Mike Petrilli wrote an enlightening post about the hurdles that the Trump administration faces in trying to enact a $20 billion school choice program. He says that the Trump administration will need three “miracles” to make good on his promise. Mike, of course, is a strong supporter of choice and continues to believe despite 25 years of evidence that choice itself does not produce different results from public schools. Some of that evidence was sponsored by his own organization (the Ohio voucher study that shows kids actually losing ground as a result of shifting to private schools). His discussion of the federal legislative process and the politics of change are worthy of a read.
Miracle number-one is getting a federal tax credit enacted in the first place. This feels much less achievable after the health-care debacle in Congress last week. It was always going to be hard. We know from past Senate votes on private school choice that the numbers simply aren’t there. Virtually every Democrat is a guaranteed “no” (save, perhaps, for Cory Booker); too few Republicans are a sure “yes.” Rural-state Republicans simply don’t have the incentive to buck their education establishments to support a policy that will bring very little bacon back to their own communities.
The conventional wisdom was that the tax credit plan would be attached to a whopping multi-dimensional tax-reform bill, which voucher-squeamish Republicans would vote for because they wanted the other goodies included in the package. (Using the legislative process called reconciliation would make such a bill filibuster-proof, so no Democrats would be needed.)
After last week, however, Republicans of all stripes know that they can sink the President’s agenda by holding out for what they want. He is in a much more precarious political position than most members of Congress are. It will only take a handful of GOP Senators demanding the removal of the tax credit/voucher initiative from the tax bill for the Administration to cave. Though less likely, something of the sort could also happen again in the House.
If somehow Team Trump overcomes those seemingly insurmountable barriers, miracle number-two will be finding the sweet spot between too much federal regulation and too little. There are massive risks on both sides of that equation.
I would have added one more twist to the story he tells here: the question of where the $20 billion that Trump has promised will come from. Will it mean turning all current federal aid programs (Title 1, special education, etc.) into an unrestricted block grant? If so, the opposition from the groups (civil rights organizations, disability organizations) currently protecting the sanctity of these programs will be fierce.
If Trump cuts programs that exist because of Congressional legislation and not executive orders, he will run into more state and federal judges to insult with his 3 a.m. tweets.
“Mike, of course, is a strong supporter of choice and continues to believe despite 25 years of evidence that choice itself does not produce different results from public schools. ”
What’s the best research evidence, Diane, for your sweeping denigration of the impacts of school choice. I think the reality may be rather more complex.
W. Bentley MacLeod and Miguel Urquiola in their paper “Anti-Lemons: School Reputation and Educational Quality” wrote that
“if the reputation model holds for a school market:
• Parents will have a clear preference for schools with higher absolute achievement—this will not necessarily translate into a preference for schools with greater value added.
• If schools can select students based upon ability then:
– School choice will result in stratification, with the highest ability/income children going to the most desirable and productive schools.
– School choice will result in lower student effort, and in lower incomes for students who do not gain admission to selective schools. (Note that if peer effects exist, then changes in the distribution of students will have additional effects on the level and distribution of achievement.)
• If schools cannot select on ability, the introduction of school choice will unambiguously raise school performance and student outcomes.”
Click to access MacLeod-Urquiola(2009).pdf
Stephen,
You lost in Massachusetts. You were beaten 62-38%. Don’t you trust parents who want strong public schools, not subsidies for privatization?
To Stephen B Ronan:
Here is what you wrote: “I think the reality may be rather more complex.”
It is complex because school choice, in your expression, demands:
1) NOT to be transparent in its operation.
2) NOT to abide by rules and regulations as in PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
3) NOT to make commitment to parents, teachers and students.
4) NOT to be reliable, responsible, and accountable for its operation.
5) Most of all, school choice is complex because its owners LOOT tax payers’ fund to spend on owners’ LAVISH PERSONAL expenses. Back2basic.
Please rebut this person. This is the US version of The Conversation. If this is where the Reformsters are heading, we need to cut them off at the pass.
They will take an article from you because of your curriculum vitae.
http://theconversation.com/the-unique-case-for-rural-charter-schools-72049?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20April%204%202017%20-%2071285379&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20April%204%202017%20-%2071285379+CID_f7d46426afb02d9aa9463085a7ac0c0f&utm_source=campaign_monitor_us&utm_term=The%20unique%20case%20for%20rural%20charter%20schools
Pennsylvania is really screwing public school students with this proposed voucher deal:
“To put the PA House’s proposed EITC/OSTC funding increase in perspective, Governor Wolf’s 2017-18 budget proposes a $100 million increase in Basic Education Funding for 1.7 million students who attend public schools. The PA House voted for a $55 million in increase in voucher funding for private/religious schools that educate 250,000 students.”
