Universal School Choice
Government plot, or a way to break the public school monopoly?
Note: SB1038 failed in the Senate Monday afternoon. However, the principles I discussed are still valid, and the issue will keep coming back until we see significant reform of our public education system.
Universal school choice is the big debate in Idaho right now. Senators Tammy Nichols and Brian Lenney have sponsored Senate Bill 1038 which would divert approximately $6,000 of existing public school spending per student to families who wish to enroll their children in alternative education institutions such as private schools, microschools, or even homeschools.
Supporters say it will create more competition in public education, forcing schools to improve in order to earn patronage, while also giving families much more flexibility regarding their own educational choices.
Opponents are divided into two camps: The public education establishment of teachers’ unions, the school board association, and the education bureaucracy all oppose this bill because it takes money and influence away from the system they control. On the other hand, homeschool groups oppose the bill because they fear it is a Trojan Horse for government oversight of homeschooling.
I won’t make you wait for the end of this article to learn my position - I am strongly in favor of this bill. However, I will attempt to fairly present both sides’ strongest arguments. First, however, let us take a high level philosophical view of the state of education.
The Idaho State Constitution says:
The stability of a republican form of government depending mainly upon the intelligence of the people, it shall be the duty of the legislature of Idaho, to establish and maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of public, free common schools.
The people who wrote this more than one hundred years ago did so with the best of intentions. They believed that every child deserved an education that allowed them to become an adult citizen with the intelligence, experience, and wisdom to make informed decisions. They believed that the best way to accomplish that was by placing education in the hands of the state.
Today we see the fruits of that idea. The public education system has become a giant sinkhole for taxpayer dollars, as we are constantly told that the schools are underfunded and need more, but more is never enough. Meanwhile, student achievement is abysmal and does not seem to improve no matter how much money is allocated.
K-12 public schools do not prepare children to be functioning adults. Most jobs now require a four year degree, and for those that do not, the governor and his big business friends are asking for $8,500 per student for training. What then is the point of going to school?
I suppose it’s because that’s where indoctrination happens. 80% of future Idaho citizens are walking through the doors of the public school system, so that is where Marxist activists get the most return on their investment. They have entire generations of Americans locked in classrooms for seven hours a day, 180 days a year, for thirteen of their first eighteen years of their lives. No matter what messages children hear at home or at church, the ideas they receive in public schools are so pervasive that few can rise above the propaganda and truly think for themselves.
More than a century ago, future President Woodrow Wilson said that the purpose of higher education was to make men who were as unlike their fathers as possible. Today, the purpose of public education is to create foot soldiers for the Marxist revolution. Young people like Shiva Rajbhandari believe they are fearless rebels fighting a stale conservative society when in reality they have become pawns of the same ideology that controls news media, entertainment, corporate boardrooms, the military/industrial complex, and of course, academia itself.
That is where we stand today. The question posed to us is, what can we do about it?
State Superintendent Debbie Critchfield would say that parents already have choices, so this bill is unnecessary. Many enroll their children in expensive private schools. Many others homeschool, making the necessary sacrifices in time and lifestyle to devote to their children. However, the great majority simply take the path of least resistance. Public schools are free, and public schools are where most people go. They are the default, the null hypothesis.
If this situation continues for another generation, we will have a society where 80% of voters were educated in public schools, and the remaining 20% had some form of alternative education. The last presidential election saw nearly 64% of Idahoans vote for President Donald Trump. Do you believe that the public school system today is turning out citizens who will vote that way fifteen or twenty years from now?
I have heard some on the right suggest that parents simply need to take responsibility for raising their children and make the necessary sacrifices to homeschool. After all, the students who came to the Capitol earlier this month to show off their projects were some of the most intelligent and well-spoken children I’ve ever met. Why can’t all students be like that?
I have heard others suggest that we should force this issue by abolishing public education. That is obviously a nonstarter. Even if our constitution did not mandate some form of government-sponsored education, the fact that 80% of students still attend public schools means it would never work. As frustrating as it is to watch the public school system continue to fail in its mission to educate students while at the same time indoctrinating them in leftist ideology, the simple fact is that most students will still utilize the existing system.
Part of political maturity is understanding the difference between the world we want to see and the world as it is. Sure, the goal of good politics ought to be the gradual progression of the latter toward the former, but we must not mistake the map for the terrain. We must not get so lost in the world we envision that we forget how the world actually is.
Wouldn’t it be great if every family was intact, with a father and a mother who had the time, energy, and money to devote themselves to raising and educating their children? Wouldn’t it be great if we could eliminate the bureaucracy and regulations that stifle innovation and freedom? Wouldn’t it be great if we could get back to the Constitution and the biblical basis of our country?
