She had a huge smile, coming up to me right after I spoke to the NC House Education Committee —the largest, it would seem, in the free world with 53 members (!)– about the need for opportunity scholarships to provide poor children access to quality schools.

“Um, I’ll get you one,” I answered. Then I noticed her sticker on her lapel, which was a circle, with the word vouchers in the middle, and a SLASH through the word.

“Why do you want my card, you clearly don’t agree with me,” I responded.

The inquirer responded – “I just want to know who is paying you; where you get your money.”

Wow. So belief is all about who pays you? I was stunned.

Her name was Elizabeth Haddix, and it turns out Elizabeth works for the UNC School of Law Office of Civil Rights.

During the whole hearing, this man stood behind her, near the door, and cued her with motions and non-verbal hand signals as people were talking. (See minute 44:16 in the video of the hearing below.) He actually looked like the union boss in “Won’t Back Down.” But upon further research, it turns out, he’s the manager of said Office of Civil Rights, and, it would seem, her coach.

It was a quick hearing, and only an hour was allocated for pro- and con-, and the basic introdution of the bill by members, but clearly Elizabeth waited with anticipation to deliver a zinger of remarks… which never came because they had to stop the hearing due to time. Thankfully, the voucher hearing continued in the NC House Ed Committee today, and 27 lawmakers had enough sense & strength to see past typical status quo arguments and pass opportunity scholarship legislation.

One of the most frustrating things I have to contend with in my job is the insinuation that some of us wake up every day and simply do someone else’s bidding. That I would have funders that might dictate who I am or what I believe is, of course, insulting. But more insulting is the notion that a smart, Duke and UNC Grad like Elizabeth – quite possibly subsidized by the state – would think more about who “pays me” than what I believe… as her manager looks on.

What’s more is that this hearing was about a bill that is largely going to benefit black and brown children, from poor neighborhoods, who can’t even spell UNC or LAW because the schools are so bad. And yet, little white Elizabeth and her Manager help run an organization with TAX PAYER DOLLARS that claims to “extend America’s promise of justice, prosperity and opportunity by elevating families and communities above the boundaries of race, class and place. Its mission is to use community-based impact advocacy and legal education and scholarship to advance strategies that secure social, economic and environmental justice for low wealth, minority families and neighborhoods.”

Huh? You are working to elevate families above the boundaries of place, but you want children consigned to failing schools they are required to attend by virtue of their zip code and poverty? Please.

Elizabeth didn’t get to talk but I can surmise what she would have said. I’ve met thousands of Elizabeth’s before – privileged people who so desperately want to help others that they lose sight of the fact that the institutions created to help and the laws written to protect us all often fail to deliver on promises.

Elizabeth probably would have said, however, to give her credit:

- Public schools are the very foundation of American society, and scholarships undermine that foundation
- Public schools are egalitarian and must take everyone, while private schools can select – and discriminate
- No one cares more about kids than educators, and public educators work hard every day to ensure they teach the kids.

Then she would have attempted to say something about civil rights, forgetting that phrases rarely deliver social justice. After all, Brown v Board was the law of the land more than a decade before anyone had real justice.

I wonder if she’d ever say that she had a choice to go to school, if not during K-12 than most certainly at Duke and UNC Law!

What makes a person who benefitted from choice repel from it? Is it their love of the status quo? Their fear of the potential of real parent power? What is it that actually robs otherwise smart people of their ability to see behind their own little paradigm and book learning? I will die trying to know, but I will never stop.

And then there’s that smile. I think more than the fact that I can predict what she’d say by her allegiance to failing public schools in NC, is the fact that when she first asked me for my card, Elizabeth had an enormous and apparently quite phony smile on her face as if getting my card was the key to her salvation. Thankfully I asked her why she’d wanted it, and she told me. “I just want to know who’s paying you,” she said. Wow. That’s your big concern?

Disagree if you want, represent your own narrow interests, but do me a favor Elizabeth – if you really believe what you believe, be honest about it and don’t fake the smile next time. Be the person you really are and demonstrate what you believe. And celebrate the fact that you had a choice in getting there.

by Jeanne Allen

In a packed room, the House Education Committee heard Tuesday from supporters and opponents of a plan to give taxpayer-funded scholarships for low income students that attend private schools.

