And yes, I am about as disappointed as this blogger is. However, there is something to be learned from this entire experience, and Adam Schaeffer may have put his finger on it:
The voucher program is dead, but school choice doesn’t have to be. Tax credits for donations to scholarship organizations can help support school choice for lower-income families, and personal-use credits can help middle-class families. Tax credits reduce the amount a taxpayer owes the government for each dollar he spends on education. For instance, if a business owes the state $4,000 and donates $2,000 to a scholarship-granting organization, it would pay just $2,000 in taxes. Similar benefits for donations can be applied to individuals.
Three states have modest forms of personal-use tax credits: Illinois allows families to claim credits worth 25% of their educational expenses up to $2,500. Iowa allows 25% up to $1,000, and Minnesota allows 75% of non-tuition expenses up to a maximum credit of $1,000 per child. Five states — Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island — have more powerful donation credits. Pennsylvania allows a 90% credit for donations and Florida allows a 100% credit, helping thousands of children from lower-income families attend good, independent schools.
Education tax credits are less controversial than vouchers, so they provide a way forward in places where it would otherwise be difficult to pass school-choice programs. Broad-based education tax credits that combine personal-use and donation credits to cover most kids are preferable. But with the setback in Utah, reformers will need a policy that has the best possible chance of surviving another ballot challenge, so they may want to proceed incrementally.
Tax credits also enjoy bipartisan support, and they’re already expanding in a number of states. With the support of a Democratic legislature or the signature of a Democratic governor, Arizona, Rhode Island and Iowa passed tax-credit programs last year, and Pennsylvania expanded its existing program. This year a unified Democratic government in Iowa increased the tax-credit dollar cap by 50% to $7.5 million from $5 million. A strong center-left coalition, including many prominent African-American Democrats — most notably, Newark Mayor Cory Booker — supports tax credits. New York’s Democratic Gov. Eliot Spitzer proposed an education-tax deduction in his first state budget and also supports tax credits.
Donation credits also look different to the average voter than universal vouchers. The credits are seen by many as an unremarkable extension of existing tax benefits for charitable giving. A donation credit expands choice through tax incentives and private money, whereas a voucher expands choice through a dramatic change in the funding system for public education. A donation credit is less risky than a universal voucher program, and it therefore has better chances of surviving a referendum.
Education tax credits are a big-tent policy, with more support on the left, right and in the middle. Many social conservatives, libertarians and homeschoolers support tax credits but not vouchers because they fear government funds will bring government control. In Utah, a socially conservative state with more children homeschooled than at private schools, credits could mobilize more enthusiastic support on the right.
Read it all; Schaeffer’s arguments are compelling from both the policy standpoint and the public relations standpoint. In the meantime, so long as we have arguments about school choice, we will likely also have arguments about Economics 101. But what else is new?