Oklahoma Legislative Education Leaders Take Advantage of Free Boston Trip Sponsored by Jeb Bush Foundation

The picture from the Foundation for Excellence in Education (FEE) website above missed the text below:

On October 17-18, 2013, Governor Jeb Bush and the Foundation for Excellence in Education hosted the 2013 National Summit on Education Reform in Boston, MA. As the Foundation’s flagship initiative, the National Summit on Education Reform annually convenes the best and brightest from around the world to share strategies to improve the quality of education for all children, everywhere. This one-stop shop of policies and practices offers an opportunity for lawmakers, policymakers and advocates to learn the nuts and bolts of reform.

That many Oklahoma State Department of Education employees would be attending a Jeb Bush function isn't shocking.  The OSDE has made Jeb Bush's foundation their one stop shop for nearly every education 'reform' made in Oklahoma, though, like so many other Republicans, Bush is merely pushing the Obama Administration's vision for remaking public education in America.  This section of the website devoted to last year's 'summit' lists the sponsors of this wonderful event - a veritable who's who in the world that is now education corporate cronyism at its best; PEARSON, Microsoft, Exxon-Mobile and K12 (of course), as well as State Farm and Target among others.

When we found pictures of the event posted on OSDE Board Member Amy Ford's Facebook page recently, however, we thought the public at large might be interested.

This is our state Superintendent - one of Jeb Bush's Chiefs For Change - wining and dining with the sponsor.

Here we have Senator John Ford, Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, Representative Ann Coody, Chairman of the House Education Committee, our Superintendent, OSDE General Counsel Kim Richey and OSDE Board member, Amy Ford enjoying an evening visit to Fenway Park.

In this picture Stand For Children CEO Brian Hunt and Stand staffer Martin Ramirez frame Richey and Ford.

Senator Clark Jolley, Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and Ford enjoy the view from Fenway's upper deck.

This is most concerning for this reason.  This trip was made possible by 'scholarships' (yes, FEE refers to them as 'scholarships') from FEE.  The THREE PRIMARY SOURCES OF BLOCKED COMMON CORE BILLS were given all expense paid trips to Boston to hear 2 days worth of information about Common Core - among other education reforms being pushed into Oklahoma from outside her borders via the benefits of big money, private foundations.  Senator Jolley was there to speak on a panel discussing the A-F grading system.

Because I think Senator Ford is a kind, decent person, I contacted him for his comments about these photos and asked him about the trip.  He told me he went on a 'scholarship' because the state did not pay for such travel expenses anymore and it was important for him to attend certain conferences.

I told him this looked as though he was accepting favors - how odd for all the primary players to be 'scholarshipped' to such a meeting.  He told me his mind was made up about Common Core after visiting with some superintendents and this trip in no way influenced his thought process on the topic.  In fact, he told me that he could go to lunch with a lobbyist one day and vote against their bill the next.

This frustrates me for two reasons:

1. ROPE has assisted in now two separate Interim Studies on Common Core, the last in October of last year.  Senator Ford never took the FREE TRIP across the rotunda from the senate to sit in on a single one of these study days - nor did Representative Coody - nor did Senator Jolley - nor did Board Member Amy Ford.  Apparently we didn't have the funds to 'scholarship' these voices FOR the people of our state across the rotunda - or maybe our opinions don't COUNT because we don't have the BUSH name on our letterhead and multimillions in backing.
2. Stand for Children has pushed Common Core into Oklahoma through bright shiny mailers, using Kentucky's cherry-picked numbers with money supplied by Bill Gates.  ROPE doesn't have the kind of money Gates and Bush has to influence votes?  Is that why our bills are getting BLOCKED in the Senate?

Interestingly, within the last several days, Oklahomans have found that Senator Rob Johnson attended a seminar in Las Vegas sponsored by FairVote - a group that wants to establish the National Popular Vote.  Johnson went on to sponsor the bill that was passed out of the Senate. Representative Tom Newell and Senator John Sparks both attended seminars in Miami.  The article goes on to say,

Because the trips were not funded by lobbyists or the companies that employ them, there is no requirement that the lawmakers disclose the travel and lodging, said Lee Slater, Executive Director of the Oklahoma Ethics Commission. 

