Stephen Dyer is a former state legislator in Ohio and an expert on school finance. In the latest post on his blog, 10th Period, he shows why the arguments for vouchers are a fraud. Vouchers are sold as a salvation for Black and Hispanic students, yet they mostly subsidize white children escaping desegregated schools. And while they are sold with the promise of improving student performance, the voucher schools are in fact inferior to public schools. They are not the schools that rich parents pay for; most voucher schools are low-quality religious schools with unqualified teachers.
Dyer begins:
Now that a group of 100 school districts have formally sued the state over the EdChoice Voucher program, it’s time for voucher proponents to trot out their favorite canard — vouchers give students of color opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise have. And to oppose vouchers is to oppose opportunities for students of color.
Total crock.
The reason this canard is so pernicious is simple: It’s not true, and in fact, the opposite is true. Vouchers are disproportionately distributed to white students, leading to greater overall segregation in public school districts and communities of color with substantially fewer state resources to educate students in those communities.
This is the stat that voucher proponents love to quote, and it’s what Greg Lawson (a guy I actually like personally, despite our profound policy differences on this and nearly every issue) from the Buckeye Institute articulated in the Dispatch story yesterday:
“Greg Lawson of the Buckeye Institute said the data on who takes vouchers varies from school to school, but overall more minority students use EdChoice.
Ohio is about 82% white, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau. But 50% of the students who take an EdChoice scholarship identify as white or non-Hispanic, according to the Ohio Department of Education.
‘The choice is there for everybody regardless of what demographic box they check,’ Lawson said.”
What Greg and others “forget” is that EdChoice doesn’t apply to every school district in the state. In fact, according to data from last school year, only 164 of Ohio’s 613 school districts lost any state funding to the EdChoice Voucher transfer last year — a $164 million deduction from districts’ state aid. However, 95% of that funding came from just 38 school districts. Want to take a gander at the demographic makeup of those 38 districts? You guessed it. Overwhelmingly non-white. How overwhelmingly?
Try 68% non-white.
Sounds a whole lot different from the 82% white stat Greg mentioned, doesn’t it? In fact, of those 38 districts, only Wilmington was close to the 82% white stat.
Why would he try to repeat the 82% stat when only 1 district in the entire state that loses substantial state aid to EdChoice fits that description?
Because if only 50% of the voucher recipients are non-white, yet the communities from which the students come are almost 70% non-white, it kinda kills the whole “giving people of color an opportunity” argument.
Yeah….
Seems that for more than 20 years now, legislators have known that vouchers are disproportionately going to white students, yet they have done nothing to address this.
Someone might want to ask them about that.
Oh yeah. One more thing. It was interesting to read that not even the outrageously histrionic Aaron Baer mentioned in the Dispatch the whole original argument for the voucher program to begin with: it provides better options for kids in “failing” public schools.
That’s because we now know, thanks to more than a decade of comparative testing, that vouchers actually harm student achievement.
Even the Fordham Institute — an avowed voucher proponent — agreed in 2016 when it found that vouchers actually reduced student achievement. This was affirmed in 2020 when the Cincinnati Enquirer looked at test scores of voucher recipients and compared those scores with scores of students in the communities in which the private school resided. The paper found that 88% of the time, the public school students outperformed the private school students.
To voucher proponents now what matters now is the choice, not the outcomes from that choice apparently.
So let me bottom line this program: it leads to more racial segregation, deprives communities of color much needed state educational aid and provides less successful student outcomes.
But hey, let’s throw hundreds of millions more of our tax dollars at this thing.

From the standpoint of the parents who choose private schools for their children, the choice to pay tuition is related to the belief that the kid will get a better education in a private school. If the private school is a good fit for their kid, this is probably true. they have to make that judgement.
Society, on the other hand, has to make a different decision. We have to decide whether it is better to fund a small group of people or all the people. Supporters of vouchers are making a statement they dare not say in public, but all my life, conservatives have made the argument to me privately.
Here it is: Only 10% of people make the world work properly. It is that 10% of your students who will go on to make the world a better place; the rest are just trash. We need to fund the 10% and restrict everybody else for the good of humanity.
Sometimes this argument takes the form of religious dogmatism. Only my religion contributes. Sometimes it is class-oriented. But always implied is the idea that very few people should be given credit for the great heroic effort to make society better.
I see this idea behind the voucher programs. If we can give a few good people opportunity, we can achieve a better society.
Obviously many of us do not accept this evaluation of man’s basic nature. The above philosophy will not sell very well. Lenin believed in this to an extent. Marxism would only arrive if promulgated by a dedicated few. Those who admired heroic capitalism felt the same way about the captains of industry. Bolsheviks or Bourgeoisie, these people cannot say what they think without alienating the general public.
LikeLike
The sales pitch for vouchers do not match results. Vouchers are pitched as an equivalent of a fancy private school. This is false. We already know that the results are worse than those of the public schools. Why are we paying for more division and disruption?
LikeLike
To support vouchers is to oppose opportunities for students of color. To support segregation is is to oppose opportunities for all students.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Vouchers enable the poor and working class to subsidize the wealthy. It is a reverse “Robin Hood” scheme that has nothing to do with social justice or equity. Black and brown students are generally on the losing end of this equation while affluent white students tend to be the “winners.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
nice: Reverse Robin Hood
LikeLike
Those “vouchers” are just another Big Lie, a money-making machine for frauds, cons, and grifters.
LikeLike
There is ample evidence that the goal for a “Christian nationalist” state is in play in the push for charter schools. When mainstream media becomes willing to write about the alliance between conservative protestant Christians and conservative Catholics, it may be too late for American democracy.
Respectively, William Barr and Paul Weyrich told us the plan, to introduce religion at every opportunity and to implement parallel schools, eliminating public education.
Leonard Leo and Pat Buchanan delivered 6 conservative Catholic judges to SCOTUS.
The result- an end to separation of church and state.
LikeLike
A founding director of EdChoice was J Patrick Rooney. Wikipedia provides a bio with an entry about Rooney related to the America PAC and anti-abortion ads.
A second founding director, Mitch Daniels, was Pres. of North-America Operations of Eli Lilly and Co. The Lilly name figures prominently in Indiana School Choice (George St. Angelo for example). Blog readers can form their own opinions about the ties with religion from a search of Lilly Endowment Grantees.
LikeLike
The bio of the current EdChoice president identifies him as a student of theology in the 1990’s.
LikeLike