The Simple Logic of School Choice

Because of the union's great financial resources, Proposition 174 may be defeated. But even if it is, the politicians and special interests should restrain their glee, because support for school choice is cropping up everywhere, and ultimately will prevail.

School choice has long been a reality for the rich. They can move to suburban districts, where the public schools are decent. Or, if like Bill Clinton, occupational requirements compel them to live in a city, they can send their children to high-quality private schools. The poor are largely denied that opportunity. They are compelled by law to attend government schools, even when some of these schools are dysfunctional.

Here in Jersey City, we spend more then $9,000 per child (almost twice the national average) on our public schools, yet fewer then half our students graduate from high school. Four years ago, the state took over the school system, promising to cut costs and improve the quality of education. Yet despite extra spending of $100 million, test scores have not substantially improved.

At one high school, only 28 percent of the students passed this year's state basic skills tests. Despite the school's evident failings, poor students who live near it must attend it- even though there are readily available nonpublic schools that graduate more then 90 percent of their students while spending far less.

This year, the City Council and I tried to place a nonbinding referendum on the Nov.2 ballot to advise the Legislature that the people of this poor and middle class city want school choice. Under the plan, the state's contribution to Jersey City's schools would be used to pay for vouchers for students to attend the school of their choice, whether public or private.

Some members of the teachers union sued and knocked this measure off the ballot on a procedural technicality. The union says it is interested in quality education, but its actions served only to thwart educational reform. In fact, our voucher program would not only give parents the power to choose the school that is best for their children; it would even increase per-pupil expenditures in the public school system, because local property tax revenues would still go exclusively to the public schools, which would presumably have fewer students.

The union's desperation shows that the day of change is at hand. Why do we allow the government to keep a monopoly on public education dollars when a voucher system could immediately expand opportunity for the poor, even as it saves tax dollars? The poor cannot be held down forever. They will rise up and demand the educational opportunity that is the birthright of every American.

More then thirty years ago, Southern governors stood in schoolhouse doors to keep the disfranchised out, but history and the people pushed past them. Before long, the obstructionists of this era will similarly be left behind.