As a taxpayer I am outraged.  Why does the state even have lobbying rules if lobbyists can just decide they don't want to be called lobbyists and work their money magic via PHILANTHROPY?

We can only take Senator Ford at his word, not knowing what's in his heart, however, this entire trip looks very, very bad and it feels like us plain old regular taxpaying citizens got thrown under the bus yet again.


ADDENDUM: 3/2/14
Apparently, Jeb Bush's Foundation for Excellence in Education was named  in an IRS complaint filed by a progressive organization in New Mexico in October of last year.  Though many will chafe at the complaint source, the complaint itself appears to cover exactly the issues we have addressed here and those are certainly valid - no matter your side of the isle:

The unorthodox manner of these scholarships—and the fact that they are used as a vehicle to meet with for-profit education corporations—further raises suspicions around the Foundation's failure to properly disclose payment of travel expenses in 2010 and 2011. Additionally, it is possible these unreported payments to the government officials may be deemed to provide a private inurement in violation of IRS regulations.

--------------------------
Though the State Department of Education makes SNAIL MAIL the only way possible to get in touch with State Board members, I have linked each individual to their state page in the event you would like to contact them and ask these individuals why they could attend an out of state meeting paid for in full by the organization sponsoring the meeting, but couldn't walk for free across the rotunda or down the hall to any of the Interim Studies we worked so hard to present.

Educational Cronyism - in Oklahoma?

Who's Really Responsible for 
Oklahoma's Educational Policies 
- Dr. Barresi or the 
Foundation for Educational Excellence? 

Last month, an article was written in the Washington Post by Valerie Strauss entitled, E-mails link Bush foundation, corporations and education officials. 

An organization called In The Public Interest, submitted Freedom of Information requests for emails between State Superintendents who are members of the Chiefs for Change and Jeb Bush's Foundation for Educational Excellence (FEE) out of Florida - the organization which developed and FUNDS the Chiefs.  Yes, I'm certain this was an effort for a liberal paper to grind their ax on conservatives and free enterprise and yes, ROPE has very little in common with the liberal perspective.  It is important to note, however, that there is a difference between 'free enterprise' and 'cronyism'.  NO taxpaying citizen should sit still for government by cronyism. 

Why do we bring this information to you?  Our state superintendent, Janet Barresi, is a Chief for Change.  Consequently, her emails were part of the FOI request.  This article and the associated emails make a clear and resounding case that our State Department of Education is being run by method of 'educational cronyism'.

There are a number of very interesting emails - some of them described here by this blogger - but all of them show how the run-of-the-mill voter/taxpayer has been cut out of educational policy in Oklahoma.

Unfortunately, the Governor's office is implicit in the described situation.  Here is an email in which Dr. Barresi is communicating directly with Katie Altschuler (a policy analyst in the Governor's office whom I have seen attend state education board meetings) about the key priorities of the C4C (parallel to Dr. Barresi's C3 initiative) policy produced by the Chiefs.  This indicates with little doubt that the Governor's interest also lies in creating education policy outside her state. 

Not only that, but please note the category on the C4C chart labeled, "Human Capital".  What?  We're now a Communist country where we turn school children into a proletariat - workers that represent only the capital their work can provide the ruling class and bourgeoisie?  Does that language not trouble anyone?  Frankly, this does fit into the current educational meme - that of Common Standards and leveling the playing field for every child.

Here is another email where Dr. Barresi's Assistant Superintendent Kari White is asking the Foundation for assistance in writing their NCLB Waiver (which ROPE and MANY others asked Dr. Barresi and Governor Fallin not to take - knowing the federal strings it would attach to Oklahoma).  She also mentions the C4C initiative (C3).