The crowd precluded any committee debate or a vote on the bill, as legislators used the limited time to hear from the public – those in favor and against the Opportunity Scholarship Act

The committee did roll out a new version of the bill and an accompanying summary that explains the bill.

“The bill before you, in reality, will not help the students it is intended to help,” Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson told the committee. She focused her comments on the fact that private schools do not have to report student test results and performance in the same way public schools do.

“If a grading scale of A-through-F is good for public schools, then it should be good for private schools,” she said. How else, she asked, would parents know if the private school they are choosing actually offers a better education than their current public school.

Proponents of the bill said that voucher programs in other states have helped improve student test scores.

“I’m struck by the amount of opposition to something some people have never seen working in progress,” said Jeanne Allen is the Founder and President of The Center for Education Reform.

The committee is expected to debate and vote on the bill next week.

A state Senate committee on Thursday approved a high-profile school voucher plan, sending it to the full chamber for what could be a fierce floor fight.

Senate Bill 23 by state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, would offer tax credits to businesses that provide scholarship funding for low-income students who want to transfer from low-performing public schools to private or religious schools.

The bill would allow businesses to write off 100 percent of their state business margins taxes, but it caps the total value of all donations at $100 million.

Patrick, who chairs the Senate Education Committee, says the plan could help as many as 10,000 students transfer.

His committee referred the bill to the Senate, but not before an important modification was approved: To qualify for scholarships, children have to be at risk of dropping out of school and come from low-income families. The measure originally allowed at-risk or low-income students to seek scholarships.

The amendment changing or to and was made by state Sen. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville.

“I understand the author’s intent with this bill,” Lucio said. “This could give those students who most need educational choice a voucher.”

Patrick accepted the change, saying his intent was “to help students who are poor and in failing schools.”

Lucio responded, “I am for helping poor kids, including keeping them in our public schools.”

To get scholarships, students must come from households with incomes less than 200 percent of that needed to qualify for the free and reduced-price lunch program. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has guidelines for who qualifies based on family size.

A family of three can qualify to get reduced-price or free lunches at school if their yearly income doesn’t exceed $36,000. Patrick’s proposal would allow families to seek assistance if they have income up to double that level.

Opponents say the plan will drain yet more funding from public schools still reeling from the $5.4 billion in cuts to public education that the Legislature approved in 2011. But Patrick said money for his plan would come from other portions of the budget — not out of funding already earmarked for public schools.

Although Patrick’s fellow Republicans control both chambers of the Legislature, his bill faces seemingly long odds. It has yet to be considered by the state House, which while passing its version of the state budget last week, the lower chamber overwhelmingly approved an amendment to keep public funding in public schools

Public tax dollars may be used to fund private school tuition under Indiana’s voucher program, the state Supreme Court unanimously ruled today.

“We hold that the Indiana school voucher program, the choice scholarship program, is within the legislature’s power under Article 8, Section 1, and that the enacted program does not violate either Section 4 or Section 6 of Article 1 of the Indiana Constitution,” the justices wrote in the 5-0 decision.

The ruling, on a teachers union-supported lawsuit from 2011, ends the legal challenge to the program at the state level. The case could be made again in federal court. But in 2002 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a similar program in Ohio, making any further appeal a long shot.

The Indiana case began shortly after the program was created in 2011 when a group of teachers, school officials and parents who oppose vouchers sued the state, arguing the program was unconstitutional.

Vouchers allow low income families to redirect tax dollars from their local public school district to pay tuition when their children transfer to private schools.

In its second year, the program is the fastest-growing in history, jumping to 9,324 students receiving vouchers this school year from 3,919 last year. The program is redirecting more than $38 million in state aid from public schools to private schools, although officials say a provision that guarantees at least 10 percent of a school district’s per pupil amount be returned to the state resulted in a savings of $4.2 million that was redistributed among all public schools last year.

Opponents have argued that vouchers unfairly take away funds that public schools need to benefit primarily religious institutions, especially Catholic and Christian schools. The vast majority of schools accepting vouchers are religiously-affiliated. The lawsuit also claimed the program violated the state’s duty to provide a free and “uniform” public school system.