Public school parents better step and start advocating on behalf of their children. This is just blatantly unfair.
If ed reformers prefer private schools over public schools that’s fine- it’s an opinion- but the least they could do is let the public know this when they run for office.
I don’t think a single member of that state legislature was elected on a platform of gutting public schools and re-directing tens of millions of dollars to private schools.
http://keystonestateeducationcoalition.blogspot.com/2017/04/pa-ed-policy-roundup-april-5-tax-credit.html
This is sad and disappointing! I wonder if Wolf made some type of a deal with the legislature that has been getting the governor to comply with their demands by controlling the purse strings.
Wolf was elected on public education and I don’t think people meant “massive new public funding for private schools”.
While Congress and the Trump Administration are consumed with promoting their voucher agenda, is anyone in DC doing anything for public school students?
Or are they pushed to the bottom of the list again?
We went directly from the Obama Administration charter mania to the Trump Administration voucher mania.
Amen, Chiara! Agree with: “We went directly from the Obama Administration charter mania to the Trump Administration voucher mania.”
34 states are pushing voucher initiatives led by the voucher cheerleaders in DC.
Meanwhile, more than 30 states have cut public school funding since 2009.
You would think one adult somewhere in government could see their way clear to advocating on behalf of public schools students.
Freaking ridiculous. Public school kids should pass the hat and hire a lobbyist.
sorry to say the Obama administration prepared the way for DeVos by touting school choice via charters.
I tend to agree, that the Obama administration is in part to blame for the directions that the current Department of Education is taking. But, I would add, that there is enough blame to go around for many other individuals.
The current trend towards school choice/vouchers in many states, and at the federal level, is the result of many factors. Most of all, the dissatisfaction which many parents/students feel towards their public school system.
I do not wish to “smear” teachers, nor public schools. There are many fine public schools, and public school teachers in the USA.
Gallup Polls show that the overwhelming majority of parents love their own public schools.
Q Gallup Polls show that the overwhelming majority of parents love their own public schools. END Q
I would like to see these polls, will you please share the link(s)? I have found polls that show that the majority of the respondents favor school choice.
I used to work in statistical analysis, for the US Department of Commerce. Polls can be manipulated, depending on the phrasing of the questions. And the results can be “massaged”, to present the answer that the sponsor is trying to push. I do not put a lot of faith in polls. Polls had Thomas Dewey defeating Harry S. Truman.
More important that polls, are the direct statistics, that are obtained on the “macro” objective. For example, what percentage of parents, have their children enrolled in the public schools, in their respective districts.
Washington DC, has the lowest utilization rate in the USA (79%). see
http://www.citylab.com/housing/2014/08/where-private-school-enrollment-is-highest-and-lowest-across-the-us/375993/
In the trendy upper-income neighborhood of Connecticut Ave. NW in our nation’s capital, 73% (seventy-three percent) of the school-age children attend private schools!
Oh pls Charles, the polls on majority of folks preferring their own public schools are all over the internet & have been for yrs, do your hw
Consider also that 85-90% of US school children attend public schools, & ask yourself what proportion of those families are desperate for alternatives?
Your plumping for charter/ voucher/ ‘free-market’ alternatives relates only to a small minority of pubsch districts– certainly not those in rural districts, which comprise a large proportion of US school districts.
You are an ideologue, & your ideas/schemes do not pertain to the great majority of US school districts.
Q Oh pls Charles, the polls on majority of folks preferring their own public schools are all over the internet & have been for yrs, do your hw
Consider also that 85-90% of US school children attend public schools, & ask yourself what proportion of those families are desperate for alternatives?
Your plumping for charter/ voucher/ ‘free-market’ alternatives relates only to a small minority of pubsch districts– certainly not those in rural districts, which comprise a large proportion of US school districts.
You are an ideologue, & your ideas/schemes do not pertain to the great majority of US school districts. END Q
I have worked in statistical analysis, for the US Dept of Commerce. I have learned not to put a whole lot of faith in polls. There are polls that show that a majority of people favor school choice. There are polls that show that a majority of people are delighted with their own public school. This shows that a person can be entirely satisfied with their public school, and also favor school choice.