I could go continue obviously, but I needn't.  It is clear.  Dr. Barresi and Governor Fallin are quite apparently ushering federal control into Oklahoma schools through an organization working arm and arm with the Obama administration in order to capitalize on the federal level education reform being pushed through to states with money from the Stimulus.  Go figure.  We're being told these reforms - completely untested and NEVER studied by Oklahoma legislators like Senator Clark Jolley (also associated with this organization as noted in the story) who placed them into state law in order to get Race To the Top (stimulus) money, are necessary for education accountability, yet can't accountability be met at the local level by boards of education?

If you ever believed our State Superintendent and Governor had the best interests of Oklahoma school children in mind, I do hope you will read the story in the Post, the associated emails and other links provided here.  No, we will never know the hearts and minds of these elected officials and as such, can not ascribe motive, however, there is a large body of evidence now available that provides great insight into the impetus of their behaviors.

I will remind our readers here that ROPE approached Dr. Barresi a number of times early on in her tenure - after endorsing her for her post - with research we had completed on the Common Core.  We were summarily dismissed.  Sad isn't it?  Legitimate researcher/parents/taxpayers given ZERO time by either the Governor's office or the State Superintendent's office, because these elected officials prefer to get their marching orders from Jeb Bush?

If this information upsets you, ROPE URGES you to contact your legislator, your STATE school board member and your LOCAL school board member.  Let them know you do not appreciate the educational cronyism inherent in our state's educational system.  Let them know that Republicans stand for local control of education - not educational takeover of schools by the federal government through regulations to which we sign on in order to use programs developed by organizations in which the parties involved have some form of personal interest.

It is VERY important to seek out your STATE BOARD MEMBER.  It is interesting to ROPE that early on in her tenure, Dr. Barresi had the State Board members sign a 'contract' stating that they would not go against 'her' education 'reform' measures.  Why is this?  Because we would lose the NCLB Waiver Chiefs for Change helped her write.  So what?  Because inside the Waiver is the A-F grading system - again, which the FEE helped her write - that calls on State Superintendents to take over 'underperforming' schools.  Take school management away from a district?  Yes.  This is an excellent way for organizations benefiting from Race to the Top school 'reform' (such as FEE, Pearson and Achieve) to sell the state programs developed outside of the state to use on local schools.  How is this LOCAL?  How can this be good for Oklahoma children? 

It isn't, but it's great for private industry and makes perfect sense actually.  The business model goes something like this:  Will promote the current Presidential administration's educational policy through a non-profit entity dedicated to assisting state school superintendents in writing parallel educational policy and training them how to convince lawmakers to write this policy into state law, all while investing money in private sector companies that develop programs to be sold to the states to meet the educational programming needs generated by implementing state education policy law.  Wow.  Way to work out a revenue stream!  Too bad the fallout for all this happens to be local school boards and children.

Ohhh, but wait!  An organization inside Oklahoma is suggesting Oklahoma do away with local school boards entirely in order to make this transition to national education policy more seamless!  The Oklahoma Academy - a conglomeration of local elites/dignitaries (including Brian Bush of OCPA, Amy Ford of the State School Board, State Representatives Leslie Osborn and Scott Martin and former Representative Chris Benge) and the hand-picked 'regular' Oklahoman, have determined to "Abolish or Consolidate Current County Structure by 2032" (page 6).  For anyone who understands Agenda 21 and the push to globalize education, this is not hard to believe, but certainly a frustrating situation for anyone who lives in the REDDEST STATE IN THE UNION.

Though we will always believe in local control of education, we might not have been so resistant to Dr. Barresi's plans for Oklahoma education if red flags hadn't gone up immediately due to the fact that the law instituting the Race to the Top reforms she is using (SB2033) - teacher/leader effectiveness, Common Core, data collection, turnaround schools - was put into place in Oklahoma (like in other states) long before any of the reforms had been written, tested or peer-reviewed.  How do you create educational policy for an entire state without results from other states that you can use to extrapolate onto yours?  It's hard to get behind initiatives that reduce children to guinea pigs.  