In 2012 a Marion County judge ruled the program was constitutional, prompting an appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court.

Indiana’s big voucher numbers are due in large part to the design of the program, which is less limited than those in other states. For example, Ohio also has a statewide program, but it restricts vouchers to communities with failing schools. Wisconsin, which has had vouchers for 20 years, limits them just to the city of Milwaukee. Indiana’s program is open to any student meeting the income guidelines — anywhere in the state.

Former State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett hailed the program’s popularity as demonstrating kids need avenues to attend the schools that best serve their needs. But Glenda Ritz, who defeated Bennett in November, opposes vouchers and originally was a plaintiff in the case. She removed herself from the lawsuit while she was running for office.

Ritz’s opposition to the voucher program has caused her political headaches at the statehouse. Earlier this year she had to fend off an effort by House Republicans to move administration of the voucher program from her office to Gov. Mike Pence’s supervision.

Indianapolis Public Schools have the most students within its boundaries using vouchers of any district in the state at 1,262, up from 644 last year. The number of students who have actually transferred from IPS is 947, up from 365 last year. The rest already were attending private schools using a state program that also made them eligible for vouchers.

But Republicans are aiming to expand vouchers further.

House Bill 1003, which passed the House and is being debated in the Senate, eliminates a requirement that students seeking vouchers to first attend a public school for at least two semesters for incoming kindergarteners. Any kindergartners who meet the income limits would be eligible. Other newly eligible for vouchers under the bill include students with disabilities, siblings of children receiving vouchers and children in foster care.

Eligibility for vouchers depends on family income and size. A family of four that earns less than $42,000 annually can receive up to 90 percent of the state aid for a child’s public school education. Families of four making $42,000 to $62,000 can receive 50 percent of the state aid amount.

The voucher law capped the number of students allowed in the program at 7,500 last year and 15,000 this year. But there is no cap going forward unless the legislature decided to add one. There has been no discussion of a cap during this legislative session.

THE MAINE EVENT. Earlier this year, Governor Paul LePage expressed his outrage that Maine’s “school systems are failing.” And when the newly-created Charter School Commission rejected four out of five charter applications he called on “…those people, if they’re afraid to do the job, if they can’t put students first, then they ought to resign.” Vowing to go back to square one on reform efforts, the Governor jumping back in the ring to convene a conference this Friday, March 22. The conference will feature sessions on best practices from across the country like Florida’s school performance grading system, school choice, and stretching education dollars. CER President Jeanne Allen, will lead a panel discussion on “Multiple Pathways to Success.”

BATTLE IN THE BAYOU. Today, parents, students, educators and reformers rallied before the Louisiana Supreme Court to defend the Louisiana Scholarship Program. Over 4,500 students across the state benefit from the program which provides scholarships to qualifying students enrolled in underperforming and failing schools, to attend schools of their choice. Former DC Councilman, attorney, advocate, and CER board member Kevin P. Chavous addressed the masses today and said, “I know justice, and it is absolutely criminal to snatch away opportunity from children.” The debate is heating up and attorneys brought their arguments for a showdown today with oral ammunition before the state’s Supreme Court. A ruling on the appeal is not expected for several weeks.

MISSED OPPORTUNITY. As Newswire reported last week, a charter school proposal must still be negotiated in joint House-Senate conference committees. As it stands now, “Mississippi has yet to open the book on what charter schools can really do for the whole of education across the state. Not only is this not significant in any way, but it’s evidence that even the relatively new leadership in power is inept at withstanding the political power of the education establishment,” said CER President Jeanne Allen.

DEFENDING CHOICE. When recently blasting the current state of public education in New Jersey, Governor Chris Christie stated, “Nothing else in our society works without competition, and public education won’t work for everybody unless it does, too.” Reformers couldn’t agree more. This is the opportunity for Christie to put his money where his mouth is in backing meaningful voucher programs and serious reform of the states charter school law with multiple authorizers as it centerpiece.

