In 2018, Arizona voters overwhelmingly rejected school vouchers. On the ballot that year was a measure that would have allowed all parents — even the wealthiest ones — to receive taxpayer money to send their kids to private, typically religious schools.
Arizonans voted no, and it wasn’t close. Even in a right-leaning state, with powerful Republican leaders supporting the initiative, the vote against it was 65% to 35%.
This year, voters in Colorado, Nebraska, and Kentucky rejected vouchers. In Kentucky, the margin was 2-1 against vouchers – and all 120 counties in Kentucky opposed a ballot initiative that would have allowed vouchers.
While the results of last week’s election indicate a closely divided nation on many issues, support for public schools is a consistent winner. And, when asked – in blue states and red states and in rural and urban areas – voters reject school vouchers.
Within hours of the recent election’s conclusion in Tennessee, Gov. Bill Lee’s top legislative allies filed their top priority legislation for 2025: School Vouchers.
This despite vouchers being overwhelmingly rejected by voters in states like Kentucky, Colorado, and Nebraska.
Yes, while Kentucky voted about 2-1 for Donald Trump, they also voted 2-1 AGAINST a ballot initiative that would have allowed public funds to be spent on private schools by way of vouchers.
Vouchers were rejected in all 120 of Kentucky’s counties.
And still, Gov. Lee and his associates continue to push for a universal voucher scheme in our state.
“Once again, Tennessee Republicans are pushing an expansion of their failed private school voucher scheme. This isn’t about improving education; it’s about diverting public dollars away from underfunded public schools to private institutions that are unaccountable to taxpayers and don’t serve every student. Vouchers are a scam — they aren’t working to improve student outcomes here in Tennessee, nor have they succeeded at this scale anywhere else in the country.”
Yes, vouchers themselves are budget-busters. But, this proposed amendment also includes a key provision that could create headaches for school districts, principals, and teachers.
THAT PARENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIRECT THE EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN
Those are the words causing great concern.
Because, what do they mean? Do words even mean anything?
Here are some of the ways this language might be interpreted:
Wouldn’t this amendment also allow parents to intrude into every classroom? If I have a constitutional right to direct my child’s education, does that not mean that I can tell my child’s science teacher to stop teaching evolution? Or start teaching evolution? Can I demand a different approach to teaching American history? How about prepositions? And how will a classroom teacher even function if every child in the classroom comes with a parent who has a constitutional right to direct their education?
A representative of the state’s Parent Teacher Association (PTA) says the law, if adopted, would amount to chaos.
And it wouldn’t just be limited to chaos in public schools. All parents would have the guaranteed, constitutionally-protected right to “direct” their child’s education – no matter the school setting.
It seems likely that if the law passed, one or several court cases would have to be heard to determine the exact meaning of “directing a child’s learning.”
If I have a right to choose a private school paid for by tax dollars but the private school doesn’t accept my kid, then what? Doesn’t the law say the “choice” is mine – and I’m “directing” the state to use its dollars to educate my child at the school I choose? Which means if the school doesn’t “choose” my kid, they are breaking the law? Infringing on my rights?
I’m not sure this law will pass, but if it does, Colorado will be in for – chaos.
A Kentucky student highlights problems created by school voucher schemes
As Kentucky voters consider a an amendment to the state’s Constitution that would allow the use of public funds to support private K-12 schools, one private school student is speaking out on why that’s a very bad idea.
One of the scariest things about Amendment 2 is that it basically serves as a blank check for vouchers to non-public schools with no clear place for the funding to come from other than public schools.
Tennessee policymakers should remember, too, that just as in Kentucky, the school voucher scheme is likely to funnel tax dollars from rural districts and send them to urban and suburban private schools.
Of course, that won’t stop Gov. Lee from trying again to pass a universal school voucher bill.
Colorado, Kentucky, and Nebraska all have voucher votes on the ballot.
Peter Greene reminds us:
These are three different approaches to the question of taxpayer-funded school vouchers, but they share the unusual feature of putting voucher programs to a public vote. All school voucher programs in the U. S. were passed into law by legislatures, sometimes over strong objections of the taxpayers. No taxpayer-funded school voucher program has ever survived a public vote.