It seems commonsensical then to wonder what came first - the ideas of how to make money off education reform, or the education reforms themselves?  Unfortunately for Oklahoma, the reforms Dr. Barresi has been embracing through the Obama administration and the FEE are failing all across the nation.  You have but to search "what's wrong with the Common Core State Standards" to see how rife with problems this initiative has become, as more and more states find the expense doesn't warrant the mediocrity of the standards.  Then there's the turnaround of failing schools that didn't even work in Chicago - birth place of our nation's superintendent Arne Duncan. The state databases have found to be overreaching and interfering with family privacy in large ways and here in Oklahoma (as in other states) the A-F grading system has been found to be completely invalid.

Often, those of us who pay attention to politics and governance are frustrated by our inability to effect change in the system.  Now we know why.  He with the gold makes the rules.  The only thing that can stop this situation is to wake up other citizens to the fact that their liberties - THEIR CHOICES - are being threatened daily by those who have self-interest at heart.  Please, don't take us at our word - go to the links, study the documents for yourselves.  If you agree with our position, TELL EVERYONE YOU CAN about what is going on right here in Oklahoma.  Our children - OUR STATE AND INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY - is much too precious to waste!



QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION: 

• Why would Republicans sign on to a Democratic education program so readily?  Many states with Republican governors have been fighting the Obama Administrations health care and immigration policies.
• Why would Republicans commit to such a program without knowing the costs to their state for such a program?
• Why would Republicans sign on to a program that ratchets up the national debt by redistributing stimulus funds to states that sign on?
• Why would Oklahoma continue to implement these education reforms when the state was not granted a Race to the Top grant to do so?  That automatically placed the burden of cost on the backs of the Oklahoma taxpayer.
• Why lock Oklahomans into educational programming (the Common Core and associated PARCC tests) similar to Medicare that, once established, will be extremely hard to dismantle?  Once state and local taxpayers (through bond issues) have paid millions of dollars to set up these programs, they're not going to want to pay more just to undo it all.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Washington Post.  E-mails link Bush foundation, corporations and education officials - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/01/30/e-mails-link-bush-foundation-corporations-and-education-officials/

Chiefs for Change - http://chiefsforchange.org/

Foundation for Educational Excellence - http://excelined.org/

Oklahoma Education Truths.  Jeb, FEE, and the SDE:  Why Enanglements Matter (Part Two)  Oklahoma Education Truths - http://okeducationtruths.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/jeb-fee-and-the-sde-why-entanglements-matter-part-two/

DocumentCloud.org - http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/560792-fwd-working-document-for-esea-waiver-call.html

C3 Initiative - http://www.ok.gov/sde/about/janet-barresi

Common Core State Standards - http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards

AFT.  Common Core Standards Will Level the Playing Field - http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/at/page4commoncoreqa.cfm 

DocumentCloud.org - http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/560838-re-esea-flexibility.html

Restore Oklahoma Public Education.  ESEA Reauthorization:  Does It Even Matter? http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2012/01/esea-reauthorizationdoes-it-even-matter.html 

Oklahoma Education Truths. Jeb, FEE, and the SDE:  Why Enanglements Matter (Part One)  Oklahoma Education Truths - http://okeducationtruths.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/jeb-fee-and-the-sde-why-entanglements-matter-part-one

Restore Oklahoma Public Education.  Common Core State Standards and Race To The Top Flowchart.    http://www.scribd.com/doc/61537521/Common-Core-State-Standards-and-Race-To-The-Top-Flowchart

Restore Oklahoma Public Education. Common Core State Standards Presentation - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsNVv_iQDMM&feature=share&list=UUffrnW6WlGtduw0C7NXNWKg

OSDE.  Oklahoma State Board Members - http://ok.gov/sde/about/stateboard 

OSDE.  State Board Signs Resolution to Keep Education Reforms - http://www.scribd.com/doc/80408209/State-Board-Meeting-Passing-Resolution-To-Keep-Education-Reforms 

