Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz

Dennis Byrne and Eric Zorn have now put forth their secondChicago Tribune joint column debate. The first was on health care, the second on school vouchers-school choice. Unlike some in the journalistic and political community,  Byrne and Zorn are able to use their intellect to engage in sharp disagreements on ideas without engaging in ad hominem attacks.

Byrne does a good job of promoting school vouchers and rebutting Zorn's criticisms. However, there are a few fundamental arguments of Zorn that Byrne either neglects or doesn't sufficiently dissect.  It is those arguments that this post will focus on. In other words, Byrne has Zorn on points; we're in the 13th round of a 15 rounder, but Zorn is still dangerous. One, he might throw a wild right that could connect and win the fight. Two, you never how the fight judges or referee might be assessing the fight. So, let's see if we can knock Zorn out with a few powerful rights and go home early.

1. Zorn: Vouchers throw money at the poor and where will we get it?

Zorn suggests that school vouchers are like "Throwing money at the poor." And, he says, "Where does the money come from." Zorn's answer is to argue that we are robbing the public schools to pay for the private ones.

Empowering parents

But that analysis misses the whole point of school vouchers. We don't need to find a pile of money. We are not "taking money from public schools." No, Eric, the money essentially belongs to the parents of the kids in the public schools. However, those parents have no control over it. They have no empowerment. No choice.

No competition occurs for the money. We have, Eric, a monopoly. In Chicago, we call it the Chicago Public School ("CPS") system.The teachers, the administrators, the custodians, the construction people, etc. Those folks get the money whether they perform or they don't.

Not fully funded school vouchers.

Byrne argues the details, while not making the above point. He says essentially that most voucher proposals are not fully funded vouchers.  That is, the CPS has a total budget of around six billion dollars and around 400,000 students. So, the cost per kid per year is about $15,000. Yes, the financial report cards that say otherwise are just not accurate. They lop off capital or other costs, without any basis. Costs are costs.

So, if our vouchers were to be fully funded, each parent of each child in the CPS would get a voucher of 15K per year. However, most likely the program would only be for 12K per year or maybe 8K per year. So, for each parent who decides to pull his or her child out of CPS,. CPS loses 15K in current costs, but only gives up say, 8K or 12K, depending on the size of the non-fully funded voucher. So, the kids who remain in the CPS now get 4K or 7K to spread among themselves, for each kid who leaves.  Yes, Eric, some teachers, administrators or custodians have to find other work, but the remaining kids in the CPS are better off. And, as we all know, it's about the kids in the schools, not the schools that house them.

A pilot school voucher program

Remember, we are doing a pilot program here. Following the Meeks model, I believe our pilot program covers around 40,000 students in a fairly well defined portion of Chicago. So, Eric, you say, what about the two to four thousand kids in that geographic area that are already going to private schools, do they get a voucher and if so, who pays for their voucher? I say, they are already out of the public schools, they are getting by, either with hard labor by their low-income parents, a scholarship, whatever.  Let them be. It is not entirely fair. They should get their pro rata share of public funds, but to keep it simple, let them be. This is a detail. We can deal with it later, when we scale the program up and find a small amount of private or other funds to treat these kids and their parents fairly. Indeed, if somebody suggested we deal with this now, I would say that can be done. If we give out an 8K voucher to the kids who want to leave the CPS and the CPS had been spending 15K per kid, we could use a portion of that difference to fund the kids already attending a private school.       

But, for God's sake Eric, we have kids not learning how to read or do simple math, do you really want to hold things up because we don't know what soccer league these kids will be in. I mean really now, let's get on with it.  

2. Innovation is the result of competition.  

Zorn gives one of his major arguments in response to Byrne in a reply to comments posted on his blog:  :

But if you were to take a random troubled city school -- I'll take your example of Hubbard though I haven't looked at its test scores and know nothing particular about it -- and turn it over tomorrow to, say, Rev. Meeks. Same building. Same students. Same amount of money to spend.... just what sort of magic do the private school enthusiasts believe Meeks or any other new overseer would work on this school?  I'm not saying they have no good ideas, nothing worth trying.... I'm saying let's see what they've got beyond the obvious advantage of involved students, and involved parents.

Did Bill Gates need pre-clearance to bring his product to market? 

Embedded in the above question by Zorn is the major problem with Zorn's argument against vouchers. It is as if pre Microsoft, the Government Czar said to Bill Gates: "Look kid, you want to start a company, tell me what you got.  Tell me about that black box. Tell me what you are doing in your garage. Tell me about your software. Tell me about PCs. And, if we like your ideas, we might let you compete. Yes, we understand that there are investors and customers who would like to fund you, but we will decide if they should give you some money. And, until we say yes, they can't give you the money."

The problems of inner city education

As Zorn argues, the problems of inner city education are substantial.  Kids without books in the home. Parents who don't have time to spend with their kids, or maybe they are not interested in their kids after working 16 hours a day at two jobs. Or, maybe the kids are surrounded by drugs and violence. Or, maybe the parents are motivated, but the teachers aren't. Or, maybe the principal is not motivated.

Free enterprise and the invisible hand

To deal with all these tough problems, we need schools that will try different approaches. Some will work. Some won't. That is what free enterprise is about. That is why competition works and monopoly doesn't. Sure, ultimately, we would like to have responsible parents for these kids. But, until that happens, what do we do? We look to free enterprise to come up with solutions that compensate for less than ideal parents. School vouchers-school choice comprise the invisible hand, guided by the parents who may not be perfect but by and large they are interested in helping their kids. Eric, you doubt that? Talk to the DC parents whose school voucher program was shut down by Obama and Duncan.    
The invisible hand of Adam Smith, which Eric makes fun of, is what Eric doesn't get. With all due respect, and I mean that sincerely, this is Zorn's problem. Sometimes, he doesn't seem to get economics

.
Zorn and campaign contribution limits

When we discuss campaign contribution limits, as I  recall, Zorn gets it. He  understands how the limits favor, say, incumbents over others. This is really just basic economics. And, yet he gets it. And, Zorn goes against the "wisdom," of his liberal friends.

Zorn and gun ownership

And, when we discuss gun control, Zorn gets why people in unsafe areas need access to guns to protect themselves from bad guys. Zorn gets it and again, this is just applied economics. Balancing benefits and costs, individual decision-making, etc. And, again, Zorn goes against the "wisdom," of his liberal friends. 

So, why Eric Zorn doesn't get school vouchers-school choice? I don't know.

Entry of Toyota to the U. S. auto market was like introduction of school vouchers to allow new private schools to compete with public schools 

  
I am sure Zorn understands that we couldn't rely on Ford and GM to decide when we should let Toyota come in to compete. And, we couldn't say to Toyota that eventually it would be making cars in the U. S. with the same people and the same buildings that GM and Ford use, so why would Toyota  think it could do it any better or more efficiently. Well, Eric, they probably couldn't have told you why before, but they did it, didn't they?
Same thing with the private schools, Eric. Give them access to the parents and the school vouchers. Let the schools compete. Let the parents choose. Let the kids learn. Yes, Eric, some parents will send their kids to a bible school or other religious schools.  The U. S. Supreme Court said that was constitutional almost eight years ago. But, most of the kids will learn how to read. And, if they read the bible, Eric, you will survive it. I will survive it. And, so will the kids.

So, Eric, Let it be;  Let it be.