In 1989, Boris Yeltsin, then a newly elected member of the Soviet Parliament and two years away from becoming the last leader of the Soviet Union and first president of Russia, visited the United States. His trip included time at the Johnson Space Center, but it was an unplanned visit to an American grocery store that same day that provoked what many believed was Yeltsin’s greatest amazement.
Opinion
As he walked up and down the aisles, he looked with amazement at all of the choices, stopping in the frozen food section to marvel over the different frozen pudding pop options. Not even the highest-ranking Communist party officials had choices like the ones he was seeing, he commented.
He went on to say, according to a Texas Chronicle story published at the time, that if his fellow countrymen knew of the choices they were being deprived of, there would be a revolution.
Now some might dismiss this as simply the words of a man who wanted to lead his country out of the crushing poverty of Communism, but I think that would be a mistake.
Mr. Yeltsin understood that all people, not just free people, yearn for options to make their lives better, more enjoyable and more fulfilled. A frozen pudding pop may not immediately bring to mind a fulfilled life, but it is certainly enjoyable.
This is to say: A nation abundant with choices for its people in politics, economics, education, art and so on, is a vibrant, free and thriving nation.
Wyoming’s House Bill 166, recently signed into law by Gov. Mark Gordon, creates an Education Savings Account (ESA) for the school-age students of our state. A Wyoming family of five making $54,870 is now eligible to receive $6,000 to be directed to the school of their choice for each of their school-age children. The funds will not be personally administered by the family, but will be directed by the state to the school of their choice to help pay the cost of that education.
The governor used his line-item veto pen to remove a portion of the original bill in response to concerns that universal access to these funds might violate the Wyoming Constitution. The viability of those Constitutional provisions remains in question. Instead, he left intact the lowest tier, allowing families with the greatest financial need access to the scholarships.
While many will rightfully argue for the universality of the program, the program itself will require a heavy lift by the Department of Education to get it up and running once all legal challenges have worked their way through the courts.
Until then, many Wyoming families will benefit from the passage of this new piece of legislation.
I say we need to reject the notion that there is a binary battle between school choice and public schools. Indeed, the very idea of school choice includes the choice of public education. Public education provides services that may be attractive to certain families but not attractive to others, just as is the case for charter schools, private schools, home schooling and tutoring.
Our public schools are the bedrock of our state and our communities, especially our small rural communities. Spoiler alert: Small towns really do matter! I was raised in a small town in Nebraska, and the public school I attended was the center of our town. Sporting events, school plays, Christmas programs and fundraisers were all packed with families, both those with school-age children and those whose kids were long gone.
Sadly, however, there are still many parents who have had negative experiences with the public schools their children attend. Those parents are desperate for and deserve other options.
Are we so arrogant as to ignore their plight for the sake of holding a monopoly on education in our state?
I think that’s the wrong way to look at education. No one’s experiences, good or bad, should be ignored. But all those experiences should lead us to accept and embrace a multi-option solution for every family in this state. That means school choice.
From a public charter school that offers parents a variety of extracurricular activities and specific school culture, to a private science school that offers a fast-tracked STEM curriculum, school choice gives parents the solutions they are looking for in educating their children. I know families in Wyoming who have a child in public education, a child in private school and a child being tutored at home. The point is the education of the child.
Those of us who have spent time writing and talking about public education and the need for more school choice aren’t trying to interfere with public education. We are trying to ensure parents have the full range of options they deserve, including public education so their children learn those core academic subjects and graduate with skills for future employment.
While I know many will never support school choice, I hope we can all agree that public education is not in grave danger of elimination.
The reality is that our education system, like our country, is strong. We can make it stronger by supporting the positive work being done for all families in our state. And that includes school choice.
An abundance of options shocked and excited Boris Yeltsin in 1989 because he had been born and raised in a system of government that monopolized every single aspect of its people’s lives, from where and what they ate to their educations to the jobs they held. It was a grim future that thankfully failed. The abundance he saw reflected in that grocery store in 1989 solidified in his mind that America was a free and vibrant nation.
School choice provides parents with even more options to educate their children, and at the end of the day, isn’t that the real point? To ensure every American child gets the best possible education to equip them for an abundant life?
That’s the goal we should strive for. It shouldn’t matter so much how we get there.
