Charter Schools: A Democratic Move toward Liberty

New York Mayor De Blasio has been waging a war against charter schools – a reactionary attempt to protect the interests of teacher unions at the expense of poor and minority children. Happily De Blasio has already suffered a reversal of fortune at the hands of his own party and that reversal provides good news  about the structure of democratic politics and its capacity to sustain liberty enhancing reforms.

On Tuesday, the governor of New York State, Andrew Cuomo, also a Democrat, attended a rally of charter school supporters in Albany—an obvious riposte to De Blasio’s decisions to take money and property away from charter schools. Cuomo has ambitions to be President and it shows that even Democrats who count public unions as part of their coalition cannot ignore the crisis in public education and the need for reform.

Because the decline of public schools is rooted in no small part in centralized bureaucracy and in the power of teacher unions, solutions take the form of injecting more competition by such means as charter schools, vouchers and merit pay. These forms of competition are liberty enhancing and can help improve standards and increase innovation, particularly in big cities, where the jurisdictional competition afforded by different suburbs is absent.

One might think that teacher unions and bureaucrats as powerful interest groups could thwart these reforms, because they help only diffuse and relatively powerless groups like parents and students.  They could halt reforms at one point but not so much today, because education has seized public attention. In 1983 the National Commission on Education, a group of experts, published a report called, A Nation at Risk, detailing a decline in the performance of educational institutions.  More and more reports of America’s failings, particularly in comparison to other nations, got attention because American citizens largely share an interest in imparting high educational skills to their children. A better educated population is perceived as necessary to compete with other nations and to produce the goods and services that will sustain the economy and the future of entitlement programs.

Charter schools may be the preferred option of Democrats to address the public’s concern as they do not directly permit pay differentials—anathema to unions—or permit wholesale privatization of schools—an even greater threat to the ideological transmission of often left-wing ideas through public schools. As a result, it is not only Cuomo, but other Democrats from Arne Duncan, the Education Secretary, to Rahm Emmanuel, the Mayor of Chicago, who promote charter schools. This is a very happy development for children and for liberty. Charter schools, being independent of centralized control, can offer a variety of approaches that may be better at meeting the demands of a particular type of student. They are free to make experiments, without much regard to the mandates of bureaucratic uniformity. This kind of independence not only is likely to improve the performance of students in the charter school, but also increases competitive pressure on public schools.

The success of the charter school movement shows that democracy can create liberty enhancing reforms when a crisis becomes large enough. And it succeeded against many obstacles. Charter schools with their decentralized order sit uneasily with a hierarchical mindset. They create nonunion alternatives. Introducing charters is also in tension with the bias toward the status quo. Yet charter schools are multiplying and with them  more choice and freedom.

Reader Discussion

Law & Liberty welcomes civil and lively discussion of its articles. Abusive comments will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to delete comments - or ban users - without notification or explanation.

on March 06, 2014 at 12:37:19 pm

Perhaps we need to focus on charter schools as a substitute for vouchers. If the Supreme Court rules that the ACA cannot compel an employer to make statutorily-required payments for things that offend the employer’s beliefs, presumably taxpayers would (again) raise these objections regarding vouchers. Recall, the Supreme Court ruled that the ACA is just a big tax scheme.

read full comment
Image of nobody.really
on March 06, 2014 at 15:33:47 pm

Good points!
I guess my concern is that those opposed to charter Schools will find some way to block them by claiming that they will have an adverse impact on some protected group or that since many of the children attending may be from religious households that it is an improper support of religion - objections will be limited only by the constraints of their fevered imaginations.

take care

read full comment
Image of gabe
on March 12, 2014 at 10:32:27 am

It is no coincidence that all those opposed to charter schools do not have to send their kids to the horrible, horrible inner city schools; and this includes most notably the teachers in these inner city schools, the teacher's union leadership, and of course the politicians who oppose charter schools.
As for DeBlasio, his actions tell you EVERYTHING you need to know about him as a "human being." His rhetoric notwithstanding, his actions demonstrate his contempt, his hatred for the poor inner city blacks and hispanics that he is totally screwing over.
He has demonstrated that in his pursuit of power and wealth, he will use and sacrifice ANYBODY to achieve his greedy, contemptible goals.
SHAME, SHAME , SHAME on the voters of NYC for electing such a contemptible, reprehensible piece of rat excrement as their mayor!!!

read full comment
Image of John Tyler
John Tyler

Law & Liberty welcomes civil and lively discussion of its articles. Abusive comments will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to delete comments - or ban users - without notification or explanation.