In The Public Interest.  NCLB Waiver Communications - http://www.inthepublicinterest.org/node/2745

Achieve.  Race to the Top - Low Performing Schools - http://www.achieve.org/files/RTTT-Low-PerformingSchools.pdf 

Foundation For Educational Excellence.  Foundation Center - http://foundationcenter.org/educationexcellence/kftf_schools.jhtml

Pearson.  Common Core Products - http://commoncore.pearsoned.com/

Achieve.  College and Career Ready Agenda -  http://achieve.org/college-and-career-ready-agenda

Oklahoma Academy - http://okacademy.org/ 

Oklahoma Academy - Abolish or Consolidate Current County Structure by 2032 - http://okacademy.org/PDFs/2012-IssueBriefs.pdf

Agenda 21 - Grinding Down America - http://www.amazon.com/Agenda-Grinding-America-Curtis-Bowers/dp/B003Z3CZGG 

UNESCO.  Education and Globalization.  http://www.iiep.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/apre98.pdf 

Restore Oklahoma Public Education. Education Accountabilty Must Originate Locally.  http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2012/05/education-accountability-must-originate.html 

SB2033.  http://www.scribd.com/doc/93232739/Sb2033-Engrossed-Version-of-School-Reform-Bill

The Columbian.  Common Core Standards Aren't Really Very Common - http://www.columbian.com/weblogs/bob-dean-says/2010/oct/19/common-core-standards-arent-really-very-common/ 

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.  Smart Brief.  http://www.smartbrief.com/news/ascd/storyDetails.jsp?issueid=5F7A6C67-6CC8-4036-97F1-A5EF6ED15D49&copyid=6B53DF3A-6E23-49B9-B580-2B77D61637E9&brief=ascd&sb_code=rss&&campaign=rss&i=5F7A6C67-6CC8-4036-97F1-A5EF6ED15D49

Restore Oklahoma Public Education.  Government Cheese. School Bonds to Pay for Common Core Expenses.   http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2013/01/government-cheese-school-bonds-to-pay.html 

EdWeek.  Spinning The Numbers on Turnaround Schools. http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/03/spinning_the_numbers_on_turnar.html?qs=chicago+schools+turnaround 

Restore Oklahoma Public Education.  How Much Data Is Enough Data.  http://www.scribd.com/doc/110458572/How-Much-Data-is-Enough-Data-What-happens-to-privacy-when-bureaucracies-exceed-their-scope 

Restore Oklahoma Public Education.  Oklahoma's A-F Grading System Gets an F.  http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2013/01/oklahomas-f-grading-system-gets-f.htm

The Complicit Accomplices of Education Reform

This post comes as a result of a posting to Jay P. Greene's blog for an article titled, "Gates Foundation Follies Part 2" (I would've used the French, deux in homage to the comedies of Leslie Nielson!).

Though I agree with Greene 100% when it comes to his thoughts on Bill Gates, I am constantly irritated by the reach-back to educational choice in nearly every one of his blogs - as though CHOICE is the ONLY manner of saving public education at this time. My favorite - total dismantling of the Federal Department of Education - is never mentioned unless to discuss the folly of such an idea as impossible.

While reading the Gates blog, I was stunned to see another man retorting to several of Greene's comments. Though I'm afraid he was talking over my head, this blogger definitely made my ears perk up with his last post.

What is irresistible about that? “Out with the old, in with the new,” is not exactly the best maxim to live by.

Besides my point, and I’m sorry if it wasn’t clear, was that the social and governing ideologies are “management” or “business” ideologies and these infect all organizations in some ways. Thus the original idea of unionization is still valid and necessary, more than ever, as a protection against the manipulations of wealth and power.

You point out the dwindling, and as you’re on this blog I assume you approve of such, as if it is somehow going to lead to some kind of prosperous future that has been “held back” due to the evils of cooperation and the integrity and dignity of communities of workers.

