Free the Children, Cut the Budget
States have no business running schools.
Pundits like David Brooks of the New York Times lament that the deficit-cutting mood supposedly sweeping the United States is myopically targeting education in favor of more powerful constituencies. “If you look across the country, you see education financing getting sliced — often in the most thoughtless and destructive ways,” Brooks writes. “The future has no union.” In Washington, he adds, early-childhood programs might be slashed, and
Many governors of both parties are diverting money from schools in thoughtless and self-destructive ways. Hawaii decided to cut the number of days in the school year. Of all the ways to cut education, why on earth would you reduce student time in the classroom?
Texas is taking the meat cleaver approach. School financing will be cut by at least 13.5 percent, around $3.5 billion. About 85,000 new students arrive in Texas every year. There will be no additional resources to accommodate them.
To Brooks’s relief, the Obama administration has at least one voice of sanity:
Education Secretary Arne Duncan gave a superb speech in November called the New Normal. He observed that this era of austerity should be an occasion to increase productivity and cut the things that are ineffective.
As though a bureaucrat’s bromides about increasing productivity and reducing ineffectiveness stands a chance of righting what’s wrong with education. We’ve had quite a lot of that over the years, with little to show for it. Education budgets went up; the quality of education did not.
Bureaucracy
There’s a reason for that: bureaucracy. That’s the antonym of “competitive entrepreneurial undertaking.” If we’re truly in a budget-cutting mood and wish to breathe life into education at the same time, we should de-bureaucratize schools by putting them entirely into the entrepreneurial arena: the marketplace.
I do not mean vouchers or charter schools. At best they operate according to a constricted model of competition tended by education bureaucrats and legislative bodies. The central flaw in these “reforms” is taxpayer financing. As long as the money comes through government, demands will be made for schools to be accountable to government rather than parents and students, setting limits to competition. Tax financing also reduces individual responsibility, while limiting — because of the double payment — most people’s ability to break out of the system altogether.
Moreover, financing learning through the compulsion of taxation is perverse. Education should be a consensual relationship among parents, children, and (when necessary) formal teachers. I’m fond of Isabel Paterson’s questions to teachers in her book The God of the Machine: “Do you think nobody would willingly entrust his children to you or pay you for teaching them? Why do you have to extort your fees and collect your pupils by compulsion?”
What’s Really Radical?
No school taxes and no compulsory attendance. Sounds radical, but what’s really radical is the State’s asserting the power of parens patriae over children and forcing everyone to pay for the outrage. As education historian E. G. West noted, it did not take laws to achieve virtually universal education in the nineteenth century (among the free population). But it did take laws to give us schools that function like indoctrination centers, preaching the glory of government while preparing children to be quiescent taxpaying citizens who will take their place in industry, the bureaucracy, or the military. Today the goal is to train the personnel necessary to assure America’s status as the undisputed leader of the global economy, as though the world marketplace were a race among nations.
My references to competition, entrepreneurship, and markets do not imply that education should be provided by for-profit firms only or even predominantly. A freed education market would include nonprofits, co-ops, extended homeschooling, and things no one has thought of yet. The key is to liberate all participants from the heavy hand of bureaucracy. No authority should interpose itself between aspiring providers competing with one another and consumers of education services. Only then will the “discovery procedure” that F. A. Hayek identified with competition be fully ignited.
What about the Poor?
That’s the inevitable question. The irony is that poor children in this society have been treated disgracefully by government school authorities. It is sheer chutzpah for advocates of “public education” to say they worry about the poor after having inflicted and/or tolerated such abuse for so long.
The poor would stand a much better chance in a freed education environment. If some of the most destitute places on earth manage to have private for-profit schools for poor children, then so can the United States, especially if the shackles were removed. Of course, there would be far fewer poor people in a freed society.
Will School be separated from State any time soon? Unlikely. The public-school industry, including the unions and all the vendors selling things to school districts, is big, rich, and powerful. The education-industrial complex surely rivals the military-industrial complex in its capacity to consume tax revenues.
But if for no other reason, the dismal fiscal condition of the states makes this a good time to talk about separation. It certainly won’t happen if nobody ever mentions it.
How would we go about it? I’ve long thought the best way would be simply to turn each school over to the people who work in it. Let them run the schools and compete independently of government without tax revenues. An alternative would be to turn the schools over to the parents if they want them. Just get them away from the bureaucracy.
Brooks is right. Education is important – far too important to leave to politicians and bureaucrats.
