People Who Live In Glass Prep Schools...
By Rob Roper

School choice has been a hotter than expected topic in Vermont ever since the issue of school district consolidation seriously reared its head this year. The measure, which could potentially end Vermont's 140 year history in ninety-odd towns of allowing parents to use tax dollars to send their children to non-religious schools of their own choosing, has stirred up a hornets nest of pro-school-choice activity from families, communities and independent schools. 

These restless natives are of growing concern to many under the Golden Dome, particularly in the Democratic leadership, whose first loyalties go to the VT NEA - an organization rabidly opposed to school choice, particularly when that choice includes independent schools.

This sentiment was vividly on display in the House Ways & Means Committee when Rep. Alison Clarkson (D-Woodstock) was incredulous that some modest language intended to protect school choice had been added to the school district consolidation bill by the House Education Committee. Clarkson stated firmly that the current debate was an opportunity to "capture" - her word - children who currently have choice and "designate" them back into the union controlled public school system. 

Rep. Clarkson expressed worry that if parents in her own town of Woodstock were given a choice, they might actually choose the Upper Valley Waldorf School down the road in Quechee over the Woodstock public schools. Looking at UVWS's website and the environment they offer, it's easy to see how she might be right. But even so, how is this a bad thing for the kids, who would get to participate in a great program presumably chosen to fit their learning styles, or, for that matter, the taxpayers of Woodstock? 

The top tuition rate at the independent Waldorf school is $10,800 for 6th-8th grade (and this number is higher than the actual cost per student, as roughly 30 percent of students at UVWS receive financial aid). On the other hand, the cost to send a kid to the Woodstock public schools, according to testimony in House Ways & Means, is about $16,000. 

So, if the citizens of Woodstock had full school choice, those children who's education needs would be better served by an environment like the Upper Valley Waldorf School's would have a better opportunity to thrive, and at the same time the taxpayers of Woodstock could realize a savings of over 30 percent per student who chooses to go there. Yet this is exactly what Woodstock's representative in the House is aggressively pledging to kill. Go figure. 

Rep. Clarkson made her true objectives pretty clear: Union controlled schools are losing students at the rate of about 1 percent a year. In order to prop up the system and the union that almost exclusively endorses and donates to democratic candidates, the legislature's job should be to deliver to the unions by force the students they have failed to attract by voluntary choice.  If our public schools are as "wonderful" as we say they are, said Clarkson, the legislature should be "encouraging" (a serious euphemism for what she's proposing) Vermont families to use them.

As offensive as this attitude is on its own, it is made more so by the fact that Rep. Clarkson, who vehemently opposes school choice for all Vermonters of all income levels, did not choose Vermont's public schools for her own children. She chose to send her kids to private prep school in Connecticut. As a parent, she no doubt did what was best for her children. Sadly, the children of the parents whom she represents don't get equal consideration. 

As this debate continues, Vermonters have to ask themselves if the right to find and choose the best educational opportunity for our kids belongs only to the wealthy and powerful, like Rep. Alison Clarkson, or if it is something we have a moral obligation to offer all to all of Vermont's children. 

And if we can save money at the same time, so much the better.

Rob Roper is the Grass Roots Coordinator for Edwatch Vermont