The Broadsides are clear in their intent as pieces of agitprop to serve the masters of wealth–your masters I assume. They will step on you too in the end, I fear, and you will have been complicit in every action.

After reading this, I couldn't help but respond with the comments below:

Interestingly, while I feel I can 'sense', if you will, a spirit of egalitarianism in Mr. Storm's postings which makes my brain bleed, I do actually see with true clarity the brilliance in his last sentence.

"They will step on you too in the end, I fear, and you will have been complicit in every action."

School Choice is NOT the answer to our current "we have big schools, spend lots of money, build huge bureaucracies all while teaching kids virtually nothing" education crisis. School choice is a ruse. School choice is the avenue for more federalized control over education through vouchers and tax credits, both of which will eventually render inert the only REAL choices in education right now - home schooling and private schooling.

Yes, it is true and even Coulson at CATO is beginning to sound the alarm over vouchers. My inherent distrust of all things federal government (I'm a firm believer in Reagan's thoughts on the issue - "I'm from the federal government and I'm here to help you"...) make me keenly aware that ANY avenue utilized to propel school choice is ostensibly to find avenues for the tentacles of the federal government through it's entrenched programming - such as the American's with Disabilities Act - into the lives of families and children who simply want nothing more than to have an UNREGULATED 'choice'.

That this idea is embraced by 'Republicans' or Conservatives - or whatever they're termed (opposite liberals, progressives or Democrats) makes them in fact complicit as Storm suggests - at least in jumping the conservative principles of 'personal freedom' and 'free market' for the 'trendy', 'shiny' education 'reform' ideas covering the dark chocolaty center of statism.

As an example; Jeb Bush jumped headlong into the education crisis fray with his Foundation for Excellence in Education. Since he is a Republican and his dad and brother were Republican presidents of these United States he MUST know much more about education than any of us, so Republicans and conservative education policy wonks follow him into this foray head first.

The Chiefs for Change portion of this organization has published their manifesto of what they want seen in the re-authorization of the ESEA. Please note how it is nearly exclusively dictating MORE federal control. A Republican dictating MORE federal control? In a down economy? When government has spent itself into oblivion? Isn't this statist - which is NOT Republican? I'm confused.

Maybe we should also point out that Jeb's dad signed America up for the UNESCO World Declaration on Education for All, globalizing education in America - also very Republican.

To this we could add that his brother G.W., took Clinton's ESEA re-authorization, "Improving America's Schools Act", amped up the AYP nonsense and simply re-labeled it "No Child Left Behind" - now arguably one of the greatest failures in education 'reform'. From Democrat president to Republican president, education 'reform' became 'reform' in fact because the name was changed.

Additionally, the younger Bush's Foundation for Excellence is embracing wholeheartedly the idea of 21st Century Skills. If you go to the p21.org website (Partnership for 21st Century Skills) you can download a 'white paper' there that details their mission and framework for their program. In it, you will find that p21 principles rest solely on the backs of Dewey, Vygotsky and Piaget - 3 of the most openly Socialist/Marxist members of education 'reform' at the turn of the last century. VERY Republican, yet no conservative/Republican seems to be very offended by this fact and in fact, many openly welcome this in the name of 'education reform'.

The Foundation for Excellence also embraces nearly every portion of the Core Curriculum State Standards initiative (including the onerous and very 1984 idea of collecting lots and lots of data on school children all in the name of getting them to graduate high school) excepting that of school choice.

I fear that those on the 'right' of the spectrum are most DEFINITELY being led into the category of useful idiots by those on the 'left' of the political spectrum who have controlled educational framework, access and rhetoric since before even Dewey. It appears that we are falling blind to what has been growing slowly before our eyes for nearly a century and even those who wish to be labeled 'education reformers' are now nothing more than accomplices to its demise.

