform circles.
Not one of these people have even considered the effects of their grand experiment on public schools? We’re, what? The “control” for the experiment? Hey, thanks! Much obliged.
LikeLike
The federal government has been guilty of overreach since NCLB. They should only be involved in issues of civil rights, and their slogan is that choice is the “civil rights issue of our time,” which is total nonsense. If the federal government starts incentivizing vouchers and more charters, they should have to prove how they contribute to protecting civil rights because the federal role should limited to restoring civil rights or social justice. Maybe it is time to go to court to protect the rights of poor, minority students that are treated like free market guinea pigs or a cog in the economic wheel of privatization.
LikeLike
Years and years past the time when lawsuits should’ve been blocking the very idea of using “standardized” testing to punitively label non-affluent, non-dominant culture schools as F schools and close them down.
LikeLike
You’re right. Apathy and a go along, get along mentality have brought us to our current sad state. We should have had lawyers on speed dial.
LikeLike
To me it seems pretty axiomatic, but to others I guess they believe in partiality, favoritism and bias; that all schools receiving public monies have the same kind of accountability metric. Why would anyone, except for bias and devious goals, not want to have all schools getting public monies to have the same standards of achievement and product-quality (however that is measured)?
If someone is going to use my tax money, then I want the guarantee that whatever school it goes to (not that I advocate “choice”) is held to the same standard as a public school.
I’m glad the Heritage Foundation realizes that federal monies to education MUST be tracked and schools must be held to the same standards. I’m glad this puts fear into them and makes them reconsider if they want that level of scrutiny, because there are already TOO many “fly under the radar” charter schools, run by evil and greedy corps and people, putting profit before students. We, here in Miami FL are being infected and diseased by such types of charters.
LikeLike
All the more reason why the federal Department of Education should be phased out (as Ronald Reagan promised), and control and funding for education returned back to the states and municipalities, where it belongs.
I have read the US Constitution front to back, and I cannot lay my finger on any specific or enumerated authority for the federal government to get involved in education at all.
LikeLike
Charles,
The US Constitution says nothing about many modern changes on society.
Nothing about banning discrimination based on race or gender. Nothing about rights for those with disabilities or gays.
I assume you miss the good old days of the 18th century.
LikeLike
Agreed. The Constitution was written in 1787-88, and ratified in 1789. The constitution left slavery (and other policies) to the states. Slaves were 3/5 of a person. Women did not vote nationally until the 19th amendment (Wyoming had women voting earlier).
The power and rights of the people are unspecific, see the 10th amendment:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
It took federal legislation to allocate rights to disabled people. And it took legislation to specify rights for LGBT people. Some states permitted same-gender marriage earlier, but it was not until Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), that same-gender marriage was required in all states.
If you assume that I miss the 18th century, you are wrong.
The point I am trying to make in my post, is that the powers of the federal government are specific and enumerated. The powers reserved to the states and the people, are unspecific.
Like I said before, the constitution, the bill of rights, and the Supreme Court are pesky critters, but we have to live by them.
The states/municipalities supervised education for 180+ years. It is only in the past decades, that the feds got involved.
I would think that one topic that we could agree on, is that the feds should get out of education, and leave policy to the states/municipalities, as the founders intended.
If you truly wish to hold back and reduce school choice/vouchers, then it would make sense to prevent the federal government from mandating it to the states.
LikeLike
Charles,
With DeVos in charge of the federal Department of Education, it has lost credibility among many educators. But no one —other than the Trump administration–wants to see federal aid eliminated for kids with disabilities, poor kids, college students, etc.
LikeLike
Few people would weep at the demise of the federal Department of Education. I also wish to see the proper resources allocated to disabled children, lower family income children, BEOG(Pell) Grants, etc. All of these are laudable programs. I have pushed for additional funding for gifted and talented students, for many years.
Many (NOT ALL) of these programs pre-date the creation of the Dept of Education. Would it not be possible to fold the limited federal role in education, back to the old department of Health, Education, and Welfare? And would it not be more efficient, just to deliver the funding for these programs, back to the states, in the form of block grants?
LikeLike
Charles,
Most of the ED programs predate the Department. I agree with you that they will survive no matter what happens to ED.
Block grants are a terrible idea. The states will be able to do whatever they want with the money. They won’t spend it on the purposes for which it was intended. That’s the difference between block grants and categorical programs.
LikeLike
Diane, this is so true. A disaster, esp. in a state like ILL-Annoy, that hasn’t had a budget for TWO years!
And you know about the terrible amendment to an education bill (sailed through first hearing after it was not posted to be heard, so no Witness Slips posted for public comment–oops!) here, that would take $9,000 per special ed. teacher/staff member from local school districts, putting that money back into the general pot & resulting in more unidentified students in need of help, taking teacher attention away from other students.
LikeLike