LETTER: SCHOOL CHOICE: WHAT IF THE AUTO INDUSTRY HAD BEEN GOVERNMENT-RUN

To the editor:

In order to understand the principle behind school choice, it would be helpful to remove the passion each side feels.

Let us assume that 90 years ago we decided that owners of cars had such an economic advantage that something had to be done to ensure everyone had a car. Since we could not expect everyone to recognize the importance of ownership, we agreed to pay taxes and mandate a car in every garage. Because few really understood the automobile, the government would manufacture them and give them to each of us. It would not be illegal to own a privately made auto, but it would not be free, and you could only drive in on private roads. What would the automotive industry be like today?

Certainly there would be no Ford, GM or Chrysler competing with a free product. The GAW (Government Auto Workers union) would be the most powerful force in elective politics. No one could have power steering until we all had that improvement. Any change would have to be supported by a tax increase and meet the approval of union officials.

In 1957 the Supreme Court may well have ruled that an equal number of black and white cars had to be produced. In 1963 religious statues would be banned along with all bumper stickers. Later we would provide free oil changes to low-income families. Senate Bill 380 would mandate that all cars be painted beige at a cost of millions. The automotive establishment would declare this to be a revolutionary improvement in the Model T.

With a free car in every garage, how much time would you spend selecting the color? How many magazines would be available to help you in your decision? With every change requiring a tax increase, what innovations would be available: automatic transmission, power steering, power brakes, seat belts, minivans, AM-FM radio? Would you spend the time sprucing up old Betsy is Betsy were free?

Thankfully we did not socialize the auto industry, and we enjoy the fruits of our freedom. To be sure, there are unscrupulous dealers and lemons out there, but the free market is quick to deal with them in a timely manner. There are government regulations to protect consumers, but our freedom to choose the best product to suit our individual needs has allowed the industry to flourish.

When educators meet to discuss how to get parents involved in their child's education, maybe they should look to the auto industry for guidance. When they try to increase our investment in education, maybe they would consider attracting private capital by offering a voucher for a portion of the tuition to a private school. They are limited when they look to funding of public education rather than public funding of education.

When parents scratch their heads in confusion over what the courts and legislatures are doing to your local school, ask yourself what your options are. Change takes too long for your child's welfare, and moving is not always an option. When those who can move choose that option, we end up with the worst schools in blighted neighborhoods. If you look to private-school options, you are left with only religious schools that are affordable. Middle-class private schools do not exist, because they cannot match the free price of public education.

The theories supporting school choice are tried and true. Application is a question that needs to be tested. That is why I applaud state Rep. Mary Kasten's support of House Bill 1037. This bill provides a three-year trial program for St. Louis, Kansas City and Cape Girardeau. Public school funding is totally protected while providing tuition for low-income students. Limited testing is a prudent step before mass production.

KEN SCHAEFER

Cape Girardeau