Vouchers are bright idea, but grim reality

I am one of many Californians who believe the state's schools are in trouble and see school choice as a way to improve education.

Public schools could use a little healthy competition instead of begging for more taxpayer money and promising improvements. Proposition 38 would have allowed California families to obtain $4,000 vouchers for attending private schools.

I was initially excited about the measure, but I now realize that if voters pass Proposition 38, California's education system will be devastated. California's low-income families are the pawns in this election.

In theory, the measure is supposed to help California's poorest children escape decrepit public schools and obtain a decent education through the state's private schools. This would be true if vouchers were means-tested for low-income eligibility.

In practice, any California family with a child would be eligible for a voucher ­ regardless of income ­ and most of the gravy train will run in the direction of the state's most advantaged families.

When every student is eligible for a voucher, private schools will skim the cream from public education. The private schools are looking for the smartest, the richest and the whitest children in California to fill the roll sheets.

Sure, a few low-income and minority children will be accepted in these schools, but only out of tokenism. Private schools want to take the children who are the easiest to educate and offer the least problems.

California's low-income families will watch how most of the voucher money goes to families that need it least.

At the same time, they will see their kids in public schools that are deteriorating further, degenerating to the point of becoming daytime juvenile halls.

They should not expect funding to go to public schools. Now that the moneyed constituents no longer have children in public schools, they will not vote for any new taxes. They might even repeal existing taxes.

Not only that, but when so many students rush for private schools, a basic rule of economics kicks in. When demand of a certain product goes up, so does the cost of tuition.

California's politicians will respond to these tuition increases by redirecting public school funding to increasing voucher values. The state's poor are politically powerless to stop that.

Proposition 38 will also be the biggest education gamble California takes. No voucher initiative as sweeping as California might undertake exists, so no data is available.

Milwaukee, which has the nation's most famous school voucher program, has seen mixed results.

Not surprisingly, analyses done by conservative groups find the Milwaukee voucher program successful, while teachers unions quickly point out the problems. No consensus exists on whose evaluation is correct.

One big difference between Milwaukee's voucher program and the one proposed under Proposition 38 is the former is means-tested. The vouchers do in fact go to Milwaukee's low-income households.

In California, such a plan would be politically dead on arrival. When vouchers are available to everyone regardless of income, it's called "school choice." When vouchers are only available for the poor, it's called "welfare."

Proposition 38's intent is not to help poor children. If it were, provisions would be included to make sure low-income families get a bulk of funding, or better yet, guaranteed acceptance in private schools.

Vouchers simply give California's middle- and upper-income residents an excuse to wash their hands of any responsibility for public schools, thus creating super schools that only search for the most adept students.

I would support a voucher proposal, publicly or privately funded, that would give the state's poor children a genuine learning opportunity at a private school.

Proposition 38 only tricks low-income residents with a promise for vouchers while they get shut out by schools that only want the vouchers from wealthier families.

I am not voting against Proposition 38 because I am afraid vouchers will make education better for the wealthy. I am voting against it because I am afraid vouchers will make education worse for all of California.
 
Chris Ledemuller is a journalism major at Cal State Long Beach.