Red States Fall Short on School
Choice
by Andrew Moylan
Posted Apr 04, 2006
The Republican Party proclaims in
its national platform that it supports "state efforts to expand school choice,"
and several state party platforms say that they "do not fear" the effects of
school choice. Amidst the ethical chaos in Washington today, and attempts by
congressional leaders to cope with it, the GOP is hoping to reaffirm to a
skeptical public the party's principles of limited government and economic
freedom. One way to reach this goal would be to pick up the torch of school
choice.
Unfortunately, Republicans in control of several state
governments have dropped that torch, extinguishing the prospects for fundamental
choice-based education reform. Take South Carolina, where Republican Gov. Mark
Sanford has been on the forefront for school choice after proposing a voucher
program in his 2004 State of the State Address.
Called the "Put Parents
In Charge Act," the legislation would have instituted a tax credit for private
school tuition costs that varied depending on grade level. Sadly, despite a 74
to 50 Republican advantage over Democrats in the State House, and a 27 to 19
edge in the Senate, the governor's proposal failed three times.
It isn't
institutional barriers that are preventing passage of the Republican agenda but
friction between the executive and legislative branches. Sanford has pointedly
criticized Republican lawmakers for what he sees as their unconditional
willingness to accept the status quo. He brought live pigs to the House chamber
in order to chastise them about their pork-barrel spending, and once arrived on
a horse and buggy at the Capitol to symbolize the Republican establishment's
archaic mindset.
But South Carolinians shouldn't tolerate political
complacency when it comes to the education of their children. In 2003, the state
ranked 24th out of 25 states and the District of Columbia in weighted SAT scores
(the other 25 states primarily utilize the ACT test). Fully 50% of 8th graders
scored at a "below basic" level on national science tests in 2000. Only 25% of
South Carolina's 4th graders rated "proficient" or higher in 2003 reading tests.
After four more years in school they scored even lower, with only 24% of 8th
graders taking similar reading tests ranking "proficient" or higher.
Even
setting aside the poor testing performances, South Carolina is a state ripe for
school choice. According to a 2000 report by the Manhattan Institute for Policy
Research, South Carolina is among the 10 least educationally-free states. Its
charter school law is relatively weak and it forces families with home-schooled
children to submit to more regulation than most states, further decreasing
educational freedom.
South Carolina is not the only state to experience
school reform gridlock. Other states with Republican majorities -- such as
Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Missouri, Georgia, Idaho, and Texas -- could
have carried the torch on school choice, but their leaders have so far failed to
follow through on their platform. Perhaps these states could follow the examples
of their counterparts in Ohio and Utah, where Republican legislators have
succeeded in implementing scholarship programs that operate on tax-advantaged
donations.
Parents need more control, not less. Giving parents the right
to choose schools for their children is fundamental to educational liberty.
Rather than submit to the whims of bureaucrats, parents should be empowered to
make educational decisions regarding their children. Voucher systems and
tax-credit programs would inject much-needed competition into government's
near-monopoly on education, improving quality and cost-effectiveness. This
tactic has worked to improve poor school systems in Milwaukee, Cleveland, and
Washington, D.C., and should be applied in South Carolina and other states in
need of choice.
As school choice initiatives stagnate, parents of
children mired in failing schools across the nation are left with little
recourse. Citizens of all states, especially those dominated by Republicans,
should demand that their representatives step up and take a stand for their
children. After all, a platform is exceedingly difficult to stand (or run) on if
it has no legs.