The people pushing “school choice” actually want only one choice
The same people banning books from schools and seeking to ban Pride flags are the ones pushing “school choice.”
Thing is, they don’t want actual choices. They want all schools to conform to their narrow vision.
Peter Greene offers some insight:
This is not about choice. It’s about capturing the education system so that young humans can be taught the correct way to behave and think. It’s about trying to eradicate a way of thinking and being that folks on the right disapprove of.
When someone like Ron DeSantis or Ryan Walters tells you that he favors school choice and he also favors making illegal all references to certain “divisive topics” and gender stuff, he is telling you that all his talk about school choice is bullshit.
Lee made clear his preference for Christian Nationalism as the driving force for education “reform” in Tennessee in his 2022 State of the State Address.
Since then, he’s tried to force Hillsdale College-affiliated charter schools on Tennessee communities – and thanks to his hand-picked Charter School Commission, he’s succeeded in some cases.
The challenge here is not just the transfer of public money to private school operators. It’s also the use of public money for one very specific worldview – to the exclusion of all others.
It’s not clear the drafters understood the full implications of the proposed change.
The wording essentially makes school choice the right of every child in the state. It also explicitly gives parents the right to “direct their child’s education.”
As Peter Greene notes, this presents some interesting challenges:
Wouldn’t this language amount to a state takeover of all charter and private schools?
And that’s not all. Wouldn’t this amendment also allow parents to intrude into every classroom? If I have a constitutional right to direct my child’s education, does that not mean that I can tell my child’s science teacher to stop teaching evolution? Or start teaching evolution? Can I demand a different approach to teaching American history? How about prepositions? And how will a classroom teacher even function if every child in the classroom comes with a parent who has a constitutional right to direct their education?
It’s not clear there’s momentum for the proposed changes to pass. But, if they did, Colorado schools – both public and private – could be in for some unpleasant surprises.
The right-wing plot to privatize public schools runs through Tennessee
Peter Greene reports on efforts by right-wing bill mill ALEC – American Legislative Exchange Council – to implement vouchers in 25 states by 2025.
No surprise, Tennessee is on the map.
ALEC’s map of school privatization targets
As Greene notes:
ALEC has set a new goal– 25 by 2025. That means having 25 states adopt school voucher programs by the end of next year. To push that goal, ALEC has a new initiative called the Education Freedom Alliance, and it is a scary crew.
Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee pushed an effort for universal vouchers this past legislative session – despite his past promises that he wanted to see results from the state’s pilot program before making the scheme universal.
The effort failed in 2024, but as you can see, Tennessee is a 2025 target. Lee and his legislative allies have pledged to push vouchers again next session.
Of course, Lee has long sought to extract public funds for the benefit of school privatizers.
“With a grocery store executive recently admitting that their company gouged shoppers on select items above inflation, it’s clear we need accountability measures to address corporate greed and protect working families from undue financial strain, especially in Tennessee where families are the hardest hit,” Rep. Behn added.
No money shall be paid from public funds nor shall the credit of the State or any of its political subdivisions be used for the direct benefit of any religious or other private educational institution.
Yep. That’s it.
The surprise is not that the majority agreed with the plain language. Rather, it’s surprising that these word could be read in such a way as to allow state money to flow to anything other than public schools in South Carolina.
Trump is “all in” on school privatization, Harris stands with public schools
As Donald Trump and Kamala Harris prepare to debate tonight, the education agenda of each candidate deserves a look.
NPR digs in to some key issues, and the differences are stark.
School privatization, for example:
First, he’s [Trump] calling for universal school choice. This would, in theory, take public dollars normally spent on a child’s public education and give them directly to parents to spend at whatever school they want, whether it’s public, private or homeschooling at the kitchen table.
By contrast:
Harris has been an outspoken supporter of public education and has been courting educators’ support.
Democrats, on the other hand, made clear in their 2024 platform that they’re against any effort that could weaken the nation’s public schools. “We oppose the use of private-school vouchers, tuition tax credits, opportunity scholarships, and other schemes that divert taxpayer-funded resources away from public education. Public tax dollars should never be used to discriminate.”
