So, Megan continues to brim with righteous anger about voucher opponents. She writes a long post derailing the good commenters here at 11D. Well, if she mocks my commenters, I get to mock hers.
Amongst the die-hard, free market voucher types, there is the misguided belief that if you offer vouchers, new independent, but inexpensive schools will rise up to fill the void. There will be more choices than the run of the mill Catholic schools. The voucher money will lead to more schools, more competition, more options.
Yeah, not.
Let's look at Cleveland. (My Minneapolis friends should chime in here, too). Cleveland has a limited voucher program. You must demonstrate some need. The vouchers can't be redeemed at suburban public schools. The voucher amount is for around $2,000.
One of the biggest proponents for vouchers was a lawyer-industrialist, David Brennan. Brennan got into vouchers after watching a presentation at the Friedman Foundation. Education was his pet policy, so he decided to advocate for vouchers with the goal of setting up his own private schools in Cleveland, which would accept the money. He planned to keep the costs low by educating the kids with some lame DOS-based computer programs. He got the voucher plan through, because of his connections with key Republican leaders and a few Democratic leaders in Cleveland. But he wasn't able to get the schools going. He couldn't break even. He ended up starting some charter schools instead.
Then there the whole Whipple education disaster.
Low cost, private schools haven't taken off in this country. Maybe if the voucher amount was significantly higher, then something would happen. But that's such a political long shot that the discussion quickly goes into the realm of fantasy.