Comment by Libertarian jerry on 4 March 2011:
Good article Sheldon. But what I would like to see done,but probably never will is the following. The 10th Plank to the Communist Manifesto calls for Public Education. We now have this throughout our nation today. On the Federal level I would like to see a Constitutional Amendment that separates education from the state. This amendment to the Constitution would be similar to the current 1st Amendment that disallows the establishment of a State religion. Once this amendment is enacted,within 3 years,all Public schools,Community colleges,State Universities and any other government funded educational entities would be forced to close their doors. Following this,all of these educational institutions would either be sold off or re-established as private entities. Coincidently,all school boards,State and Federal educational departments would be shut down. At the same time,taxes would be lowered across the board to reflect the cuts in educational budgets. One could only hope. O well,if only pigs could fly.
Comment by Matt Malesky on 4 March 2011:
+1 for Libertarian jerry’s comment and I would like to propose another amendment be added that seperates money & banking from the state.
Comment by Sheldon Richman on 4 March 2011:
What makes you think those amendments will be interpreted your way? Have the others?
Comment by FC Bock on 4 March 2011:
I agree with Sheldon’s comment regarding interpretation. Does the constitution currently even allow federal government involvement in education? I don’t recall to whom it’s attributed but have always liked, “It (the constitution) has either given us the government we got or has been unable to prevent it.”
Comment by FC Bock on 4 March 2011:
I agree with Sheldon’s comment. Does the constitution currently even allow federal government involvement in education? I don’t recall to whom it’s attributed but have always liked, “It (the constitution) has either given us the government we got or has been unable to prevent it.”
Comment by DownsizeDC on 4 March 2011:
The Paterson quote is classic. Thanks!
Comment by Bullseye on 4 March 2011:
Super article, as always.
There is great cause for hope, guys. The Internet is undermining all information and knowledge monopolies like the relentless sea lapping at a castle’s foundation. Libraries, newspapers, magazines, TV news, colleges, and public schools are being unofficially replaced. UN-officially. Big ‘E’ Education will suffer the same fate as newspapers and libraries. They just haven’t gotten it yet. These antiquated bureaucratic Censors and Ministries of Propaganda cannot compete with the lightening fluidity and honorable candor of the Internet.
It’s inevitable, so stop despairing.
Why exactly do we need giant buildings with physical stacks of thinly sliced bleached trees that we have to visit physically, when I carry nearly the entire sum of all human knowledge in the iPhone on my hip, easily within reach, and flowing data to me at the speed of light on demand? The same question will be asked about the Education Camps. Where talking a difference in efficiency of several orders of magnitude. Mules versus supersonic jets.
Like I said, it’s inevitable.
Where do you go today when you want information or knowledge? The library? A university? Wolf Blitzer?
I doubt it.
Comment by crossofcrimson on 4 March 2011:
FC Bock,
The quote you’re referring to comes from Lysander Spooner in “No Treason No. 6: The Constitution of No Authority”…
“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”
Comment by crossofcrimson on 4 March 2011:
Sheldon,
Great article. You keep this Rothbardian on his toes. Your contributions are always a welcome sight. Keep it up!
Comment by Darris on 4 March 2011:
I read somewhere that 25% of high school biology teachers are creationist. Without some sort of regulation that keeps them from spewing anti-science, how would the free market take care of that problem from a libertarian point of view?
Comment by Dr. Steve on 4 March 2011:
Sheldon, well stated. When I pass the school complex near my home I wonder, “Why does that have to be government owned/managed?”
If the plug were pulled, someone would come in and buy or lease it and do a better job, although it is over built for private education efficiency.
Taxes would go down, except the pay off of past pension obligations, leaving the public utilizing education the funds to partake. The physical plants of schools would go on the tax role instead of being a drain, if not as a school, something else. Property taxes would be lower hopefully, used for true “public goods”.
As to the “poor”, some form of scholarship would emerge, but with strings attached. Employers would demand an educated, productive work force, and would take the necessary steps to assure it is available.
The one question I have for you is why nonprofits? Would we not be better off with either no business tax, or a flat tax for all entities? The definition of nonprofit if it is an entity that gets a pass from the government just recycles corruption and corporate cronyism. It puts for-profits at a disadvantage and then they start searching for charity scholarship and soon there is another “government” grant program.
Comment by Dr. Steve on 4 March 2011:
Darris, you choose your science, I’ll choose mine. Let the market choose which has value in the end. What is the “real” global warming science?
