Friedman and the origins of the voucher idea
Bob Zadek describes Milton Friedman as the creator, perhaps, of the concept of school vouchers, which he glosses as another way of saying free choice in schools. In the same segment, Don Boudreaux agrees with Zadek’s tribute to Friedman, and Zadek closes by noting that Friedman was born 99 years ago that day. The voucher idea is presented as one part of Friedman’s broader libertarian record: Boudreaux says Friedman was a tireless and passionate opponent of military conscription, that no single individual in America was more responsible than Friedman for getting rid of the military draft, and that Friedman believed the draft was slavery. Boudreaux also stresses that Friedman never called himself a conservative and instead described himself as a liberal in the classic sense. The Second American Revolution – NOW (2011)
In the 2014 episode, Zadek repeats the attribution, saying school choice was probably started by Milton Friedman, who was a strong advocate of breaking the public school monopoly and of exposing public school education to private choice so that parents can pick the vendor providing education to their children. Zadek lists charter schools, private schools, and homeschooling as alternatives the choice movement encourages. Aren’t Men Entitled to Due Process on Campus? (2014)
The 2014 debate: Zadek versus Rothmann
Zadek introduces the voucher debate with John Rothmann as a discussion of a growing contentious wedge issue in American politics, and he frames vouchers as a subset of school choice. He sets out the mechanism: rather than the federal government giving tax dollars directly to public schools, the government gives the money to parents, and in the words Zadek attributes to Lamar Alexander, the government pins $2,000 onto the clothing of the student, who then spends the voucher or coupon at a public or private school of the student’s choosing. Zadek says the effect is to take funding away from public schools and give it to private schools, parochial schools, or whatever, and asks whether that process is healthy for American education. Aren’t Men Entitled to Due Process on Campus? (2014)
Rothmann answers that he has always opposed the school voucher program, calling it destructive to public education and saying public education is the backbone of American democracy. He describes Lamar Alexander’s bill as taking $24 billion, or about 41% of current federal spending on elementary and secondary public schools, and allowing states, not individuals, to decide how the money would be spent. For each eligible child, based on family income, Rothmann says an average of about $2,100 of federal money would be allocated. He says he does not know a school, parochial or private, where $2,100 buys an education, and notes that most private schools in San Francisco have tuitions running from $15,000 to $30,000, with Catholic schools somewhat cheaper but constantly in need of money and closing. Aren’t Men Entitled to Due Process on Campus? (2014)
Rothmann also disputes Zadek’s characterization of the teachers’ unions as the great enemy, saying most teachers he knows are outstanding individuals who care deeply, while conceding there are abuses in the system. He points to schools where vouchers have been used that have been closed as incompetent and unsupervised. On the argument that vouchers help minorities, Rothmann says he disagrees profoundly and directs Zadek to look at what is happening in Oakland, which he calls a tragedy. He concludes that what will strengthen America is a strong, vital public school system that is workable, affordable, and encourages the best people to go into teaching. Aren’t Men Entitled to Due Process on Campus? (2014)
Zadek presses the case that education is important and asks what makes public education, where the vendor is government, per se better than private education. He argues that in a competitive environment, whether the Super Bowl or a consumer product, the best determiner of what is best is the marketplace. Rothmann calls that rubbish and nonsense, and offers the example of wanting to send his 15-year-old son to one of the best private schools in San Francisco at a cost of at least $40,000 a year, asking whether Zadek would provide him $40,000. Rothmann says Lamar Alexander is proposing $2,100 if you meet the requirement. Aren’t Men Entitled to Due Process on Campus? (2014)
Rothmann adds that private religious institutions, particularly Catholic schools, have pushed very hard for vouchers, and that three times they put the measure on the state ballot and three times the people of California said no. He says he believes in a firm separation of church and state and that the voucher question creates the opportunity for religious institutions to receive public funding. He repeats that Alexander’s bill would take $24 billion, 41% of current federal spending at the elementary and secondary level, and says that would gut public education. In his view the program does not open up choice but limits it, and may create substandard schools with no real supervision. Aren’t Men Entitled to Due Process on Campus? (2014)
Rothmann cites his own credentials in the exchange: a Master of Arts in teaching, a secondary teaching credential from the state of California, and 40 years as president of the Washington High School Alumni Association, along with involvement in PTAs. He says he has researched the issue and battled over the voucher propositions that have gone on the ballot, and that they lost because they fail the ultimate test: they do not make things better, they only take money away from public education. Aren’t Men Entitled to Due Process on Campus? (2014)
Ravitch and the textbook context
In the 2010 episode, Zadek mentions vouchers only in passing while discussing textbook content and indoctrination. He describes Diane Ravitch as a leading educator and very smart person who devoted her life to educational theory, and says she was for many years supportive of charter schools and vouchers and free choice in education, and has recently, to his dismay, changed her mind. Zadek says the show is not talking about charter schools that day. He quotes Ravitch commenting on textbook writing in California and in general: “It’s outright censorship,” and “It dums down our textbooks, makes them bland, far less interesting than anything children might see in the movies, even in G-rated movies or TV.” Best of: Changing the Face of History (2010)
The same segment describes McGraw-Hill’s self-imposed guidelines for elementary and high school texts, which Zadek says require that 40% of the people pictured be white, 30% Hispanic, 20% African American, 7% Asian, 3% Native American, and that of that group 5% should be disabled and 5% should be over the age of 55. Zadek says it does not matter what the history is and the facts do not matter under such standards. Best of: Changing the Face of History (2010)
Across episodes: no development
The excerpts show vouchers touched in three episodes: a passing mention in the 2010 textbook discussion, the Friedman tribute in 2011, and the extended 2014 debate with Rothmann. The excerpts show no development of the argument between the earlier and later treatments; the 2014 exchange is the only one that argues the policy at length.
What the sources do not cover
The excerpts do not state the outcome of Lamar Alexander’s bill, the names or holdings of any court cases on vouchers, or the details of any state ballot measure beyond Rothmann’s statement that California voters rejected the measure three times. They do not give the text or full provisions of the McGraw-Hill guidelines beyond the percentages Zadek recites, and they do not say what Ravitch’s changed position on vouchers now is. The Pell Grant model mentioned in a segment heading is not discussed in the excerpted text.