by Mark Butler

Do the math on school vouchers and you uncover the truth surrounding the largely public school-organized opposition. The average per pupil spending (our tax dollars) in Utah is $7,500. The value of the voucher offered to parents who exercise their parental rights regarding the education of their children is $500 to $3,000. We'll use the larger number. Subtracting $3,000 from $7,500 leaves a balance in the state coffers of $4,500 (from a family whose student is no longer consuming resources in the public school system). The $4,500 balance represents taxes paid by Utah's citizens choosing private education for their children and funding public education for others by that amount.

So, in the first instance, it is ludicrous to say that parents supporting and participating in a voucher system are failing to fulfill a civic duty to support the good of society through public education. These parents are contributing $4,500 (the amount that stays in the public school system) to the education of others' public school children, while additionally financing the education of their own children in voucher schools. Voucher school tuition exceeds the voucher amount. Hence, these parents are paying what amounts to an additional tax in order to exercise the right of educational choice for their children while simultaneously supporting public school education.

In consequence of the voucher program, the overall public school budgets will decrease, but not in proportion with the exodus of students. So, in fact, the per pupil budget available to the schools will increase significantly (remember the $4,500 that remains behind). How such an arrangement could be construed as detrimental to and non-supportive of public education is beyond reason--it is pure political rhetoric or simply poor math.

Nevertheless, because overall public school funding will decrease, many schools may be forced to downsize their administrative and teaching staff as the total number of classes decrease. Yet, because of the increase in per pupil funds for those that remain, class sizes can actually decrease in relation to the number of teachers that can be retained. All this also surely benefits students, as classroom overcrowding has been an issue sorely complained about by teachers and parents for years! Vouchers help solve classroom crowding.

The voucher program could siphon off from the public schools some of the families and students most invested in their education, leaving public schools with an increased educational challenge. Yet, to meet this challenge, the public schools will be armed with increased per pupil funds! So, in essence, the education funding for children of economically disadvantaged or educationally disinvested families will increase, providing a clear opportunity to improve education for these citizens most in need!

The voucher program does nothing but increase the overall amount of private and public monies (taxes paid plus personal expenses) going to education, while not decreasing taxes one penny. Simultaneously, the burden on public schools will decrease and per pupil spending increase. Where is the "cost" or "harm" to public education in this?

It would appear that the interest group at risk from the arrangement is the institutional bureaucracy of the public education system itself. Because overall public school budgets will decrease, downsizing will occur and impact some teachers and administrators, who now find they must make their way in a competitive educational marketplace. In terms of the students, however, who should be our ultimate concern, the voucher program is win-win all around!

The taxpaying public should absolutely be allowed to hold their tax-paid educators to public accountability through choice and competition. Education funding will increase and students benefit all around from voucher-empowered choice and consequences. Don't be fooled by rhetoric without reasoning. Challenge voucher opponents to do the math and you'll uncover the truth: Private and public school students benefit from the consequences of educational choice. Voucher opposition is pure protectionism on the part of public education's professionals. It's time to end the monopoly and invigorate education with good old American competition.

Mark H. Butler is a professor in the Marriage & Family Therapy Department of the School of Family Life.

The Daily Universe welcomes opposing viewpoints of about 600 words regarding this issue.

Copyright Brigham Young University 4 Jun 2007