SCHOOL CHOICE: What's in a name?

Senate Bill One (SB1), known as the “school choice” bill, has spurred a fury of debate. While many would agree that parents are entitled to choose the best education for their children, many of the same do not support SB1. So what’s the divisiveness about? The fact is, the fire under much of the opposition to SB1 has nothing to do with whether or not such an entitlement is valid, but rather whether SB1 is in fact about school choice at all!

The problem is that SB1 boils down to school choice for some kids, not all, under certain qualifying circumstances, but not all–in fact, not most. Under the current plan, SB1 provides for school choice only where schools are determined to be “failing” and only to enrolled students with a qualifying income.

What about students enrolled in schools that fall just a hair above “failing?” Under SB1 these students do not qualify for school choice. If the school is in fact failing, but a student’s household income is just one dollar more than the qualifying income, is it fair that this student will be ineligible for school choice? Does that extra dollar render this child unworthy of a choice in education? Ah…the debate takes shape.

School choice is an age-old battle with its soldiers insisting it’s a “right,” not something to be granted by government. Along comes Senate Bill one offering up the concept of ”school choice” as something to be granted discriminatively. School choice, under SB1 is not regarded as a right, but rather as something for which one must “qualify.” By a more appropriate name, perhaps even “school choice for some” or “school choice with strings” SB1 would be far more accurately depicted.

In a recent statement, Pennsylvania State Director for Americans for Prosperity, Sam Rohrer, weighed in on the issue with typical principled accuracy, saying, ”The concept that children are a gift of God, not a grant by government, forms the underpinning of parental choice.” Amen to that.