I’ve written at least nine posts about the need for school vouchers, and I’m convinced that at some point they will become a reality—even in progressive Montgomery County where Superintendent Monifa McKnight and teachers’ union president Judith Martin very likely turned MCPS into a safe space for sexual predators.
For our newer readers, here’s a short background why school vouchers are desperately needed. Traditionally, a school district draws boundaries around schools, and residents within those boundaries need to send their children to those schools. As a result, housing near good schools is more expensive than near failing schools, which has the follow-on effect of red-lining, exclusion, and poor educational outcomes for struggling families. MCPS is no exception.
With school vouchers, the school district gives parents funds that they can spend at a school of their choice. This arrangement helps underserved parents from escaping the failing schools to which they are forcibly assigned. The biggest obstacle to implementing school vouchers is the teachers’ unions. The national teachers’ union (NEA) is opposed to school vouchers, and Maryland’s teachers’ union (MSEA) is also opposed to school vouchers. Montgomery County’s officials are so anathema to school choice they don’t even allow charter schools. The claim is that school vouchers divert public resources for the benefit elite public schools, but the true fear is school vouchers will enable parents to exit the public school system and cause closure of failing schools. You can tell that is their true fear because the teachers’ unions also oppose school choice—allowing parents to go to any school within the public school system.
All that negativity aside, we do have a modest example of school vouchers in Maryland that extends to Montgomery County. The state’s Child Care Scholarship Program is a good (but not excellent) example of how a school voucher program works.
Families take the scholarship to a child care provider that participates in the Maryland EXCELS program. The scholarship is a signed agreement between the State, provider and parent…The family is responsible for paying the State assigned co-payment and any amount not covered by the Scholarship directly to their child care provider. Once the child begins care, the child care provider submits an invoice for payments and is then reimbursed for the scholarship portion of the payment by the State.
This is a bureaucratic way of defining school vouchers!
The best thing about CCSP is that it disburses funds to private providers that meet eligibility requirements. There are no teachers’ union and no arguments over curriculum. Arguably CCSP is politically palatable because the parents must meet income requirements, so it avoids the unfounded claim that wealthy families are being subsidized.
This begs a very uncomfortable question. If CCSP works for the disadvantaged pre-K crowd, it would also work for the disadvantaged K–12 crowd. Maryland does offer a modest BOOST school voucher program that Governor Moore is cruelly trying to defund. Not only should BOOST enjoy continued funding, it should be expanded to all struggling families. If Maryland doesn’t want to expand this program, our County Council can take the lead—and set a premier example of a caring local jurisdiction.