ADDED 9/23/23: Andre Coulson's article has been moved and I only found it on the way back, so I'm posting it in its entirety:

April 8, 2006

Why Federal School Vouchers Are a Bad Idea

by Andrew J. Coulson

Andrew Coulson is Director of the Center for Educational Freedom, and author of Market Education: The Unknown History.

President Bush wants to help kids in failing public schools. That's good. He wants to do it by giving them federal vouchers to attend private schools. That's bad.

The president is right to favor parental choice and competition between schools. Educational freedom has a long and illustrious history reaching all the way back to ancient Athens – and the Athenians gave us democracy (albeit in a crude form) and most of Western culture.

That's not too shabby when you consider that the legacy of ancient Sparta, pioneer of state-run schooling, is, uh... a name for high-school football teams.

But if you study the subsequent 25 centuries of education history, you are driven to an inescapable conclusion: government funding of private schools brings with it government control – and the higher the level of government involved, the more serious the problem.

The Netherlands is a case in point. Back in 1917, the Dutch were at each others' political throats over the content of their government schools. Different religious and cultural factions couldn't agree on the official curriculum (sound familiar?).

Rather than spilling blood, they came up with a kinder, gentler idea: they'd fund any sort of school for which there was a demonstrable public demand. Catholics could get Catholic schools, Calvinists, Calvinist schools, and so on. It worked like a charm. Far from Balkanizing the public, as modern school choice critics fear, educational freedom and diversity dissipated the conflict that government schooling had caused.

So far so good. But with government funding came government control. Today, the Dutch government defines teacher accreditation requirements, fixes salary scales, curtails the firing of teachers, sets the core curriculum, says how much will be spent, makes it illegal to charge tuition over the voucher amount, and prohibits profit-making in voucher schools. In other words, Dutch "independent" voucher schools have lost their independence.

Indeed, like Puritans fleeing England's established Church, I know of several Dutch teachers who came to America to escape the suffocating pall of government intervention in their country's voucher schools.

There are ways to mitigate this regulatory encroachment.

Acting at the state rather than the national level, for instance, can harness the "laboratory" of federalism. States that went too far in curtailing the autonomy of voucher schools would likely drive away parents and businesses, engendering an economic backlash that would discourage regulatory excesses. The lack of this mitigating factor at the national level is a key reason for opposing the president's federal voucher proposal.

An even better solution to the regulatory problem is to avoid using government money entirely. There are two driving forces behind the public's desire to regulate government-funded schools: opposition to paying for instruction that violates our convictions, and a desire for accountability. State education tax credits address both concerns more effectively than either vouchers or the existing government monopoly.

America is in a perpetual culture war over the public school curriculum. Think "intelligent design," school prayer, sex education, textbook selection, etc. The Dutch voucher program eliminated much – but not all – of that conflict. At present, there is discomfort in some quarters of the generally liberal population over certain very conservative Islamic voucher schools – especially in the wake of the religiously-motivated murder of film director Theo van Gogh. But if access to Islamic voucher schools is curtailed, law-abiding Dutch Muslims will suffer. It's a lose-lose situation that is inherent in the government funding of education.

Tax credits avoid this zero-sum game. A complete education tax credit program has two parts: a credit for parents to use against their own expenses, and a credit for individuals and businesses who donate to private Scholarship-Granting Organizations (SGOs). The first part helps middle-income families pay for their own children's schooling, and the second part ensures that low-income families also have the resources they need to participate in the education marketplace.

Under this system, no one is compelled to fund anything to which they might object. The personal credits involve people spending their own money on themselves, and the donation credits allow taxpayers to choose the SGO that receives their donations. No government money is used.

Taxpayer accountability is also far greater under tax credits than either vouchers or government schooling. If you don't like the way a particular SGO is allocating your money, you can redirect your donations elsewhere. Try doing that with your tax payments.

So while the president is right to favor greater choice for parents and greater autonomy for educators, there are better ways to achieve those goals than a dangerous expansion of federal intervention in our schools. Let's leave educational authority to the states and the people – to whom the Constitution and the Tenth Amendment rightfully reserve it.