In a forthcoming City Journal article, Manhattan Institute senior fellow Sol Stern suggests that school choice is failing to measure up, and that choice supporters need to find a “Plan B.” The New York Sun covers Stern’s essay here.
While Stern has done some excellent writing on education in the past, this particular piece is confused and at times factually incorrect. There are many other problems with Stern’s article, but it seems best to begin with the basic facts.
Before calling for a Plan B, one should be aware of the successes of Plan A.
Stern writes, “In 2002, after a decade of organizing by school choice activists, only two programs [for poor children] existed: one in Milwaukee, the other in Cleveland …” In fact, there were three programs that targeted disadvantaged students.
Florida’s voucher program was passed in 1999 and available to students in failing schools, which was used as a proxy or “poor children” (though it was later overturned by that state’s supreme court).
Stern then turns from this very specific accounting to a broad discussion of “proposals for voucher programs” and private school choice in general. But he fails to mention the other voucher programs passed and still in existence; special needs vouchers in Florida, Ohio, Utah, and Georgia and for foster-care children in Arizona.
And although Stern seems most interested in choice programs meant only for disadvantaged children, he fails to mention any of the many education tax credit programs passed in recent years. Five states – Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island – have donation tax credit programs. Nearly $150 million in scholarship funds support close to 100,000 low-income children. And that’s not counting the most recent business-donation programs in Arizona and Rhode Island, or Arizona’s personal-donation tax credit program which serves primarily low-income families.
Stern’s article is simply not an accurate reflection of the significant and accelerating legislative success school choice has seen in recent years.