Why School Choice Is Not A Leftist Plot To Take Over Private Ed

School choice has always had opponents. Traditionally, they have been on the left, with organizations like the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, the American Association of School Administers, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and the National Parent Teacher Association all taking firm stands against it.

But as school choice becomes a new norm in many states, a new fusillade from the political right is assailing it as everything from a communist plot to a United Nations plot and arguing that “true educational freedom requires independence from government dollars.”

Some of these arguments are outright nonsense. EdChoice (where we work), is one of the oldest educational choice advocacy organizations in America. It was founded by Drs. Milton and Rose Friedman, two of the strongest anti-communists to ever walk the face of the earth. Our Leslie Hiner has worked for years with international organizations such as OIDEL to push back against organizations like the United Nations, and specifically the Abidjan principles, to protect the rights of families around the world to educate their children.

Every family does not have the money to fully pay for their children’s education. That is why, since before the founding of our country, Americans have taxed ourselves to pay for education. We are working towards creating freedom for those public funds to be used at non-government-operated schools.

But there are, of course, some valid concerns worth considering. Taking government dollars risks government control. Introducing subsidies to a market can distort it. These are not new arguments, and choice programs have changed and evolved to try and overcome them.

Almost all contemporary choice laws include robust religious liberty provisions. Take this language, from Arizona’s education savings account (ESA) statute: “This chapter does not permit any government agency to exercise control or supervision over any nonpublic school or homeschool.”

West Virginia’s ESA statute could not be more clear that ESA providers are not considered state actors. It states specifically that no provider is required to alter its creed, practices, admissions policy, hiring policy, or curriculum to participate in the program.

While subsidizing some parts of a market and not others can tilt it towards institutions that accept public dollars (see this recent research on how no-tuition public charter schools reduced enrollment in Christian schools), higher education shows examples of thriving schools that bucked that trend. Hillsdale. Christendom. Patrick Henry. Wyoming Catholic.

Some of the most desirable and promising colleges use the fact that they refuse federal assistance as part of their marketing. And, since the government is already subsidizing the vast majority of the education system, all private school choice does is level the playing field.

That said, we should be clear: Regulations are a threat and it doesn’t matter where they come from. Regulations can be advanced by both Republicans and Democrats, leftists and conservatives. Private schools choosing to take public money do run a risk of sacrificing autonomy.

Milton Friedman also popularized the phrase, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.” Put another way, eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. Schools and advocates will have to perpetually watch for encroachment and fend it off when necessary. The tradeoff is the ability to serve many more students and spread your mission to people who otherwise cannot afford it.

Schools do need to be thoughtful about their participation in these programs, but in every single choice program, schools decide whether they want to participate and at which level. Perhaps they want to limit the number of seats they make available to make sure they always have the chance to leave should regulations become too onerous. Perhaps they want to start small and scale up provided that things are still going well. Or perhaps they don’t want to participate at all.

That is another thing worth mentioning. No one has to participate in these programs. If you are a school leader and don’t think the trade is fair, don’t make it. If you want to homeschool your kids and stay completely away from government intervention, have at it. No one in the choice movement is trying to stop you. Some people are trying to needlessly scare you, though. And standing in the way of other families who need the support just because you don’t want to participate is short-sighted, selfish, and wrong.

Let’s be crystal clear about what we want. We want a truly pluralistic education system, where people from all different types of backgrounds and educational, religious, and moral philosophies can create institutions that reflect their values and use those institutions to educate their children.

We believe that, as Milton Friedman put it 70 years ago, government’s job should be “improving the operation of the invisible hand without substituting the dead hand of bureaucracy.” That means providing funds, particularly for those who otherwise would not be able to afford the type of education they desire for their child, setting reasonable regulations as to who can access public funds (such as defining what is educational and what isn’t), and ensuring that government dollars are not being stolen or used to commit fraud.

School choice programs can massively increase the opportunities for families to find a school that best meets their needs. They will dramatically decrease the role government plays in directing children’s education. They will also give schools the opportunity to serve students that they otherwise would not be able to.

That might come with challenges, and schools are right to be clear-eyed about what those challenges might be. But the blue helmets of the U.N. are not coming for your school. And you should think twice before believing anyone telling you otherwise.

Robert Enlow is president and CEO at EdChoice, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization working to advance educational freedom and choice for all students as a pathway to successful lives and a stronger society. McShane is director of national research there.