Ezra has encouraged me to jump in to what has become an energetic debate on vouchers for poor urban public schools, so here I go. Quick run-down: Megan McArdle seethes with rage over rich liberals who essentially practice "school choice" by picking up and moving to expensive suburbs, but who don't support vouchers so poor parents can also get their kids out of bad schools. Ezra responds that vouchers aren't the answer, because they won't do away with concentrated poverty, which he considers the root of educational inequality. Kevin Carey swings in to say they're both wrong: Schools that educate poor kids can be great schools in spite of concentrated poverty, and school choice is okay when choice is confined to the public system. Carey also takes a jab at the Prospect for prioritizing longterm poverty fixes and downplaying the importance of education reform. To this, I'd only respond that there is a variety of opinions on education at TAP, and that I, for one, have argued again and again for serious attention to be paid to our schools as engines of equality, and will continue to do so. But back to the issue at hand. Kevin is right that private vouchers aren't a systemic fix for urban education. As he writes, "Voucherizing a whole city like DC wouldn't work. There aren't enough good private schools to teach all those students in the short run, and -- more importantly -- there wouldn't be enough in the long run." Nor is busing city kids en masse to the suburbs a great solution, since that would be unworkable politically and logistically. Poor kids certainly do deserve top-flight schools within their own communities. And although it's not necessary for those school buildings to be race and class integrated for children to receive a good education within them, it would be preferable if they were. Integrated schools do a better job of readying children for the workforce, tend to have more resources at their disposal in terms of money and parental investment, and perhaps most importantly, teach kids tolerance and comfort around people different from themselves.
THE PROGRESSIVE CASE FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE.
I’m writing to you today with a sense of urgency that I haven’t felt since I began my journalism career. As executive editor of The American Prospect, I’ve witnessed firsthand how independent journalism serves as a crucial bulwark against the erosion of our democratic institutions. Today, that role is more vital than ever. Can you step up today and show your support?
The winds of authoritarianism are blowing stronger. We’re seeing alarming signs of a coordinated effort to silence critical voices and undermine the very foundations that support progressive causes. As Bob Kuttner presciently wrote in our August 2024 issue, a weaponized IRS could attack the very foundations of the progressive movement. We need readers to step up and help us dig in for the long haul.
We’re falling behind in our spring fundraising campaign, and with so much at stake we can’t afford to come up short. If you value fearless, independent journalism that holds the powerful accountable and defends democracy, now is the time to step up. The American Prospect depends on reader support to stay in the fight. Pitch in today and help us close the gap. Please consider making a donation today.
–David Dayen, Executive Editor