Your Monday Message from the Libertarian Party:
Dear Susan, One of the realities of an economic downturn is declining government revenue – and how elected officials nearly always fail to properly address it. That failure is becoming starkly clear in this current recession and its effects on government-run education. The non-partisan Center for Education Reform reports government spending on education is at an all-time high, doubling in constant dollars from $3,931 in 1971, to $7,524 in 2005. Spending on government education has doubled, but test scores have declined. Clearly, more spending isn’t going to make government-run education work. In fact, it’s making it worse. Faced with crippling budget shortfalls brought on by irresponsible spending, politicians are gutting classroom budgets, protecting administrative paychecks and letting education suffer. Fattened on booming tax revenues, politicians spent as though the money would never stop flowing. Once it did, the children were left to bear the brunt of the pain as classroom spending is slashed while administrators still enjoy lush salaries and taxpayer-funded travel. It’s something I saw far too much of in nearly seven years as a government chief of staff. The fiscally responsible, and more educationally effective, approach is already working in many cities – expanding school choice by allowing parents to “shop” with their tax dollars or scholarships. Such a reform could be adopted in several ways – making education expenses deductible from property taxes, adopting education tax credits or school vouchers or allowing companies to deduct primary education scholarship contributions from commercial property taxes to fund education for children whose parents do not own a home. Not only would allowing parents to pick their children’s school give the next generation access to the best education possible, it would also put an end to one of the dirty secrets of government-run education. Grouping children into government schools by attendance districts, or not allowing lower- and middle-class families to spend their own education tax dollars, leads to de facto segregation and unequally funded schools. Parents with children trapped in failing government-run schools would finally have the finances to give their kids a better education — simply because they get to spend their education dollars instead of the government. But most importantly in these times, school choice saves taxpayers money. The non-partisan Center for Education Reform points to a June 2003 U.S. Department of Education report finding “29 percent of all private schools charge tuitions less than $2,500 and 76 percent of them cost less than $5,000. The average private school tuition is $4,689, while the average (government) school expenditure per pupil was $7,392, more than 50 percent higher than average private school tuition costs.” In fact, in most areas of the United States most private schools have lower per-student costs than the local government schools. With education at private schools costing less than government schools, leaving tax money left over, school choice may even help save government education. The Center also reports under “Milwaukee’s school choice program, both per-pupil and overall funding for the government schools increased significantly under school choice. Between 1990 and 2002 – the MPS reaped this 32 percent increase in spending, enrollment grew by only 5.4 percent, and local residents saw their property tax burden decrease by over 30 percent.” Research by the American Legislative Exchange Council finds that in Cleveland and Milwaukee, cities with two of the oldest choice programs, the savings realized by the program actually increased funding in the government school system. If it costs a local government $7,500 to educate a child, for example, but that child leaves the system and takes $5,000 with him, that leaves behind one less student to teach but an extra $2,000 in the government’s pocket. I don’t know about you, but I’d prefer that money be given back to the taxpayers. Either way, it completely debunks anti-choice myths intended to preserve government’s failed monopoly on education. School choice’s track record is clear. It saves taxpayers money and gives a bright future to lower and middle-class children who may otherwise be stuck in an underperforming school. Delivering the finest education available to our kids, ending quiet segregation and saving billions of tax dollars in an economic downturn can all be easily accomplished – if politicians would simply let parents spend their own education tax dollars. You can make it happen, by helping elect Libertarians. Join us today!
With optimism,
Donny Ferguson
Director of Communications
Libertarian National Committee
[email protected]
Why the selective quote, Geoffrey? You should quote the whole paragraph.
The Center for Education Reform is hardly non-partisan. I fail to understand how any libertarian could support that I, who have chosen not to procreate, and taken great care to assure that I do not, should have to support other people’s children attendance at private schools, when there is a great probability that the curriculum at those schools will include religious instruction that I find to be personally abhorrent.
I ran for school board too, in CO in 2001, but I had a built-in campaign to defeat a $47M blank-check bond measure–they wanted it to build new schools but had nothing to show the voters–no blueprints, models, not even a PowerPoint slide. My wife got the school board President to admit that the number were pulled out a nether region.
I lost the battle but won the war. I didn’t get elected, primarily because I blew off a forum put on by the teachers’ union (like I wanted their endorsement anyway, when the test scores were the 3rd-worst in the state!), but I got the bond defeated by a 56-44 margin, and I was the only one running against the bond. I gathered 46% of all the votes cast by electors and came in fourth of five for three seats, missing out by 43 votes.
To be fair, I only ran to kill the bond. I spent $50 total on ten signs (that were promptly stolen). At that point I had no children, so I really had no interest in the district beyond where my property tax dollars were going.
That’s absurd. Local school boards are more legitimate that the central government, or even state governments — and they all should be abolished. But if your point was to be an “efficiency expert,” I can see the reason for criticism. A libertarian should focus on increased freedom for home-schoolers, etc., not in making the trains run on time, or in this case, the propaganda centers “more efficient.” Abolishing DARE and selling buildings, however, would be part of a good libertarian campaign.
Kimberly-
One problem is that few Libertarians have actually run for their local school board. Therefore, most of what is written from a libertarian perspective is more doctrinaire or speculative.
There is a listserv on yahoogroups that tries to remedy this somewhat, but there are only a few people on it.
