It’s Time for Texas to Embrace School Choice

S chool choice is the most important state-level policy of our time. Government schools have over-promised and under-delivered for decades. Learning losses from ill-advised school closures are merely the latest failure.

Throwing more money at the existing system won’t benefit anyone but vested interests. Today, states need radical solutions to shake up the status quo. This is especially important in Texas. Despite its conservative bonafides, the Lone Star State has yet to introduce genuine competition to its education systems by embracing school choice. It’s time for that to change.

The Texas constitution requires the legislature to provide adequate education funding for all students. But nothing in the constitution requires the government to produce the schooling itself. In the 2023 legislative session, state policy-makers should work toward universal transferable funding for all students, allowing the needs of families, not arbitrary zip codes, to determine which schools children attend.

Arizona is leading the way on this issue, showing Texans that school-choice policies really do work. In July 2022, Governor Doug Ducey signed H.B. 2853, providing families with up to $7,000 of public funds per child to pursue the schooling option best fit for each student, including private tutoring or homeschooling. The public response was incredible: Applications poured in and even briefly crashed the website. Arizona families clearly wanted better education options for their kids.

It’s not difficult to understand why. Government schools — misleadingly called “public schools” — are failing the people they claim to serve. Despite their name, these schools aren’t open to the public, run by the public, or meaningfully accountable to the public. Instead, students are assigned by residential location to schools run by the state (often according to the whims of teachers’ union), with lackluster boards of education providing weak oversight at best. What’s more, the lack of an exit option means teachers and administrators rarely respond to legitimate complaints.

We shouldn’t be surprised that this system works for the few at the expense of the many. For the vested interests that have taken control of our schools, that’s by design. These government-school monopolists claim that vouchers, education savings accounts, and related measures are bad for students. But the large body of research on school choice proves them wrong.

Here’s an overview of the results from a recent bibliography:

• Seventeen studies look at school choice and student test scores. Eleven show some positive effects, four show no effects, and three show some negative effects
• Seven studies explore school choice and educational attainment (high school graduation, college attendance, and college graduation). Five find positive effects, two find no effects, and none find negative effects
• Thirty-two studies investigate school choice and parent satisfaction. Thirty report some positive effects, one reports no effects, and two report some negative effects
• Eleven studies consider school choice and civic values. Six find some positive effects, five find no effects, and none find negative effects
• Seventy-three studies examine school choice and fiscal effects for taxpayers. Sixty-eight find some positive effects, four find no effects, and five find some negative effects.

In short, the evidence is overwhelming: School choice works. The only way to argue that it doesn’t is by cherry-picking negative findings.

Why do government schools cost so much yet deliver so little? Simple economics shows us the answer. Simply put, today’s school system is designed to stifle competition, innovation, and creativity. Econ 101 teaches that monopolies jack up prices and skimp on service. And why shouldn’t they? Without competition, there’s nothing disciplining a monopolist’s behavior. Imagine if Texas law assigned families to grocery stores by location, the same way it does schools. It’s obvious this policy would make food overly expensive and hard to find. Customer service would be almost nonexistent. This is no way to promote family flourishing.

School choice can radically improve these incentives. In addition to the previously discussed benefits, research on school-choice programs shows that they improve learning outcomes even for students who don’t enroll in these programs. Indeed, 25 of 28 studies show school choice improves test scores in government schools. This important result demolishes a popular anti-choice argument: that school-choice advocates want to destroy government schools. Nonsense. Defenders of school choice want to empower families to pick the options that work best for them. That includes making government school systems as effective as possible. Breaking the monopoly is crucial for fixing government schools.

We wouldn’t trust a government monopoly to provide essential goods such as shelter or medicine. There’s no reason to tolerate it for schooling. The only way to ensure that producer behavior responds to consumer needs is by promoting competition. Admittedly, private schools, homeschools, and related options aren’t for everyone. But Texas does need to inject some discipline and accountability. The best way to do this is with a universal, transferable school-financing program. Such a policy will force all schools to compete for students and education dollars, rather than treating those dollars as a given.

Monopoly and special privileges are contrary to the principles of a free society. Texans take their liberty and civic responsibilities seriously. They know something has gone terribly wrong with the government school system, and in the 2023 legislative session they’re going to demand remedies. Regardless of partisan affiliation, legislators would be wise to embrace school choice. Funding students instead of systems is the best way to ensure that we’re giving our children the tools they need to thrive.