I myself, am a strong supporter of quality public schools. I also support school choice/vouchers for people who are dissatisfied with their current public school(s). There is no conflict.
We both know, that public schools, are on the “bell curve”. Some/many are terrific. Some are mediocre, Some are terrible. No one expects all public schools in the USA, to be outstanding.
True, many parents/.children are entirely satisfied with their current public school. This is great. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, is a saying that I tend to agree with.
Parents who live in rural areas, are just as entitled to have their children attend quality schools, as are parents in urban areas. No question about this.
This is why I have often encouraged long-distance learning by two-way video. I have also approached my state representatives, and pushed for a four-year residence preparatory academy, for gifted/talented students here in Virginia.
No matter how terrific a public school can be, few have the resources and teaching staff, requisite to assist gifted/talented children in achieving their fullest potential. This is not a sleight to public school teachers.
Charles, please read the article that will be posted tomorrow morning, first thing, about how “choice” will devastate rural schools.
“worthy of a read” -only to know America’s enemy.
Better to peruse KnowYourCharter.com and, to extrapolate the growth of for-profit schools, Muslim-associated schools, evangelical schools, Wiccan, etc. and calculate our taxes, going out the window (until Gates’ for-profit schools-in-a-box takeover the market, replacing publicly-funded education).
The various expo$itions by rationalizers (self-anointed and well-funded), like Fordham and Gates’ Impatient Opportunists, have become tedious and redundant.
The $20 billion Trump promised for educational choice will probably not be an all at once dump–go spend it.
According to a report this week in AOL Finance, Trump and Republicans in Congress may put a “scholarship tax credit” for school choice into a planned revision to the IRS tax structure.
One of these bills S. 809 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) proposed by Senator Marco Rubio from Florida was sent to the Committee on Finance. No action was taken and Rubio failed to attract co-sponsors. Here is a summary of Rubio’s “Educational Opportunities Act.
Begin quote: Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow individual taxpayers a tax credit for charitable contributions to a scholarship granting organization. Allows a maximum credit amount of $4,500 ($2,250 for a married individual filing a separate return). Defines “scholarship granting organization” as a tax-exempt entity whose exclusive purpose is to provide scholarships for the tuition and other expenses of elementary and secondary school students from low income households (i.e., household income not exceeding 250% of federal poverty guidelines).
Allows corporate taxpayers a tax credit, up to $100,000, for contributions to a scholarship granting organization.
Imposes a penalty on scholarship granting organizations that fail to distribute at least 90% of their total receipts for elementary and secondary school expenses in a taxable year. End Quote. retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/809
Republican Todd Rokita (IN) proposed a bill identical to that of Rubio, H.R. 1511 “Educational Opportunities Act.” It attracted three Republican co-sponsors: Luke Messer (IN), Trent Franks (AZ), and Ron DeSantis (FL). Both of these bills died in committee. Even so, it is not hard to see how state taxing authorities could be enlisted to support Trump’s campaign promise to provide $20 billion for school choice, not immediately, over time.
A version of these bills would allow Congress to dump all pretense of having federal funds allocated toward such old-fashioned priorities as meeting the educational needs of students living in poverty, students with disabilities, students learning English. Moreover, the funding would not go through the Department of Education. Betsy DeVos could spend time in her bully pulpit promoting choice, and her favorite thing, religious education.
So far, there is not much clarity on how a federal scholarship program might work (or not) compared with a law that makes it possible for states to issue tax credits. In theory, tax credits could be awarded at the state level, with the IRS having no direct role in the transactions. The devil is in the details.
The current budget proposal cuts $9 billion from USDE but it adds $1.4 billion for school choice programs, including charters. According to US News and World report (March 10) the proposed budget would increase charter school funding by $168 million.
The budget would also allocate $250 million for a brand new choice program reserved for private schools (no details yet). Title I funding would get a $1 billion increase, but only for states that have already adopted a choice policy and system of funding it (vouchers). That is a strong-arm tactic borrowed from Arne Duncan’s RTT program. If you want this money, get with my program. I am guessing that the “increase” for Title I would be a “reward” for states that have already adopted a voucher program or equivalent.
Here is a lighted edited version of some proposed budget cuts beyondUSDE.