Yes, yes it would. But it’s not that easy. Families today come in many different configurations, and a lot of parents simply do not have the time, money, or ability to be full time homeschoolers or afford private schools. Bureaucracies and regulations that have long existed are not easily dismantled. And a country that has left the path laid out by its founders more than a century ago will not be so easily set back on course.
How then shall we live? The left has taken over much of our culture, and they are relentless. Hiding out in our own enclaves is not a long term solution. We need to actively engage the culture if we want to bring about the world we envision.
I believe that Senate Bill 1038 is a step in that direction. It does two things:
First, it incentivizes public schools to improve due to the threat of competition. Once parents have the ability to take their tax dollars elsewhere, public schools will be forced to compete on the same level playing field as private schools and other alternatives. They are going to have figure out how to get more done with less money rather than simply begging the legislature for more tax dollars or passing levies in low-turnout elections. They are going to have to return to serving students rather than the unions. They are going to have to find ways to increase student achievement rather than obfuscating its decline.
The second benefit of SB1038 is for students who are struggling in the current system right now. They will immediately have the option to take their tax dollars elsewhere, whether to private schools, microschools, tutoring services, or use it for homeschool curricula. This will instantly improve their own educational situation, rather than waiting until they have graduated (or dropped out) for their public school to show improvement.
The long term effect of this bill will be a reform of the current system that allows families to choose the institutions that best serve their children, which means more successful students, and which likely means fewer Marxist foot soldiers as well. I know far too many conservative families who sent their children to public schools for whatever reason and were shocked to find them graduate as faithful leftists. This bill would give them new opportunities. It makes it easier for families to utilize alternative institutions - it resets the null hypothesis.
We all know the leftist and establishment arguments against SB1038. They claim it will harm rural schools. They claim it will disadvantage disabled students. They claim that it will siphon public money away from public schools.
The last charge is most interesting. I was thinking recently about just how much public money goes to private entities:
Bidding out for construction projects
Teacher and administrator conferences
Curricula and materials
The idea that so-called public money can never make its way to private institutions is ridiculous, but it’s simple rhetoric they use to scare people away from this legislation.
The other arguments are just as specious. My colleagues Anna Miller and Kaitlyn Shepherd did a good job of responding to these myths last week. However, you are probably not moved by the arguments from the left or the establishment, are you? If you oppose SB1038 it is likely from the perspective of the hardcore homeschoolers. (I say hardcore as a compliment.)
Some of the arguments I have heard are not applicable to the current legislation. Nothing in the text of SB1038 threatens homeschooling in any way. In fact, the bill actually increases protection for the integrity of homeschool and private school programs compared to what is in the law currently:
33-6604. STATE CONTROL OVER NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS. (1) This chapter does not permit any government agency to exercise control or supervision over any nonpublic school or homeschooling.
(2) A qualified school that accepts a payment from a parent pursuant to this chapter is not an agent of the state or federal government.
(3) A qualified school shall not be required to alter its creed, practices, admissions policy, or curriculum in order to accept students whose parents pay tuition or fees from a freedom in education savings account pursuant to this chapter in order to participate as a qualified school.
https://legislature.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/sessioninfo/2023/legislation/S1038.pdf
Many of the arguments from groups such as Homeschool Idaho are not about what is specifically in the bill, but about what might happen in the future. Currently the bill allows for random audits to make sure that Education Savings Account money is used for actual educational expenses, which is reasonable. However, many fear that future legislatures could alter the text of this bill and use that clause to exert more control over private or homeschool curricula.
My response to that line of argument is that we are already in that situation. Any legislature can decide to regulate homeschooling at any time. SB1038 does not change that fact in the slightest. While it’s possible that families could become accustomed to ESA money only to have things change in the future, that is still better than the situation we have now where they are trapped in the failing public school system.
Additionally, there are already smaller scale programs that allow families to use public money for private or homeschool programs. Hundreds of homeschool students already take advantage of the Empowering Parents Grant, and so far those families have not had their rights taken away.
I totally get being wary of government. None of us want the state to have any influence over private or homeschool programs. Many homeschool families came to Idaho precisely because the state does not exercise such oversight. Trust me, if I honestly believed that SB1038 posed a threat to homeschooling in Idaho I would absolutely be against it, even if it meant disagreeing with my employer. But that’s not what I believe.
An anonymous account on Facebook recently wrote an essay that I thought was very good:
Why is there a divide between homeschoolers and homeschool watchdog groups if this bill strengthens homeschooling protections in Idaho?
The answer: Fear
In states that are not green homeschool freedom states “homeschoolers” have slowly seen their chains tighten because they never fully removed their government chains in the first place. The answer is not to stop good legislation such as SB1038 in green homeschool freedom states. The answer in the 80% of states that still have chains those chains must be fought and removed. You can’t remove the chains from public schools until you’ve secured your own freedom. Idaho homeschoolers have removed their chains. Now we must fight and protect those who are oppressed in the public government school system. They want this, but they need help from those who have already fought for their freedoms and won.
