On Education

Congress Could End Vouchers in D.C.

March 4, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (30)

It's uncommon for the leader of a public school system to support a voucher program that diverts money from public schools to private schools. But the District of Columbia's schools chancellor, Michelle Rhee, is not your typical public schools leader. She is the head of one of the worst-performing public school districts in the nation. And she supports vouchers if it means that children will attend better schools. That is exactly what school choice supporters say the Scholarships Opportunities program has done for children in Washington, D.C., since 2004. The program provides scholarships of up to $7,500 so that some 1,700 low-income, minority children in the city can attend private schools that are, by many accounts, better than the district's anemic schools. But now congressional Democrats could eliminate that option for D.C. families.

Last week, Rhee got word that federal funding for the city's voucher program might end by fall 2010 and that her public schools should prepare to re-enroll those students currently attending private schools on taxpayer money. Rhee was not thrilled with the news. "Part of my job is to make sure that all kids get a great education, and it doesn't matter whether that's in charter, parochial, or public schools," Rhee told the New York Times last week. She went on: "I don't think vouchers are going to solve all the ills of public education, but parents who are zoned to schools that are failing kids should have options to do better by their kids."

Vouchers are available for public school students in Arizona, Louisiana, Ohio, Utah, and Wisconsin. But only D.C.'s voucher program is directly financed by the federal government. In recent days, several major newspapers have published scathing editorials taking congressional Democrats to task for supporting an omnibus spending bill that could kill the program. Their reasons for cutting the program are not entirely clear. But many suspect that politics, rather than compelling evidence about the merits of the program, is driving the decision. (A Republican-controlled Congress set up the city's voucher system five years ago.) Deborah Parker, a D.C. mother whose children receive vouchers to attend Sidwell Friends, the elite private school that enrolls the Obamas' daughters, told the Washington Post that she's frightened of returning her kids to the public schools. If the Senate goes along with the House and approves the bill that could end vouchers in D.C., the newspaper's editorial said, "someone needs to tell Ms. Parker why a bunch of elected officials who can send their children to any school they choose are taking that option from her."

Andrew Rotherham, cofounder of the Education Sector, an independent research organization in D.C., offers some background on the controversy surrounding vouchers. He offers this prediction: "The coming fight over the D.C. voucher program seems destined to be the most interesting debate to date in terms of what education politics are really going to look like in the Obama era because that issue cuts across a host of political and jurisdictional lines."

What do you think? Should Congress allow eligible families in D.C. to send their kids to private school at taxpayers' expense?

Related News

Tags:
private schools,
education,
Congress,
Washington, DC,
public schools

Reader Comments Read all comments (30)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I can't read yokur wesbite in Opera 9.2, I just igfured I might tell you bout it.

seo lace of AL 3:25PM May 02, 2010

winsome answers i like it

plubpoeld of AL 11:34AM November 30, 2009

Yes taxpayers should pay for students from underperforming schools to go to private/charter schools becuase those same taxpayers benefit from an educated economy. Read the study done by Henry M. Levin found in the Educational Reseacher, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 5-20 entitled The Economic Payoff to Investing in Educational Justice. His findings show that we all benefit from investing in our children so as to create more high school graduates. The benefits of higher graduation rates to the taxpayer manifests itself through "higher tax revenues and reduced costs of criminal justice, public health, and public assistance."

When elementary schools are underperforming their graduates are left behind in middle school. When they are unable to compete in middle school they lose more momentum which then fails to catapult them into high school. This gap doesn't get smaller, but larger which leads to higher leavels of high school dropouts or graduates unable to perform in the college environment. They begin their college careers in developmental coursework, just to begin the cycle again.

The facts are that we are no longer raising the Baby Boomer generation. What worked for educating them is no longer working; therefore, we must try different approaches to find something that DOES work. If the voucher system works, keep using it. When/If it is consistently not producing... end it.

Fact: Parent involvement has declined. As parents are now needing to work more hours and in many cases maintain more than one job those teachers are responsible for being both nurturer, educator, and disciplinarian. This issue increases the need for smaller classrooms and stronger Administrators. Can we afford to allow some kids to leave so that we/the schools can concentrate on improving the system... Absolutely!

Danielle of OH 9:44AM March 23, 2009

On Education

Report cards may come out only twice a year, but education news happens every day. Here is where U.S. News writers grade the latest developments, from school districts banning the game of tag to congressional debates that affect college affordability. Check regularly for the most recent updates.

advertisement