IN GOOD COMPANY. Congrats to the legislators, advocates and CER’s own, Jeanne Allen, who were honored last week at Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO) Symposium.

BLENDED LEARNING IN ACTION. Check out how Oakland, CA’s Aspire ERES Academy is pushing the boundaries on innovation in teaching through blended learning.

Republican Gov. Bill Haslam used his annual State of the State address Monday night to defend his plan to implement a limited school voucher program next fall that would allow impoverished children in 83 low-performing public schools to use tax dollars to attend private institutions.

“Some have said that this administration and General Assembly aren’t committed to public education, but that could not be further from the truth,” Haslam told members of the Republican-run House and Senate meeting in a joint convention.

Noting his administration has been “literally putting our money where our mouth is, even when other states haven’t done so through tough budget times,” Haslam added the state’s education funding formula has been fully funded in his three budgets.

Noting various initiatives his administration has implemented including expansions of publicly funded but privately operated charter schools, Haslam said, “This year we’re proposing to offer another option for school choice” through vouchers. “If we can help our lowest-income students in our lowest-performing schools, why wouldn’t we?

“I’ve heard the argument that this kind of program will drain resources in the schools that need them the most, but we’re focusing on those schools,” said Haslam, who pointed out the state is providing $38 million to the 83 worst-performing schools over a three-year period.

The bill, called the “Tennessee Choice & Opportunity Scholarship Act,” is sponsored by House Majority Leader Gerald McCormick, R-Chattanooga, and Senate Majority Leader Mark Norris, R-Collierville, who carry the governor’s package of bills.

Enrollment would be limited in its first year to 5,000 students whose family income makes them eligible for free or reduced-price lunch programs. That would grow to 20,000 by the 2016-17 school year.

House Minority Leader Craig Fitzhugh, D-Ripley, charged the administration is “putting forward a radical, unfunded mandate in the form of a school voucher proposal designed to rip millions of dollars from public education.”

He said it “will almost certainly mean a tax increase for our local governments, a dramatic decline in public school funding and, most importantly, it will leave thousands of students behind in failing schools.”

During his address, in which he unveiled a $32.7 billion budget for the 2013-14 fiscal year that starts July 1, Haslam urged lawmakers to keep an open mind about expanding its Medicaid program to more than 100,000 Tennesseans under the Affordable Care Act.

Haslam said he remains undecided about the expansion, which is expected to have a tough time in the GOP-run Legislature.

“Most of us in this room don’t like the Affordable Care Act, but the decision to expand Medicaid isn’t as basic as saying, ‘No Obamacare, no expansion,”‘ Haslam said, noting that hospitals, many of them in rural areas, will suffer, and some could shut down.

Under the law, the federal government would pay 100 percent of the expansion in its first three years and 90 percent after 2019. A number of Republicans are philosophically opposed and also cite concerns that the federal government will eventually cut back on its commitments given federal deficits.

Two freshman lawmakers from Hamilton County found the voucher proposal appealing.

“I like vouchers; I’ve liked them a long time,” said Sen. Todd Gardenhire, R-Chattanooga, noting he’s supported them since the 1970s. “You know, you got to look out for the kids first, let them choose, let the parents choose, and then the market will take care of itself.”

Rep. Mike Carter, R-Ooltewah, said he hasn’t seen details, “but in concept I completely support the governor’s position. And I’m extremely pleased we’re focusing on the under-privileged, under-performing children. Where else would you put your dollars but there?”

Here’s the bizarre world in which we live: In 2007 Gabriel Evans attended a public school in New Orleans graded “F” by the Louisiana Department of Education. Thanks to a New Orleans voucher program, Gabriel moved in 2008 to a Catholic school. His mother, Valerie Evans, calls the voucher a “lifesaver,” allowing him to get “out of a public school system that is filled with fear, confusion and violence.”

So what is the response of the teachers union? Sue the state to force 11-year-old Gabriel back to the failing school.

This week a state court in Baton Rouge is hearing the union challenge to Louisiana’s Act 2, which expanded the New Orleans program statewide and allows families with a household income less than 250% of the federal poverty line to get a voucher to escape schools ranked C or worse by the state. Gabriel’s voucher covers $4,315 in annual tuition.

