Sign Up For Our Newsletter

What's In a Name? (Robert Teegarden)

In a rather poignant moment in the movie, “Schindler’s List,” Isaac Stern, the captive Jewish comptroller of Oskar Schindler’s factory, shares a toast with Schindler in which he tries to explain that he knows what is his fate, he knows the inference in the language “final solution.”  Stern says to Schindler, “Do we have to invent a whole new language (just to explain what’s going on)?”  The presumed answer is “Yes.”  And just like “Schindler’s List,” we have to invent a whole new language in education.

The words used by the Arizona Education Association president John Wright in the recent letter posted on their website about the newly-enacted state budget have been co-opted to suggest something they really don’t mean, and not designed to intend by their origins.  And these are the people teaching in Arizona schools.

But first, what exactly is the Arizona Education Association? The title suggests a learning institution. It’s not. The use of the adjective "Arizona" suggests that all educators in the state, all professional pedagogues, are part of this association. They’re not. Maybe they’re all invited, but only some choose to participate.  Not so.  The picture on their website would suggest that kids are part of their association.  They’re not.  There’s an inference about students and how much they care.  But do they really?  Just who are they, then?  It’s the government teachers’ union.  Period.  What’s their job?  To get as much money and benefits for their members as possible.  Do they really represent their students?  To quote the famous Al Shanker, former head of the American Federation of Teachers, “When school children start paying union dues, that ‘s when I’ll start representing the interests of school children.”  Like Al Shanker, the association’s budget article doesn’t mention students once.  That’s very telling.

The association says that they oppose “this budget and takes offense that it was negotiated in secrecy, voted on in the middle of the night, and that educators were not consulted about, or alerted to, the inclusion of vouchers.”  I’m wondering if the business of the Legislature is any more secret than that of the teachers union?  A lot of votes happen in the middle of the night; it’s the nature of the business.  There were a lot of people in the seats observing the proceedings.  Where were they?  They say that “educators were not consulted.”  Actually, a lot of educators were consulted.  Maybe they just chose not to be involved.  The letter goes on to complain that “they were not alerted.”  The association has just as much access to government, in fact, probably more, than the average citizen.  But finally they get down to brass tacks.  What’s their big complaint?  This budget includes the introduction of the “v” word, vouchers.

Let’s see, vouchers… I wonder what the big fear is?  Early childhood vouchers are available for child care… I guess they’re okay.  There are Pell Grants and Stafford loans to go to college.  They’re vouchers.  And from where I sit, the greatest educational public policy program of the 20th century was not the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of the Johnson era.  It was the Montgomery G.I. Bill from 1944.  Guess what?  It was a voucher!  What did it do?  Well, G.I.s were given a chit, a voucher, and told “if you want to further yourself, go to the college program of your choice, give them this and you’re on your way.”  No fuss, no muss.  If you didn’t like the program, if it wasn’t up to your standards, if it didn’t fit, you moved.  The resources (like your book bag or pencil case) went with you.  So why do the K-12 government school people fear vouchers?  They have worked for millions in the past. They’re working for millions of kids all across the United States right now. What’s wrong with Arizona?

They talk about the “lost revenue (due to) the continued expansion of corporate tax credits for private schools.”  Clarification!  These are NOT tax credits for private schools.  These are tax credits for citizens, part of the public, to choose a school for their kids consistent with their values.  These are tax credits for students, not institutions.  “Lost revenue” presumes that this money out there (wherever "there" is) is already part of the state coffers; until it’s paid in taxes, it’s still private money. Who knows what other credits are out there that may yet negate those “lost revenues”?

The association summarizes by saying “Arizona could have made significant educational strides.” They’re finally RIGHT!  That’s exactly what happened.  Arizona did make significant educational strides this year.  It said, “Folks, you have a choice in education just like you have in groceries, health care, and recreation.” The government doesn’t tell us that we must shop at the Piggly Wiggly market, the government doesn’t force us to go to the government hospital (God forbid!), and we are not compelled to only go to Lake Powell for family outings.  We have some good old fashioned 1st Amendment freedoms to choose.

They moan that, “The tax cuts, along with the inclusion of tax credits, and vouchers jeopardize public education funding for the future and sabotage the potential to build a stronger Arizona.” But they forgot to mention that it brought about $260 million in new spending for schooling. Hmmm…

But then, finally, we get down to brass tacks.  “Tax credits and vouchers violate AEA’s core principles and values.”  But they still get it wrong. They go on to say, “Taxpayer dollars must not be used to subsidize private and religious schools.  There is a fine line between expanding school choice and advancing a deliberate attack on public school funding. “There are no government funds used to “subsidize” any private or religious schools. If it’s a tax credit, it’s NOT GOVERNMENT MONEY. It belongs to a private citizen at that time. But even with a (dare I say it) voucher, the government doesn’t subsidize, support or enfranchise.  Who gets the support?  Kids, parents, families.  They choose. They just didn’t choose you.

But not once did the Arizona Education Association talk about benefits to kids, to their students.  Not once did they talk about plans to use this extraordinary windfall of $260 million new dollars to help overcome the woeful results of government schooling in the state.  Not once did they talk about how to assist families in the education of their own children.  Then why are they associated?

After all, that’s what I thought education was all about…

Robert Teegarden is director of state projects for the Alliance for School Choice.