“ The proposed 2018 Budget would eliminate funding for these independent agencies: African Development Foundation; Appalachian Regional Commission; Chemical Safety Board; Corporation for National and Community Service; Corporation for Public Broadcasting; Delta Regional Authority; Denali Commission; Institute of Museum and Library Services; Inter-American Foundation; Legal Services Corporation; National Endowment for the Arts; National Endowment for the Humanities; Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation; Northern Border Regional Commission; Overseas Private Investment Corporation; US Institute of Peace; US Interagency Council on Homelessness; US Trade and Development Agency; Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.” https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/budget/fy2018/2018_blueprint.pdf
Tax credits. Great if you’re high income & need to write off a bundle of income. How does his help those supposedly most in need of alternatives to their allegedly horrible pubschs? Sounds a lot like GOP healthcare plan…
DIANE: FYI: Here is some research that came in today in the Teaches College Record. I have linked ir, but also copied just the conclusions of a long and well-written report:
**Venture Philanthropy and Teacher Education Policy in the U.S:
The Role of the New Schools Venture Fund””
by Kenneth Zeichner & César Peña-Sandoval — 2015
“Conclusions: We reject both the position that the status quo in teacher education is acceptable (a position held by what we term “defenders”) and the position that the current system needs to be “blown up” and replaced by a market economy (“reformers”). We suggest a third position (“transformers”) that we believe will strengthen the U.S. system of public teacher education and provide everyone’s children with high-quality teachers. We conclude with a call for more trenchant dialogue about the policy options before us and for greater transparency about the ways that private interests are influencing public policy and practice in teacher education.”
http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=17539
TCRecord: Article
http://www.tcrecord.org
Venture Philanthropy and Teacher Education Policy in the U.S: The Role of the New Schools Venture Fund by Kenneth Zeichner & César Peña-Sandoval — 2015
Or, the research authors could conclude that a system that produces a workforce that makes productivity gains, despite the 2% drag, caused by the financial sector, is, in general terms, working very well. The work of the researchers could commence by focusing on changes in a private school system, that produces men like Trump, who apparently learned or deduced, wrongly, that judges sign off on laws. The same private system apparently leads people on Wall Street to conclude that they don’t have to contribute to GDP, and can take lavishly, from labor’s work. The premise to study is, are the privately educated, worse than welfare queens. In terms of contribution to a civil society, apparently, they are learning that lying and exploiting the vulnerable, is acceptable. Why is there so much focus where there is not a problem and so little, where there is a significant and substantial problem?
I agree. Your last question is a great one. The “takers” are not the poor. They are those that create laws partial to their own interests allowing them to exploit others. They are the companies that pay people peanuts, and then get the rest of us to underwrite the employees’ food stamps or Medicaid while the companies are making huge profits.
Linda: Apparently I didn’t take from the article the same as you did. It seemed to me that the authors would agree with you–though they were also critical of some of the problems that remain for public schools. Support and help public schools get better is what I read.
If the U.S. had a two party system, instead of a ruling class and a peasant class (which includes many who do not recognize themselves as such), current assumptions and, the national dialogue, would be very different. The war against America’s most important common good-public education- reflects the lack of a two-party system. Peasant-thinking citizens, who comfortably prop up the agenda of the ruling class, in diverse ways, are, sadly, not unique in the history of the world. What was unique, 35-40 years ago, was the expectation and demand, for equal opportunity, by an American middle class which, as a result, created an engine of economic growth that reduced income inequality.
Linda,
Let’s acknowledge our culpability. The very people who will be harmed most either vote for the candidate of the 1% or don’t vote at all. In so many crucial elections, the turnout is so low that teachers and parents could choose the people in the legislature and on the state and local school boards.
Case in point: Ferguson, Mo., just re-elected its white mayor over a black member of the City Council. Ferguson is 67% black. Where were the voters?
We agree. Adding, it would be remiss of me not to acknowledge a systemic problem, reflected in the fact that at each higher rank, in a scale of income, there’s significantly more voting participation, as a percentage of the segment. Whether the issue is fear, hopelessness, barriers to voting, inexperience in democracy through generations or, other factors, it would dishonor those who recognized the problem and gave their lives in the 70’s to get the vote out in the south, for me to blame, wholesale, non-voters.
There’s no love lost, from me, for teachers, middle class evangelicals and anyone else who votes Republican.
Just curious, to which Ohio schools, does the ubiquitously quoted Chad Aldis and, his friends and family send their kids? Is it private schools that they want taxpayers to fund, the ever-so-successful ECOT, the cherry-picking charters or, the public schools in their demographically homogeneous neighborhoods, like the ones that Roland Fryer describes in his two-tier prescription?