The tragedy is how many students qualify for the program. According to the state, 953 of the state’s 1,373 public schools (K-12) were ranked C, D or F. Under the new program, more than 4,900 students have received scholarships allowing them to attend non-public schools.

Enter the teachers unions, which sued this summer to stop the incursion into their rotting enterprise. According to the Louisiana Federation of Teachers and the Louisiana Association of Educators, the voucher program steals money from public schools.

But teachers who do their homework know that the state constitution has no prohibition on where money may be allocated, as long as it is going to educate Louisiana children. Louisiana school funding is determined by a designated Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, instead of directly by lawmakers. According to the state’s constitution, the Board must set a “minimum foundation” for funding and ensure that it is fairly distributed among school districts, locally known as parishes. In poorer neighborhoods, the state chips in to make up for any shortfall in local funding.

According to the Institute for Justice, which represents families using the program, the financial footprint of the scholarships so far has been small. Per pupil expenditures have not been affected in the public schools. And of some $3.6 billion in state funds spent by Louisiana to bolster its Minimum Foundation Program, only $22,054,733 is attributable to the new student scholarship program, around 0.6%.

The real squeeze isn’t to public education but to the publicly employed educators, whose union interests have long since taken primacy over providing kids with a decent education. The Louisiana unions know that putting their dismal classrooms into competition with private schools could eventually have students and parents trampling each other in a rush to the exits.

Louisiana’s story is the latest study in how far the education bureaucracy will go to protect its money and power and resist the competition that comes from school choice, even when it means forcing kids to return to schools that steal their futures. The scholarships are only available to students in failing schools. If teachers unions want to stop their students from leaving, they don’t need a lawsuit. They need to start serving 11-year-olds like Gabriel Evans instead of themselves.

The following are edited excerpts from telephone interviews and email exchanges with leading education analysts, writers and researchers regarding the policies and positions of the presidential candidates.

Michelle Rhee

Chief executive, StudentsFirst; former chancellor, District of Columbia Public Schools

Both support expanding educational options for families. President Obama did this, for example, by encouraging states to get rid of unnecessary caps on public charter schools through Race to the Top [grants]. At the same time, Gov. Romney supports dramatically expanding choices parents can make about where to send their kids to school. But he doesn’t tie that increased flexibility to strong rules ensuring any school — private or public — that takes the public funds will be held accountable for student learning.

Jonathan Kozol

Author whose books about education include “Death at an Early Age” (1967) and “Savage Inequalities” (1991). His new book is “Fire in the Ashes.”

As we saw in Wisconsin, there is a constituency out there that would like to do away with public-sector unions. The teachers are the loudest of those unions. Romney could not do away with teachers unions, but I think he will do his very best to move us in that direction.

President Obama simply wants to challenge the teachers unions to be more flexible in their demands but obviously recognizes they have a useful role in our society.

I regret the President’s apparent willingness to continue relying on standardized exams in evaluating teachers because I think it’s a simplistic way of judging what happens in the classroom and excludes so many aspects of a good education that are not reduceable to numbers.

The President recognizes that a demoralized teaching force is not going to bring passionate determination to the education of children — no matter how you measure them, castigate them or properly criticize them.

Jeanne Allen

President, Center for Education Reform, based in Washington, D.C.

A Romney administration would likely leave the regulating to the states, where it belongs. This becomes the huge distinction between the candidates—on charters, on teacher issues, on testing. Obama believes government should lead, and if the states aren’t doing something he’ll step in.

Romney’s impact would be felt much bigger and broader than the current administration’s impact. Today you can get more money by promising to behave. Romney’s approach would likely be very different: his incentives for choice…; his fight with labor; his attempt to reopen the higher education lending market.

Obama should be calling the unions to the carpet, and instead [Education Secretary Arne] Duncan is sending platitudes about getting along and collaborating. That’s because they promised the unions they would work with them and need the unions. Romney has no such allegiance.

Gary Orfield

Professor, UCLA Graduate School of Education; co-director, the Civil Rights Project at UCLA

The Obama administration should have fought harder to continue the economic stimulus in education for at least another year or two. Without it things in schools and colleges would have been far worse.

