Advocates for School Choice

by K. Braun

This Washington Post article highlights National School Choice Week (NSCW; January 22-28), advocating for school choice.*  While NSCW events were coordinated across the country, the main events took place in Washington, DC. Organizers selected the capital due to its obvious political significance and also because the District of Columbia currently has “the nation’s only federally funded voucher program.” The specific confluence of circumstances as a new Republican administration begins in 2017 makes the timing of NSCW particularly advantageous for school choice supporters.

NSCW demonstrates large-scale, concerted advocacy efforts undertaken by groups to gain or retain a place on congressional members’ legislative agendas. As the House and Senate both now have a Republican majority, school choice advocates recognize an opportunity to make significant headway on favorable legislation. Event participants can encourage legislators to act, while NSCW lobbyists can work with legislators and their staffs to propose draft bill language to enact the changes that NSCW favors.

NSCW further focused legislators’ attention by building on existing media coverage of the confirmation process of Betsy DeVos, President Trump’s education secretary nominee. Participants will likely ask their senators to vote in favor of DeVos’ confirmation, as they view her as a school choice champion. (Her past actions have involved lobbying efforts to expand voucher programs and charter schools throughout the country.) Opponents of school choice likely gather at another time within their own issue-specific organizations and lobby senators just as forcefully against school choice.

Article: Brown, Emma. “DeVos receives praise at ‘National School Choice Week’ rally.” Washington Post, 24 Jan. 2017.

* The NSCW organizers define school choice as including all education types: “traditional public schools, public charter schools, public magnet schools, private schools, online academies, and homeschooling.” However, the article treats school choice as educational options other than public school. The article does not mention the group’s organization, but its website emphasizes that it is an “independent effort” involving partners such as chambers of commerce and schools (notably absent is mention of teachers’ groups or unions).


Federalism and the October 3, 2012 Presidential Debate

by J. Wesley Leckrone

Assistant Professor, Political Science, Widener University

Federalism played a surprisingly important role in the first debate between President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney on October 3, 2012. The roles of the federal government and states were addressed on the issues of education, Medicaid, and health care reform. There was even a mention of the 10th Amendment (a first in a presidential debate in the last 50 years?).  In general, Romney made a traditional Republican argument to allow states to make decisions for themselves, advocating for the consolidation of federal programs and devolving them to states. President Obama argued that the federal government had a role in ensuring minimum standards, thus supporting more grants to the states and opposing devolution.

Here’s a montage of their positions in their own words:


President Obama:

” And when it comes to education what I’ve said is we’ve got to reform schools that are not working. We use something called Race to the Top. Wasn’t a top-down approach, Governor. What we’ve said is to states, we’ll give you more money if you initiate reforms. And as a consequence, you had 46 states around the country who have made a real difference.

But what I’ve also said is let’s hire another 100,000 math and science teachers to make sure we maintain our technological lead and our people are skilled and able to succeed. And hard-pressed states right now can’t all do that. In fact we’ve seen layoffs of hundreds of thousands of teachers over the last several years, and Governor Romney doesn’t think we need more teachers. I do, because I think that that is the kind of investment where the federal government can help.

It can’t do it all, but it can make a difference. And as a consequence we’ll have a better trained workforce and that will create jobs because companies want to locate in places where we’ve got a skilled workforce.”

“You know, this is where budgets matter, because budgets reflect choices. So when Governor Romney indicates that he wants to cut taxes and potentially benefit folks like me and him, and to pay for it we’re having to initiate significant cuts in federal support for education, that makes a difference.

You know, his — his running mate, Congressman Ryan, put forward a budget that reflects many of the principles that Governor Romney’s talked about. And it wasn’t very detailed. This seems to be a trend. But — but what it did do is to — if you extrapolated how much money we’re talking about, you’d look at cutting the education budget by up to 20 percent.”

Governor Romney:

“Well, the primary responsibility for education is — is, of course, at the state and local level. But the federal government also can play a very important role. And I — and I agree with Secretary Arne Duncan, he’s — some ideas he’s put forward on Race to the Top, not all of them, but some of them I agree with and — and congratulate him for pursuing that. The federal government can get local and — and state schools to do a better job.

My own view, by the way, is I’ve added to that. I happen to believe, I want the kids that are getting federal dollars from IDEA or Title I — these are disabled kids or — or — or poor kids or — or lower-income kids, rather, I want them to be able to go to the school of their choice.

So all federal funds, instead of going to the — to the state or to the school district, I’d have go, if you will, follow the child and let the parent and the child decide where to send their — their — their student.”

“Mr. President, Mr. President, you’re entitled as the president to your own airplane and to your own house, but not to your own facts. All right, I’m not going to cut education funding. I don’t have any plan to cut education funding and — and grants that go to people going to college. I’m planning on (inaudible) to grow. So I’m not planning on making changes there.”


President Obama:

“It means that Governor Romney talked about Medicaid and how we could send it back to the states, but effectively this means a 30 percent cut in the primary program we help for seniors who are in nursing homes, for kids who are with disabilities.”

Governor Romney:

“I would like to take the Medicaid dollars that go to states and say to a state, you’re going to get what you got last year, plus inflation, plus 1 percent, and then you’re going to manage your care for your poor in the way you think best.

And I remember, as a governor, when this idea was floated by Tommy Thompson, the governors — Republican and Democrats — said, please let us do that. We can care for our own poor in so much better and more effective a way than having the federal government tell us how to care for our poor.

So — so let’s state — one of the magnificent things about this country is the whole idea that states are the laboratories of democracy. Don’t have the federal government tell everybody what kind of training programs they have to have and what kind of Medicaid they have to have. Let states do this.

And, by the way, if a state gets in trouble, well, we can step in and see if we can find a way to help them.

But — but the right — the right approach is one which relies on the brilliance of our people and states, not the federal government.”


President Obama:

“… the irony is that we’ve seen this model work really well in Massachusetts, because Governor Romney did a good thing, working with Democrats in the state to set up what is essentially the identical model and as a consequence people are covered there. It hasn’t destroyed jobs. And as a consequence, we now have a system in which we have the opportunity to start bringing down costs, as opposed to just leaving millions of people out in the cold.”

Governor Romney:

“The federal government taking over health care for the entire nation and whisking aside the 10th Amendment, which gives states the rights for these kinds of things, is not the course for America to have a stronger, more vibrant economy.”