I did run for school board about ten years ago. Most of my campaign was talking about abolishing the DARE program and selling empty school buildings (there were 14 empty buildings at that time, now there are more. This is an urban district that is losing about two thousand students a year).
Ironically, most of the criticism came from libertarians. Comparing a libertarian running for school board to a libertarian seeking to run the Nazi ovens more efficiently….
PEACE
“Socialize the Toxic Assets” advocate “political science” man Michael Munger was also a big advocate of “school choice” — which, I’m quite sure in both cases means abolish private education in favor of total government control via a voucher system.
I think that one reason that school reform has not happened is because it is so polarized on the right and the left.
I think that if people opted for middle options, they might find a solution.
For instance, it is frightening to leftists to think that tax money should go directly from government to a private entity or charter school.
And, quite frankly, I think some plans to enact school choice in that manner are as bad as any aspect of government that Libertarians usually call “socialist”. Even worst, it could become “fascism”, if the government is collecting taxes for education and turning it over to for-profit, corporate schools.
Breaking the monopoly and burden of the public schools could be done much more gently, with less radical and more “for the people/for the children” approaches.
To start with, I think that there should be some rules that if any 30 parents get together and say they want to start a school, they should be allowed to use some public space to have their children meet in. So, the government is not doling out funds to corporations. But, instead, giving physical, non-transferable, resources to empowered parents.
In addition, I think that various monopolies the public schools have should be broken slowly:
-Do not force parents to go to their local school to get approval or permission for homeschooling. Make sure the overseeing or approving entity is different than the local school. Because, the local school has some interest to thwart homeschooling. (Ideas of entities which might monitor [and do in some states]: the state Board of Education; the Health Department [ie: very minimum standards to make sure parents are not being negligent]; or giving the parents permission to choose a any area school district to check in with; etc.
-Start opening up options and making a back and forth among private schools, home- schoolers and public schools by forcing the logical situation that any child – no matter what kind of other schooling they have – can utilize the public school, tax-payer funded programs such as: band, chorus, plays, sports and after-school programs. If parents do the favor to the public school of paying taxes AND putting their child in private school, the parent should still have rights to the sports program they are funding.
-Start allowing charter schools to happen everywhere BUT ONLY at first for entirely charitable, not-for-profit purposes. Have the government give minimal help or tax refunds to families or the school entity when there is a charter school set up by a parent collective or non-profit. (In saying this, one must be careful how to interact with religious schools. Because, mixing the government and religion creates a whole other set of problems and concerns. And, some people have done that, and it is questionable.)
I am always amazed that Libertarians have not been more able to dive into the problem of our failing, socialist-style public schools with more strategies that resonate with “liberty and freedom.” Instead, the Libertarian/Conservative argument often gets bogged down in sounding like a defense of privately owned and corporate schools. Perhaps that is testament to the amounts of money someone realizes could be gained if they could wrest control of the education dollars for themselves.
I think one side of this argument sees empowerment for teachers unions and the government, and the other side sees empowerment for small businesses and private schools.
I seek freedom and choice for parents and students.
I think there are easy ways to do open up that freedom, where you start by releasing the stranglehold. Start by letting go of things and opening things up. Don’t start by trying to build the next thing to your own advantage.
School choice will only be a reality when the public schools get off the tax dole and charge tuition and fees like the private ones.
IOW, not anytime soon.
“If it costs a local government $7,500 to educate a child, for example, but that child leaves the system and takes $5,000 with him, that leaves behind one less student to teach but an extra $2,000 in the government’s pocket.”
Was a public or private school responsible for Donny’s math skills? 🙂
Actually the statement is probably correct, as some corrupt official walked off with the other $500.
Thank you master Ferguson for your latest message.
School choice will become a reality when the purpose of your party is fulfilled. That purpose, which we at the LPUK and LP’s throughout the world share, is simply stated in your own bylaws, as:
“moving public policy in a libertarian direction by building a political party that elects Libertarians to public office”
God bless,
Geoffrey
Much batter than last week,
MMMM, pancakes!
Much batter than last week, but I haven’t read it (nearly) so carefully yet. Maybe I’m gun-shy 🙂
I do think this line makes us sound a bit cranky, though: “But most importantly in these times, school choice saves taxpayers money.”
There is one thing, though – I see here a lot of talk about school choice (a phrase that scares me because it makes me think of vouchers, but whatever), but not too much about what activists can do.
Frankly, we Libs are all pretty much on board with ‘school choice’ in some form or another. We really didn’t need paragraphs of proof. That’s probably why I haven’t read it carefully yet.
I do favor internal Party education, and maybe that’s the primary purpose of this piece. It is sent to the Party’s email list, which I assume means donors and activists. Maybe the point is simply to arm potential candidates/speakers with information about school choice.
But what are we supposed to DO about it? Oh, wait:
“You can make it happen, by helping elect Libertarians.”
Right. The plan is to elect enough Libs to vote in school choice. That should be only a matter of … well, decades. Optimistically.
I guess that’s why he signs ‘with optimism’.
What about a list, like this:
Things you can do -today- to help make school choice a reality in your hometown:
* Write a LTE
* Join a local homeschool or school choice lobby
* Speak to your legislator personally
* Run for School Board or other office in your county
* Help other Libertarian candidates get elected
etc., etc.
I guess he was serious when he said that winning elections was really the only focus and purpose of the current leadership of the LP. Too bad.
That will have to change.