My reading is that Romney is profoundly skeptical about the value of federal funds and thinks they do no good.

A Romney administration would obviously bring deep cutbacks in virtually all areas of domestic spending.

The Chicago teachers strike is a reflection of the fact that teachers have been pushed too far for too long and are particularly incensed on the overly assertive (and intellectually indefensible) use of test scores to evaluate individual teachers. Romney’s very hostile reaction toward the teachers and the Obama Administration’s straddle show the difference.

Diane Ravitch

Education historian and blogger whose books include “Death and Life of the Great American School System” (2010).

Both support charters, which is privatization, and which do not get better test scores than public schools.

Both support test-based evaluation of teachers, which has never been shown to accomplish anything other than to demoralize teachers.

Both support carrots (merit pay) and sticks (closing schools like shoe stores that don’t make a profit). Merit pay has been tried again and again for nearly a century. It never works.

Both emphasize test scores as the measure of good education, which they are not.

Neither talks about the impact that poverty has on children’s readiness to learn.

Three big differences:

1. Romney supports vouchers; Obama does not.

2. Romney embraces privatization; Obama has offered only half-hearted support via privately managed charters.

3. Romney wants to give the student loans back to the banks and provide no help for college students drowning in debt. Obama took the program away from the banks and understands that students need financial aid. All the talk about boosting college-going rates is hollow, if students can’t pay for it.

A special commission appointed by Gov. Bill Haslam is about to begin drafting its final recommendations on how a Tennessee school-voucher program would operate, including who would be eligible for taxpayer dollars for private school tuition.

The voucher issue returns to the state legislature in January after a year’s hiatus. The state Senate narrowly approved a voucher bill in 2011, sponsored by Sen. Brian Kelsey, R-Germantown, that allowed students whose family incomes were low enough to qualify them for free or discounted school lunches to take half the taxpayer money spent per-pupil in their school district to pay private school tuition.

House leaders were more reluctant to open a political battle over vouchers and just before the 2012 session opened, Haslam asked lawmakers to stand down and let him appoint a task force to examine the issue and make recommendations this fall for the 2013 legislature to consider.

He said Tennessee needed time for the major changes in state education policy to get up and running before embarking on another. The earlier changes included the end of collective bargaining by teachers, major changes to teacher tenure and performance evaluations, and higher standards for a revised core curriculum for K-12, plus a shift from enrollment-based funding for higher education to performance-based funding.

The “Governor’s Task Force on Opportunity Scholarships” held its fourth meeting Wednesday and although differences among its members continue, its chairman, state Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman, made it clear that the panel’s charge from the governor is not to debate whether to have a voucher program but rather how a program should operate — its legal parameters — if lawmakers create one.

Key issues include when to launch a program; whether to put family-income limits on participation; whether to limit participation to students from low-performing public schools; the size of the “scholarships” — the amount of public money diverted to private schools per student; whether to start a program on a limited, experimental “pilot” basis in a few districts; whether to allow for-profit private schools to participate; and what kind of accountability measures should be put in place, if any, for the private schools accepting the public money.

In addition to limiting eligibility to low-income students, the bill senators approved in 2011 would have limited the program initially to Tennessee’s four largest counties, Shelby, Davidson, Knox and Hamilton, on a trial basis. School districts in those counties have formed a Coalition of Large School Systems, which has opposed vouchers because they divert public funding away from their districts and to private schools.

Advocates of vouchers say they promote school choice by allowing students from low- and moderate-income families to attend private schools that will accept them.

Despite the governor’s assignment for the task force, he said he’s still not sure if he will fully support a voucher plan. “A lot of it depends on what it looks like,” he said.

Joining the large school systems in opposing vouchers is the Tennessee Education Association. “They hurt public schools in a lot of ways,” said TEA lobbyist Jerry Winters. “They directly pull money from public education and send the dollars to private and parochial schools. They also have the great possibility of cherry-picking students and pulling away parental support for the schools left behind.

The nine-member task force includes state education officials, legislators, education policy experts and a representative of the Coalition of Large School Systems. It will meet again in October to draft its final recommendations.