Because vouchers would not cost more than public schooling, your welfare analogy does not hold water.

In fact, most private school tuitions would cost the government less than educating in the public schools. (Imagine if welfare actually saved the government money!)

I do not suggest we make poor families dependent on the government for their needs. But educationally, why wouldn’t we attempt to open up all possible avenues to a good education (at a cost savings) especially for poor families should be explored.

Look, it is well known that public education is not “created equal” in poor communities vs. in wealthy suburbs. If this ideal was realized, I wouldn’t be a proponent of vouchers. But given the reality that public education is not high quality in many poor communities, I think it is time to get past ideology and find pragmatic solutions to the unmet educational needs of many. (Yes, not all, but a start.)

Also, referring to one of your previous posts, I’d be interested in hearing more about what you find so offensive about a voucher that allows a parent to choose to educate their child at a quality religious-based school. I guess my take is as long as the government can assess that 1) the school provides students with a quality education 2) the school provides a civic-minded education, than that school is fit to receive government funds for educating American students.

on another note, wasn’t it democratic lawmakers who also raised the spectre of tuskegee a few years ago when a proposed upward bound evaluation excluded some students from participating in the program? isn’t this an analogous situation? oh the hypocrisy indeed.

Attorney DC is on the right track here. If you keep following the logic you end up with public school choice and charters, which is the status quo in DC (minus the Congressionally imposed voucher program).

Vouchers could be offeed based on income- students in families below or just above the poverty line could receive the choice of full-tution vouchers (both students with and without special ed needs). Maybe a sliding scale of tution coverage could be given to those who are a bit above the poverty line, but far from middle class.

While not a cure-all, limited vouchers would expand the choice to those economically-poor families who lack the means to consider other education options that middle and upper class familier already have. (And, more often than not, these students are also in some of the lowest-performing schools.)

How about some new framing: PUBLIC schools with accountability and dollars and PRIVATE schools that people pay for themselves without taxpayer money or regulation. That TWO-SECTOR formulation is more accurate and works just fine, thank you very much.

The largest voucher program in the nation is the McKay Scholarship program in Florida, which is for children with disabilities. Almost 20,000 special needs students are attending 846 private schools. If the funding follows the child, private schools will accept special needs children:

http://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/Information/McKay/files/Fast_Facts_McKay.pdf

As to your point about not everyone can go to private school, I don’t believe anyone has ever claimed that they would, or that they need to do so. Like any other education reform, this isn’t an all or nothing proposition.