Seriously, the market will determine the utility of the education in terms of it’s productive value regarding work training. The enrichment value of education is up to the individual to determine it’s worth.
Comment by Joker on 4 March 2011:
Bullseye: They’ve already been hit, and hard. It’s evidenced by the fact that so many colleges are offering “online courses.” I, for example, enjoy studying foreign languages. The internet offers, essentially for free, thousands of places for me to learn any random language; between online newspapers, videos, music, video games, and now websites that give any where from extremely basic lessons for free to semi-advanced lessons for 1/10th the cost of going to a school.
And of course, if all else fails, there’s Wikipedia.
Darris: Easy. If you want to send your kid to a school that has Intelligent Design teachers, you do that. If not, you send your kid some where else. In fact, that already happens today; do you want your child to go to a private Protestant school or Catholic school? The small but still barely existing private school sector already has the options available.
My biggest hope being (and this is sort of related to what Darris’ problem may be), is that should schools become fully private, that parents can “vote with their cars” in that they can drive their child to whichever school they like, instead of being forced into all these “districts,” where they have almost no power over where their kid goes and what he/she learns.
Comment by Bullseye on 4 March 2011:
Joker:
“so many colleges are offering “online courses.””
Right. Some degrees are nearly entirely offered online.
I would caution that even the word “course” will be questioned in the market. So will the word “degree”. Why, especially, should the acquisition of knowledge have contrived segmentation and compartmentalization, fixed curricula, with start/end dates, packaged information, and egotistical task masters, even if it’s online?
The “course” available on the Internet has no such definition and hence, limitations or boundaries. These boundaries are all the contrivance of schools, teachers, bureaucrats, buildings, and books. Those physical bottlenecks are already gone. The dinosaurs just haven’t gotten the memo.
Further, “courses” are a “push”. The acquisition of knowledge and information on the Internet is a “pull”. YOU, not a wizened, omniscient, know-it-all (Censor? Propagandist?) decide what you need to know. Then you go get it. For this reason, it’s no longer possible to suppress the good ideas and those that used to make a living censoring and propagandizing are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Knowledge is an economic good and the Internet lubricates its market.
Thanks to the Internet, economics grows less dismal every day.
Be happy.
Comment by Dennis on 4 March 2011:
Mr. Richman, this is one of your best editorials. Of course, I say this because it states my belief. In regards to your statement about the poor, why should the poor be compelled (with their taxes) to subsidize the education of attorneys, physicians, and engineers? Public subsidies hurt the poor.
Another issue in education is Sallie Mae which has led to major increases in the cost of a college education.
Again, thank you for this excellent piece.
Comment by Darris on 5 March 2011:
The only problem I have is that the children will be subject to the idiocies of the parents. I’m glad I went through a school that taught me empirical inquiry instead of belief through faith. I wouldn’t be a borderline libertarian if I wasn’t told to question things. I might never have learned that from a private school if my mom wanted to keep me a Christian.
Comment by Aron Martens on 5 March 2011:
Children are inevitably subject to the idiocies of their parents on many dimensions. The Nirvana Fallacy cautions us not to claim a perfect system. Even if some parents are idiots, their numbers are small. I think the relevant issue is, would the private system, overall, be superior to the existing system? I have confidence that most children will ultimately reject the idiocies of their parents, particularly if they see around them, other children who are attending other private schools that offer better choices than the ones they are enrolled in. The current government run monopoly system is worse for our children whether the parents are idiots or geniuses.
Comment by Beth on 5 March 2011:
Darris,
I agree that it is troublesome to have children subjected to the “idoiocies” of faith. Where we differ is that that I do not care for the faith of some secular teachers in public schools. Yes, scientific or secular minded folks also have faith, it is just in different things and can be just as misleading and idiotic as some religious faith. One example is the secular and “scientific” teaching that boys and girls are the same. I was taught this throughout public school despite its complete lack of common sense and logic.
You should be more worried about government “faith” than the religious faiths of a few.
Comment by Pat on 6 March 2011:
Darris,
I don’t believ that a libertarian is necessaily anti-creationist.
With due respect,if you so insist, perhaps you are being a bit “religious” yourself.
Comment by Mary on 6 March 2011:
A full generation of completely homeschooled children is also having its effects on the government schools. These children know that the schools are unnecessary and, in most cases, these schools actively prevent learning from occurring.
Society is now seeing these children as adults and, for the most part, are impressed with the children’s competence, social skills, and ability to self-teach whatever they need next.