Sadly disappointed–just that.
Betsy DeVos (https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/miseducation-betsy-devos-public-schools/) is a huge fan of providing ‘superior’ education for ‘superior’ families, so is Michele Bachmann (https://www.ontheissues.org/House/Michele_Bachmann_Education.htm), so is Ron DeSantis (https://www.clickorlando.com/news/politics/2024/04/15/desantis-holds-news-conference-with-education-commissioner-at-florida-school/), so is Joe Ricketts. He did, after all, write a curriculum for a college that DeSantis dismantled (https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/sarasotacounty/new-college-online-degree-program/67-50474ecb-63bf-4be9-ae6d-61fa2fa3ed54). Apparently, Amy Edmonds and Albert Sommers (https://www.wyomingnews.com/opinion/guest_column/sommers-education-savings-accounts-a-constitutional-wyoming-solution/article_9a8ded24-8ef1-11ee-9c72-ef4d9e0115cd.html), among others, are part of this consortium. Again–disappointed.
This is nothing but a thinly disguised effort at an ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ school system–a Foster Friess attempt at segregation by race, gender, religion and socio-economic status. So disheartened that opinion is being championed.
What makes you think it’s being “championed”?
Championing something means you’re advocating for it.
The piece is CLEARLY labeled as an Opinion piece.
That, by no means, is the same as WyoFile championing anything.
What you’re really upset about is WyoFile publishing someone’s thoughts that don’t match yours.
I almost joined WyoFile this week but I’m putting that decision on hold after reading this opinion piece from Edmonds. Wyoming’s schools deserve better than this. Public money being used for religious instruction (Hillsdale-based in Casper) is against our constitution and it’s only time before more money is wasted on litigation. Wyoming has had a long tradition of supporting its public schools and, sadly, WyoFile undermines that with this piece.
WyoFile adds a voice that differs from yours so you decide to “cancel” them.
Yeah, that’s “tolerance” for you.
Regarding public money to be used for tuition assistance for a parochial school is concerned, the SCotUS has specifically held it does NOT violate the federal constitution. See Carson v. Makin, 596 U.S. 767 (2022)
Completely disagree with this.
Public tax money shouldn’t be used for private or religious schools. Give public schools the budget they deserve and keep your religious beliefs in your home.
Odd. Mrs. Edmonds didn’t mention a word about any sort of religious belief.
I think your straw man is showing.
Your deflection is more glaring than anything.
The push for tax dollars going to “private” for profit schools is and always has been a red herring. Mrs. Edmonds lists charter and magnet schools in her piece, but those are few and far between in wyoming. The majority of “private” schools, in wyoming, are centered on a faith based education. Try not to be disingenuous.
Ok, if you want to insist we’re really talking about religious schools, I’ll refer you to my comment to Holly Waatti-Thompson above.
A few responses to comments:
“Public money to fund private k-12 education. Such bad policy.”
Of course we spend public (i.e., taxpayers’) money on other private uses, and most people opposed to the ESA bill are supportive of those expenditures. For example, public money to fund people’s healthcare (CHIP—family of four eligible up to $62,400 income/year), public money to fund people’s housing (Wyoming Housing Commission—family of four up to $75,750/year), public money to fund people’s groceries (WIC—family of four up to $55,500/year).
The ESA program, after the governor’s veto, eligibility level for a family of four is $46,800/year.
“For one, it’s a funding giveaway to families already sending their kids to private schools.”
Most people making $46,800 a year aren’t sending their kids to private schools. That’s mom and dad making less than $12/hour each. Big bucks.
“Charter schools using public money should have to adhere to the same rules and regulations as public schools.”
Note that charter schools are public schools. Private schools are not charter schools.
“… the government (at all levels) should not support a private view of the world.”
The government should tell us what to think? You will think what the government tells you to think. Scary.
“These non public schools have not been held accountable to education standards in any way.”
Note that the ESA program requires students to take the WY-TOPP or another nationally normed achievement test. Further, the bill requires students to receive instruction in reading, writing, mathematics, civics, including studies of the United States constitution and the constitution of the state of Wyoming, history, literature and science.
