Why is Obama killing off D.C.'s voucher program?
By Fred Hiatt
February 8, 2010; 4:27 PM ET
The Obama administration said it was going to respect science and respond to evidence -- a contrast, many Democrats said, to the previous regime. So why is President Obama killing off the program that offers the best chance to find out if school vouchers work?
Congress has been paying for the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which helps more than a thousand District children attend private schools. It gives a chance of a future to children who otherwise would be condemned to attend failing schools. How can that be bad?
Generally, opponents offer two arguments. One is that it won't solve the whole problem. Well, no. That's why everyone should support what Chancellor Michelle Rhee is trying to do to improve all D.C. schools. But even she supports the scholarship program. She testified before the Senate last September that until her reforms have had a few more years to take root, she can't guarantee a quality education to every District child. No wonder that every year there have been many more applicants for the vouchers than vouchers to give out.
The second objection is that if children or families with get-up-and-go actually get up and go, things will be even worse for those left behind. There are a lot of problems with this argument, but the main one is that the people who make it usually aren't willing to condemn their own children to attend terrible high schools in order to improve things for the other kids there. Why should we demand that of families who have high aspirations but can't afford to move?
But even if you're inclined against vouchers, why not embrace a program that has a chance to shed real light on the long-running, fraught and inconclusive argument about their effectiveness? The D.C. program was established to provide such evidence. It enrolled a control group of children who applied for vouchers but didn't get them, and it is following them along with the kids with vouchers. In a couple more years, if funded robustly, it would give us a real sense of what worked and what didn't. That could be helpful to lots of children.
Yet the Obama administration seems to be doing everything it can to wind down the program. Why? Early research results have been positive -- certainly in terms of parental satisfaction, but also for achievement. Maybe the Democratic Party, and the teachers union leaders who support it, would rather not see any more evidence.
voices.washingtonpost.com
Hey Buddy, notice this is from the liberal Washington Post. You should be able to read and believe something from a source slanting your way. |
