School choice is a great idea because it will lead to dramatic improvements in education.
But there is also a secondary benefit. Because of inherent waste and inefficiency, government schools are more costly. So adoption of school choice also can produce savings for taxpayers.
Defenders of the status quo, such as teacher unions and their allies, are claiming otherwise. This has become a big talking point for the left in Arizona, which is hoping to undermine the the statewide school choice plan enacted in 2022.
So, in a column for the Wall Street Journal, and
Is school choice bankrupting Arizona? …With an ESA, parents can use a portion of their child’s state education funds—typically about $8,000 a year—to pay for private-school tuition …the Arizona Department of Education’s latest projection that the program, which has about 58,000 participants, will serve 100,000 students by the end of fiscal 2024 at a cost of roughly $900 million. …Arizona public schools spend about $14,000 per pupil, or $1.4 billion for 100,000 students. If the department’s enrollment projection is reached, school choice would serve roughly 8% of Arizona’s students for 6% of the $15 billion that Arizona will spend on public schools.
Needless to say, you don’t need to be a math genius to recognize that taxpayers save money by spending $8,000 per pupil rather than $14,000 per pupil.
By the way, this issue is not limited to Arizona. Here’s a tweet exchange showing that reformers are having to debunk the same arguments in Georgia and Texas.
I’ll close by reiterating that school choice should be pursued to improve educational outcomes. That is – far and away – the most important reason to break up the government school monopoly.
The good news for taxpayers is just a fringe benefit.
P.S. The multi-state adoption of school choice in recent years is great news, especially to those of us who have spent our adult lives watching Democrats throw good money after bad and watching Republicans throw good money after bad.
[…] Saving money for taxpayers. […]
[…] School Choice Is Great for Students, but It’s also Good for Taxpayers […]
[…] School Choice Is Great for Students, but It’s also Good for Taxpayers […]
If you read between the lines, the public education unions believe vouchers will increase costs because they have no intention of cutting public school spending by a penny–even if 20% of the students flee to private schools. real education reform would result in public school funding being cut in addition to vouchers being issued (preferably proportionately–if a $9,000 voucher is issued when public schools cost $14,000, the taxpayers should save the $5,000. I’d wager that now the funding of public schools is virtually unchanged as students flee the public schools by using vouchers). This really isn’t that complicated–politicians shouldn’t do just half of a job.
It is all teacher’s union push back fronted by their bought and paid for elected representatives.
Yes in in AZ the Katie Hobbes, the union choice for governor, is trying to get rid of vouchers.
She also has another distinction – Gov. Katie Hobbs surpassed former Gov. Janet Napolitano’s veto record on Tuesday, the 100th day of the legislative session.
Hobbs signed 29 bills on Tuesday and vetoed 11 more, bringing her total veto count so far to 63. Napolitano previously held the record for Arizona governor with most vetoes for the 58 bills she nixed in 2005.
New name should be Katie Bollard.
The current governor in AZ (where I live) is doing everything she can to end vouchers.
Unfortunately, our govt will never get this right and it will open huge holes to allow the govt more power over private schools and homeschools. I have already seen this attempted in my state where a liberal took exception to a Christian private school which took a voucher and was teaching 7 days of creation. I’m never heard what happened but that is the type of pushback you can expect. Honestly, I’m surprised democrats are so opposed to school choice since it would open the doors to more control for the govt.