By J. Manuel Urrutia
The column by Justin Levi (“Don’t be quick to dismiss school
vouchers,” Daily Bruin, Viewpoint, Oct. 4) was remarkable
for not being based on reality. Levi’s column consisted not
of facts but of nostrums passed around by conservative activists
about public education and their panacea of the moment: vouchers.
With the exception of a single sentence (“Proposition 38
would provide vouchers for all”), none of Levi’s creed
applies to Proposition 38, which was misleadingly named “The
National Average School Funding Guarantee and Parental Right to
Choose Quality Education Amendment” by its creator, Silicon
Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper. Like Levi, I am
“disturbed by the way the debate on this issue seems to be
unfolding.” His first misleading statement is when he implies
that Prop. 38 will provide vouchers “based on a percentage of
the average cost of educating a student, K-12, in a state-run
school.” Proposition 38 grants a $4,000
“scholarship,” with no provisions for this amount being
revised in the future to account for inflation. Levi’s next
mistake is his explanation of school financing. It is simply not
true in light of the actual text of the proposition. Specifically,
Section 8.3 of the proposition is very clear as to how school
districts will be funded by the state if Proposition 38 is adopted.
According to this section, the state is only obligated to provide
funds to a district so that its per-pupil expenditures are at least
equal to a “national average dollar per pupil funding.”
The catch is that all other funding sources of that district
(local, donations, federal, bond proceeds, etc.) must be counted
first. This formula says not one word about the mythical savings
Levi alludes to in his tirade. Does Levi seriously believe that the
funds the state currently provides will remain untouched by the
legislature, especially with Section 8.3 as part of
California’s Constitution? Such a funding formula mandates
that poor school districts spend no more money than this
“national average.” This ensures mediocrity and a
least-common-denominator education. This is a major crack in the
“school choice” egg. But that is not all. Proposition
38 is patently unfair to wealthy districts since they will be
denied any state money as their per-pupil spending is, by
definition, above the average. This is an invitation to protracted
litigation. Levi’s dissembling is most outrageous when he
examines “competition.” He claims that competition
produces results and then cites a flawed Harvard
“study.” Well, what Proposition 38 offers is, at best,
a rigged competition. Let me explain why. Under current state law,
private schools are almost free of any regulation: their curricula
does not have to follow the mandates of the State Board of
Education, their teachers do not have to be state certified, and
their facilities do not have to meet the same building codes as
public schools. This is because they serve a very specific and
demanding clientele. More importantly, they do not receive any
public funding. Proposition 38 will make it possible for these and
any new private schools to receive public money but with one
important difference: private schools are not obligated to meet any
and all the requirements that public schools have. In other words,
the competition that Levi advocates does not exist: private schools
are free to do anything they want with the taxpayers’ money,
not even provide an education. Is this what competition means to
Levi? Not when there are no oversights placed on voucher- accepting
schools. Levi makes other equally preposterous claims as well as
accusing assorted bugaboos of the conservative camp ““
teachers, politicians, liberals ““ of being responsible for
the current state of public education. Rebutting each and every one
of them would be simple, but it is not necessary. Instead, I urge
the UCLA community to do what an educated and involved citizenry
must always do: study the text of the proposition and form your own
opinion. It is available at
http://vote2000.ss.ca.gov/VoterGuide/text/text_proposed_law_38.htm.
Do not let misguided individuals like Levi sell you snake oil.
Public education, of which UCLA is a part, is the crown jewel of
our nation, emulated all over the world. It should not be
undermined for the ideological benefit of people who don’t
believe that our society has the right to offer a quality public
education to all its children. Please vote no on Proposition
38.