Education savings accounts, tax-credit scholarships, vouchers, charter schools, hybrid homeschooling, and microschools are transforming K-12 in profound ways. In our series of conversations, “Talking Choice,” Ashley Berner and I try to make sense of the shifting landscape. Berner directs Johns Hopkins University’s Institute for Education Policy and is the author of Educational Pluralism and Democracy. Whatever you think of educational choice, we seek to provide more concrete insight into what it means for students, families, and educators. Today, we discuss what a blue wave in next month’s midterm elections might mean for school choice programs.
—Rick
Rick: Ashley, Democrats look poised to do very well in next month’s elections. It’s not clear whether we’ll see a “blue wave” or something more modest, but the blue team is going to add a lot of new officeholders in Washington and the states. Given the progressivism of many of these candidates, what might this mean for educational choice?
For instance, the District of Columbia, home to what may be the nation’s most expansive choice system, is almost sure to elect Janeese Lewis George, a self-professed “democratic socialist.” In Los Angeles and Louisville, Ky., candidates endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America will be on the ballot. In Congress, Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hope to be joined by simpatico new Democratic senators from Michigan and Florida and a number of DSA-aligned representatives.
Over the past few months, progressive candidates have called for measures like Medicare for All, free child care, and universal rent control. At the same time, they’ve had a lot less to say about education. Despite that quietude, their harsh words for markets and support for government-provided services sure suggest they’ll be going after charter schools, voucher programs, and the like.
So, is that what we should expect? Well, maybe not. After all, these programs are broadly popular with voters, including plenty of Democrats. Low-income and minority parents trapped in lousy schools frequently describe choice programs as a lifeboat. In cities like L.A. and D.C., school choice has become a given for many families. Will we see an attempt to shutter school choice programs? Or are these programs entrenched enough that Democrats may hesitate to take them on?
Ashley: Good question! My bet is that the effects of a blue wave on choice would vary based on program scale and time. In other words, how many families does a particular choice program serve and how long has it been in place?
The District of Columbia has had school choice for over 30 years. Today, charter and district enrollments are almost 50-50. Those two factors would make it very difficult for a newly elected mayor to eliminate choice altogether. Even in deep blue cities like New York, charters have proved remarkably robust. Former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio faced massive resistance when he tried to cap the city’s charter schools in 2014, and he ultimately backed off. Mayor Zohran Mamdani hasn’t even tried—although he campaigned against charter expansion.
But the “scale and time” rule doesn’t hold in all cases. Think about Arizona, which has long-standing choice programs. The state has been deadlocked on means-testing and accountability standards for its universal education savings account program. If Democrats flip one of the legislative chambers, I’d expect not a rollback of the program but a move toward some academic guardrails.
More broadly, if DSA candidates do start going after choice programs, that opens an opportunity for centrist Democrats to ally with centrist Republicans and low-income parents who support school choice. There’s a precedent here: North Carolina—a purplish state—has seen movement toward greater charter funding, with some Democratic support.
What do you see, Rick? Are any states particularly at risk of rollbacks?
Rick: Your Mamdani example is telling. In Wisconsin and Arizona, where Democratic governors have inherited landmark choice programs, those programs have mostly continued to hum along. And Mamdani hasn’t really tried to take on charter schooling. Why is that? Well, debating school choice in the abstract is one thing. It’s something else to take choices away from thousands of families.
It’s noteworthy that school choice hasn’t been a prominent DSA target. Given that Democratic candidates are attacking “privatization” and calling for univeral, government-funded health care, you might expect it to be. Instead, it’s conspicuous by its absence. I suspect this is because choice is broadly popular with Democratic voters—and because of the potential PR headache presented by sign-waving low-income parents and by sympathetic kids pleading, “Please don’t kick me out of my school!”
That said, the easier path for choice-skeptical Dems is to cap, regulate, and quietly stifle choice programs. The Biden administration did a lot of this. The Biden team insisted they weren’t “anti”-charter school but only wanted to pursue reasonable guardrails. The practical result was new rules for federal charter funding that require new charters to get the blessing of local districts and make it tougher for them to open. Of course, it’s never wholly clear when new restrictions are a “stealth attack” or just a matter of “sensible governance.” The confusion lowers the political temperature. Much Democratic pushback will likely take this form. It won’t satisfy the anti-choice crusaders but would quietly curtail the scope and size of school choice programs.
Of course, this doesn’t tell us how new Democratic governors might approach the new federal scholarship tax credit, especially in states like Ohio or Georgia where they may wrench the governor’s mansion from a Republican predecessor. How do you see that shaking out?
Ashley: On the federal scholarship tax credit, my bet is that more Democratic governors will opt in, following the lead of Colorado Gov. Jared Polis and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul. Of course, much of that will depend on what the final rules say.
But the initial rules released by Treasury suggest that the potential benefits to public school students will be too large for Democratic governors to ignore. Deborah Gist, the former superintendent of the Tulsa, Okla., public schools, has designed a scholarship-granting organization that public school districts can use. Meanwhile, EducationSuperHighway has one for high-quality literacy tutoring and the Afterschool Alliance notes the tax credit’s potential to fund after-school and summer programming for public school students.
In Ohio and Georgia, where Republican Govs. Mike DeWine and Brian Kemp both opted in, a newly elected Democratic governor probably couldn’t opt out for 2027, since the program kicks off Jan. 1—before the gubernatorial term starts.
Buckle your seat belt, though: Opting in isn’t one and done; states have to opt in annually. That could make for some interesting political drama.
The opinions expressed in Rick Hess Straight Up are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.