OPINION: Follow the money for details on Idaho’s school voucher plan

The standard Idaho political rhetoric speaks of “school choice” — which sounds wonderful, doesn’t it? — and in his State of the State speech, Idaho Gov. Brad Little added to that with the descriptor “education freedom.”

The suggestion underlying that language is that public education is somehow oppressing Idahoans, that what’s being pursued here is the ability to pursue nonpublic school options for education. That construct is a crock.

Idahoans, like people in other states, have and always have had the ability to educate children in private schools or at home. The choice is and has been theirs. That’s unchanged. And no one is talking about changing it.

So what is “school choice/education freedom” about?

It’s about the money. Watch the money, in the session ahead, as legislators prepare to shift a large chunk of it — the debate likely will center on how much and when, more than if it happens — away from public schools to, well, somewhere else.

After all, roughly half of the general fund budget in Idaho (and across most states, this is more or less true) goes to education, and that’s not all the money schools get. This is a large pile of money, and some people out there salivate at the thought of taking a personal or corporate bite out of it. It’s not that there’s no concern about actual, you know, learning among these people; some no doubt are committed to doing something better.

But a moment’s reflection should tell you it’s not that simple. Remember the old saying, that if someone tells you it’s about the principle of the thing, it’s probably about the money.

In his State of the State address, Little — who may recognize the school voucher train coming hard at him from the Legislature, which rejected past voucher plans but likely won’t this session — proposed spending $50 million “to further expand education options.” He said he will “ensure there is oversight” and “prioritize first and foremost our public schools.” (Don’t be fooled: Money used for vouchers or related programs is money that isn’t being spent on public schools.)

Or at least that’s the governor’s opening move. One floor above in the Statehouse, a crop of voucher-adjacent measures is arising, with many possible price tags. One of them, backed by two legislators in top leadership positions, would offer $5,000 tax credits for students who attend school other than the public kind. Spending on this is said to be limited to $50 million.

Last month, one of the co-sponsors of that measure, Rep. Wendy Horman, R-Idaho Falls, faced off at an event sponsored by the Idaho Falls City Club against Rod Gramer, former president of Idaho Business for Education, which has opposed vouchers. Gramer pointed out that once voucher payments in other states have begun, they have sometimes exploded, as in Arizona and Indiana. He said, “Out-of-state billionaires and their front organizations never stop pushing vouchers until they have universal vouchers with no income limit and no accountability.”

Horman said that the Legislature would have to approve any future increases. That would be true, but it was true in Arizona and Indiana, too.

Something in this area, or maybe more than one option, feels like a slam dunk to emerge from the Legislature, a probability signified by a big, pro-voucher event held just hours before the launching of this year’s session, by the Mountain States Policy Center.

There are complexities, of course. Much of the national discussion about vouchers (President-elect Donald Trump last year proposed a federal voucher program) has centered on schooling options for lower-income or special needs students. The Idaho options seem not to focus on those areas. And there’s the geographic difficulty: Many Idaho students live far from the nearest private school option, or maybe near only one that might not be a good choice.

Follow the money.

Stapilus is a former Idaho newspaper reporter and editor who blogs at ridenbaugh.com. He may be contacted at stapilus@ridenbaugh.com.