Comment by Paul x on 7 March 2011:
Only individual actions work. Pulling your kids out of these rotten schools is all that can be done. We will never see any agreements or legislative solutions such as turning schools over to parents. That will only become viable after most of the kids are already gone.
Comment by A Liberal in Lakeview on 7 March 2011:
Sheldon came tantalizingly close to one of the most insidious features of government schools when he stated that “[m]oreover, financing learning through the compulsion of taxation is perverse.”
Indeed, perverse. Now what stardard of ethics is set for students by the example of the teachers’ behavior? The government schools, as we all know, teach ethics expressly. (Recall the cult of diversity and tolerance, which is addled with double standards.) But what about the ethics of not threatening and coercing your neighbors to support the government’s schoools or the education of your own kids? This message has no hope getting evenhanded treatment by a government’s teachers and, worse still, the basic principles which entail condemnation of aggression and extortion will themselves get short shrift.
The example set by the teachers, however, can work its ill effects without so much as a word of rationalization in self defense by those teachers. The occasional student who recognizes the ethical double standards can be smeared as a troublemaker and subjected to harassment. By the time a kid has been through 12 or 13 yrs of government schooling, the long habit of not thinking the practice wrong gives government schooling the superficial appearance of being right. (Hat tip to Thomas Paine.) The situation is like a dream come true for collectivists whatever their stripe.
Worse still, for much of the day the children are trapped with their peers and their benighted teachers. So there’s an opportunity cost in terms of less exposure to adults who don’t share the communistic ethic.
The solution’s obvioius: No school taxes. No compulsory attendance. Terminate all the funding. No education communism.
As for the buildings themselves, let them be homesteaded. Unfortunately, I suspect that the overhead costs of operating them would be reason to reject them. Homeschooling doesn’t require this added overhead and it wouldn’t suprise me in the least to see lots of housewives setting up little homeschooling businesses in their homes in which they teach not only their own children but also those of likeminded neighbors.
As for the poor, those who clamor for them to be educated should, well, put up the capital and perform the labor voluntarily or just shut up. When they fail to do the former, we’ll have evidence that they never really cared so much about the poor as they suggested in the first place.
Comment by steven on 7 March 2011:
I agree, A Liberal In Lakeview. The moral lessons that most parents teach their children at a very young age, such as don’t take things that belong to other people unless you have their permission, start to be undermined as soon as these children enter public schools.
Comment by Peter on 7 March 2011:
Visit the website at Separate School and State. It covers everything and then some.
Comment by Beth on 8 March 2011:
Liberal in Lakeview,
You made some good points.
I am in college. We have some highschoolers attending in thier senior year and many newly graduated highschoolers continuing their education.
I see the double standard practiced by both the Instructors and Professors and mimicked by the students.
I had some ethics classes last semester and I made some very good public defenses of liberty in them to the class such as the immorality of pushing your views and using force upon innocent others. The Instructor claimed I was making Strawman arguments and the students frustratingly could or would not make the connection about the behemouth ethical double-standards they were supporting.
I have for years heard about how public schools and colleges were basically promoting their own pro-statist/government viewpoints to vulnerable young people as a matter of morality. I have now been able to witness it myself.
Comment by Gleason Greene on 15 April 2011:
It was a terrible mistake to have allowed the Public School system to start and I would like to think that the internet or the people will take control but I doubt it. The basic reason for starting public schools was to take control of people’s minds for the purpose of supporting a dictatorship, which, in essense now exists. I fear it may take real disaster to destroy this powerful dictatorial weapon, the educational complex; but, of course, there is hope.
Comment by Gleason Greene on 16 April 2011:
Not at all radical. As emphasized by a lecture at FEE a few years ago the introduction of Public Schools was the beginning of the destruction of our educational system. Once government takes over, as it certainly has, dictatorial powers increase, initiative and productivity decrease, and we all become true GI’s, government issue to be used as the dicator sees fit.
Comment by Rick on 17 April 2011:
Keep what is effective and cut what is not effective… sounds simple but the state still cannot decide what is effective! and never should. What is effective should be decided by individual parents.
Comment by smwnqswblmm on 7 February 2012:
VG1Z46 sqqxfwzkuymn, [url=http://zeogzskxqcxs.com/]zeogzskxqcxs[/url], [link=http://ejjfgnoyommo.com/]ejjfgnoyommo[/link], http://zienjiocfirj.com/