For those who have not been following this lawsuit, the federal government is claiming students in Louisiana are being racially segregated because of the state’s voucher system. What appears to be happening in the lead-up to the actual hearing (later this month) is a lot of political maneuvering to shape the conversation. In addition to a debate over whether or not segregation is occurring, both camps are using the attention to debate whether or not voucher systems (and private schools, generally) are beneficial. It is out of the scope of this post to discuss the merits of private education and vouchers.
However, I think a conversation about school choice, and the potential segregation that occurs as a result, is worth bringing up. As with many perceived problems in education research the answers depend on who you ask, what the specific question you ask is, and where you look for answers. The case for integration is no different.
Syracuse’s own MPA professor Bifulco finds integration to be endemic to voucher programs in North Carolina. Many people, and the Department of Justice, are claiming the same effects are happening in Louisiana. Is this a horrifying problem that must be addressed and changed immediately? I am not so sure, and here is why.
Children and parents are voluntarily choosing the schools to attend. This is not just a case of white parents taking their kids out of schools because they don’t like the racial composition (a problem many believe to be larger than it is). The families who are using the vouchers, those exercising choice, are predominantly minorities. In many places where voucher programs are set up, those eligible to use them are students from poor families and students attending failing schools; this means the students are heavily skewed toward non-white. Indeed, those who are “suffering” from segregation are minorities voluntarily segregating themselves. I’m not saying this cannot still be considered a problem, or that measures should not be taken to rectify the situation. I’m merely pointing out that the issue is probably not as sinister as the DOJ may have us believe.
Moreover, this lawsuit appears politically motivated. No schools are the same. Never, in the history of public education, have schools been the same. The control of schools at the local level has always resulted in providing unequal education to students. It is no secret that rich towns have better schools than inner cities. And these “rich” schools rarely have the same racial composition as “poor” schools. It is not a school, district, or state policy to racially segregate students, but it happens. Why isn’t the DOJ and the Obama Administration going after the hundreds of neighboring cities with racial and economic disparities for lack of integration? Probably because the schools aren’t part of a ‘school choice’ system. This difference in income and racial composition between schools is only more extreme when comparing public vs. private schools. Fairlie finds racial sorting to be very high in this case. Why isn’t the DOJ calling for an end to private schooling? Probably because they know the American public would not allow such a removal of freedom of choice.
In my opinion, Democrats generally protest school choice for a whole host of valid, political reasons (as numerous as the valid reasons for supporting school choice). But in this case and many others, using loaded words and ideas like segregation and racism are tactics which are used to mislead the public. If they really cared about the racial composition of schools, they would have MUCH bigger fish to fry than vouchers. It just so happens that their current ‘fish’ pisses off a lot of their core voters, teachers.