What about the financial part of the equation? Opponents on both sides have suggested that moving this money into the private sector could cause prices to increase. While that’s possible, at least in the short term, I believe the market will figure this out. Right now we are dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the public school system, and that money is finding its way to teachers, administrators, custodial staff, textbook companies, education technology companies, and more.
For current public school families, this will not be new government spending, rather it is diverting existing money that currently goes into the public school system and will instead allow parents to direct that money as they see fit. It will go into private schools, tutors, education technology companies, textbook manufacturers, and more. It is actually more of a free market solution than what we currently have.
Contrast this to House Bill 24, the Idaho Launch Grant, which would allow students to spend $8,500 a year on a small selection of trade schools and employee training programs. That is entirely new spending, and it is being directed by the government and their big business friends. SB1038 is very different because it is a redirection of money that is already in the system, directed by parents, not bureaucrats.
I think it is important to identify who is on each side of any issue. I look at the people supporting SB1038 and I see strong conservative leaders whose hearts are in the right place, people I strongly trust to do what is right for Idaho families. The bill is sponsored by Senators Tammy Nichols and Brian Lenney, as solid as you could ask for. It is supported by Senator Scott Herndon, who is an unflinching champion of liberty and Christian values. It is supported by my colleagues at IFF, by national school choice champion Corey DeAngelis, by Heritage Action, Citizens Alliance, Young Americans for Liberty, and hundreds of families throughout Idaho.
Senators Lenney and Herndon are homeschool dads themselves, and both have said they will not take advantage of this program if it passes. This means they have no personal interest in this bill, rather they both believe that it is the right thing to do for the vast majority of Idaho families. They want others to have the same opportunities their families enjoy!
I can make the same claim. My wife and I currently homeschool, and right now we are working to enroll our children in a private Christian school that has already said up front that they will not participate in the program either. So none of this is self-interest on my part either.
Joining Homeschool Idaho on the other side of this bill are the teachers’ unions, the public school bureaucracy, and the far left. HSI recently complained about people noticing this fact in an open letter to the Senate:
I am left to conclude that the language of “aligning with ALL the left-wing groups” is straight up rhetoric. It serves no useful purpose other than to polarize people and is utterly absurd on its face. This false equivalence of lumping Homeschool Idaho and leftists into the same category is an underhanded tactic that is honestly beneath you, beneath your office, and beneath the conservative values we both hold dear.
Source: Letter from HSI Board, 2/22/23
I would never say that the hardcore homeschool families of Idaho are in any way the same as the leftists and establishment figures who dominate the public school system. Yet it is a simple fact that they are on the same side of this issue. It’s a bootleggers and Baptists phenomenon. I will not cast aspersions on the motivations of homeschool opponents to this bill, but when you find yourself agreeing with the editorial staff of the Idaho Statesman then perhaps it is at least worth reconsidering your position.
HSI accuses proponents of SB1038 of dismissing their concerns, however I see the same thing on their side. Many of the arguments I have been presented with are either not applicable to the bill itself, as I said above, or they are coming from a position where any such reform is a complete nonstarter, at which point what is there left to discuss? I have heard opponents argue that SB1038 should be limited to existing public school students, which seems unfair to me. Why should we cut off families who are already enrolling their children in private schools or engaging in homeschool solutions? The ESA is opt-in, so there is nobody forcing you to take it, but why prevent others from having that choice? The purpose is to allow all families to direct their own tax dollars as they see fit. This is not a narrow, laser-focused program, but an opportunity to significantly reform a broken system.
Some of the most outspoken opponents of 1038 from the right have gone so far as to accuse people like me of being socialists who actively want government to take over homeschooling. That is not arguing in good faith.
Idaho’s homeschool families are made up of some of the best people in our state. They are leading the way in the fight for liberty. On this issue, however, I sincerely and earnestly disagree. By the way, there are many homeschool families that support SB1038 as well - it’s not a monolithic group. They deserve to be heard as well.
I believe the anonymous writer of Restore Liberty in Idaho hit the nail on the head. The opposition to SB1038 is driven by fear that Idaho will follow the same path as California and many other states that severely restrict homeschooling. I get it, but this bill does not do that. This bill does not open the door to doing that any wider than it already is. However, believing that we can continue to graduate entire generations of Idaho voters from the public school indoctrination system without threatening the future of liberty in this state is whistling past the graveyard.
Unless we give families the ability and the incentive to take their children out of the current system, then expect Governor Shiva Rajbhandari to sign legislation banning homeschooling entirely in another fifteen years or so.
Brian, this was a fair and honest coverage of the issues. As a father with public school as well as home schooled kids, (now adults), it's hard for me not to take a side. Thank you for stepping into this quagmire and keeping us informed.
Thoughtful and well written Brian.