“We continue to earn high marks, and our public schools serve ALL students …”
The 2023 statewide graduation rate was 81.4%. Laramie #1 77.4%, Platte County #2 63.6%, Fremont #38 47.4%. Are the 1 in 5 statewide or the 1 in 2 in Fremont #38 who don’t graduate being well-served?
Fremont #38 gets more than $26,000 per ADM. The statewide average this year is over $17,000 per ADM. Maybe the families of these struggling kids would like to use $6000 to help their child succeed, because obviously the public system hasn’t figured out how to help every child learn.
All that text to sell an idea that never works: replace public service with private profit-centered options.
Edmonds claims, “Those of us who have spent time writing and talking about public education and the need for more school choice aren’t trying to interfere with public education.” She says it isn’t either/or, it’s both/and. While public education may be in no danger of “elimination” as she puts it, the school choice movement has its roots in an ideology that wants exactly this.
Milton Friedman’s 1955 article, “The Role of Government in Education” framed government’s role as that like a restaurant inspector insuring certain minimum standards were met. He advocated for vouchers, for removing government from administering schooling, for attaching a dollar amount to each student’s education to be spent where the family chose. He believes that government should finance public education, but not administer it.
The core of Friedman’s idea is that education is part of the marketplace, and schools are akin to businesses. Good businesses attract customers. This analogy of “school as a business” is the ideational root of the school choice movement. Maybe this makes sense in the rational world of academic economics, but in our world of political polarization and culture wars it is wishful thinking.
One of Friedman’s summations says, “Such schools would be conducted under a variety of auspices: by private enterprises operated for profit, non profit institutions established by private endowment, religious bodies, and some even by governmental units.”
Without saying so, it appears that Edmonds wants government to fund public education but follow Friedman and fundamentally change how it is conducted, to eliminate it as we know it.
Public money to fund private k-12 education. Such bad policy. For one, it’s a funding giveaway to families already sending their kids to private schools. Already short of funds, many smaller Wyoming school districts will be consolidated, losing what is often a town’s center of identity. Smaller schools will close and kids will be bussed. Teacher quality will likely lose importance in the face of inability to pay a decent living wage. One study found that between 1999 and 2017 more than one quarter of charters closed after operating for five years. The last thing families and communities need is this kind of instability. Lastly, if a school taking public money has admission requirements, then educational opportunity for all doesn’t exist.
Charter schools using public money should have to adhere to the same rules and regulations as public schools.
Education is not wheat bread vs. white bread, bananas vs. apples. The point of a public education is to provide the citizens a common understanding of the nation, with a shared idea of how that nation and the world work.
On the other hand, the point of a private education is either (or both) to get a better chance at doing better than your neighbor in order to defeat your neighbor in the “competition” of life, and/or to “correctly” indoctrinate your child in the “correct” view of the world (usually or always an isolated view, not a shared view. Often, if not always, involving a specific religious belief). “Private” education is just that, its primary goal is not a shared understanding of the world, it is narrow, isolated, generally restricted.
The public good, the shared future of the nation as a whole, is underminded by private education. Public funds should not be used to further divide the citizens of the nation, and the government (at all levels) should not support a private view of the world.
Then create alternatives within the public system. These non public schools have not been held accountable to education standards in any way. This shift to choice for many is just a new way to reestablish segregation.
School choice has long been available in most of our nation, including Wyoming. Private parochial schools can be found in nearly every county, and homeschool curriculums have long been available. There used to be correspondence schools, since replaced by online classes, too, so ‘school choice’ is not the issue. It’s the smokescreen that hides the fact that any voucher/savings account scheme siphons cash out of the public taxes into the coffers of private entities, and is forbidden by our constitution.
Religious schools have long wished that they could tap into public resources instead of holding fundraisers. Parents have scrimped and saved to be able to afford tuition to assure that their kids got a religious education instead of the secular education of public schools. We The People of Wyoming cannot be taxed to pay for private or religious education. That is one of the founding principles of our nation and state.
Add in the evidence from across the nation of the grift these schemes have produced, along with some appallingly bad education in many cases, and the case against this new law is strong.
Strong public schools have long served our state well. We continue to earn high marks, and our public schools serve ALL students, not the chosen few of private schools, which reserve the right to reject those who don’t meet their criteria.
The Governor should have vetoed the whole bill.