This editorial from Texas in many ways applies to Kansas as well.

“Until now, reason has prevailed in the Legislature on the subject of taking money from underfunded public schools to be given to unregulated private and parochial schools.

“Despite the rhetoric by TAB and others about designing the programs to help poor and minority students trapped in low-performing schools, any universal voucher program will more likely subsidize private school for those who can already afford it. Vouchers do not change the dynamics of student preparation, family transportation or the inherent lack of alternative choices in the state’s rural communities.

“Private and parochial schools have the advantage of being able to choose who they accept and what types of students they are willing to serve. They do not have to serve students with language challenges or learning disabilities. They can dismiss students who do not follow their rules. And any private school development officer will tell you that the tuition they do charge families does not cover the cost of educating the students they do take.

“Despite the suggestion that marketplace competition will cure public education, alternatives do not necessarily equate to better education for students, as the Texas experience with charter schools can attest…

“What economists like Laffer and groups like TAB fail to consider is the high cost of removing the community connection to its school district. The success of any district is directly dependent on the participation of middle-class families, and once they are no longer vested in neighborhood schools, the students who remain and the community at large pay the price.

“A universal voucher program would decimate that connection, making investment and serving the students that remain difficult, if not impossible.

—Austin American-Statesman http://bit.ly/17G1RlP