These points about public funding, or subsidizing, of private activities are germane to the same points I raised in the “Finn Offers Dead Mackerel” blog of Dec. 16. A further reference can be found at the Center on Education Policy website, “Lessons from other countries about private school aid.” The references at the back are extensive.
Many of the points raised in the opinion pieces on publicly-funded private school vouchers that apppeared recently in our online column are wide of the mark. From the perspective of promoting liberty, it is immaterial whether public funds in private schools raise children’s test scores, short-run or long-run, or whether the public schools improve or not, short-run or long-run. It’s not an efficiency argument.
The salient point is that public money in private schools, as in other private enterprises, turns them inevitably into public enterprises. All of the policy “opportunities” then follow.
If we had to have lower-quality outcomes, with freedom to choose methods, make adjustments, and live with our own mistakes, I’d choose those over a state regime that removed my freedom of choice, and I think many would agree.
That said, I am glad to report that in education, anyway, incentives have steered private providers toward excellence. That’s exactly what we want and expect.
If the consequences of personal health habits/conditions were reflected in private costs, people would “shape up” in that realm, too.
Unfortunately, wilfull behavior isn’t he same as freedom, and subsidizing it isn’t the same as being compassionate toward the sick. Jerry Lewis proves annually that Americans are very compassionate toward those with “no-fault” illnesses.
Seemingly unrelated (exercise?): I would like to here propose the formation of the JLF bocce team, an idea that I cooked up with Roy. This is the first step in a mega-plan to form a bocce LEAGUE to challenge other think tanks, or whomever. This is as close to a sedentary sport as one can get, so come one, come all!
