By Jason J. McGuire
In a recent Times Union commentary titled “Federal vouchers will hurt New York’s public schools,” Christine Waters opposes New York’s participation in the new federal scholarship tax-credit program. She repeats many familiar talking points that surface whenever parents are offered greater educational choice. Yet beneath the rhetoric lies an uncomfortable reality: New York’s education establishment remains committed to preserving a government monopoly over education rather than empowering families to choose the learning environment that best serves their children.
Let’s begin with a basic principle. Children do not belong to school systems; they belong to families.
Parents are their children’s first and most important educators. When a school—whether public, private, charter, or home-based—fails to meet a child’s needs, parents should have the freedom to pursue alternatives. That is not an attack on public education. It recognizes that every child is unique and that one-size-fits-all solutions rarely serve everyone well.
Opponents call the federal program a scheme to “dismantle public education.” That claim ignores how the program works. The Educational Choice for Children Act creates a federal tax credit for donations to scholarship-granting organizations that help families afford educational expenses. It is not a state voucher program, nor does it require Albany to redirect existing public-school funding. Rather, it creates additional opportunities for students whose families might otherwise be trapped by geography or income.
Critics also argue that educational choice somehow undermines democracy. The opposite is true. A healthy democracy depends on informed, engaged citizens who exercise freedom and responsibility. We trust parents to make decisions about healthcare, housing, nutrition, and faith. Why should education be the lone exception, with government bureaucracies presumed to know better than mothers and fathers?
The commentary further invokes the ugly history of segregation-era schooling. America’s past racial injustices should never be forgotten. But today’s school-choice movement bears little resemblance to those historical abuses. In fact, educational choice has often been most strongly supported by minority families trapped in underperforming schools who seek better opportunities for their children. Equating modern parental choice with segregation is both historically misleading and dismissive of the many Black, Hispanic, immigrant, and low-income families who actively seek educational alternatives.
New York spends more per pupil than any other state, yet student outcomes often do not match that investment. Simply demanding more money for the existing system is not the same as demanding better results. Families understand this reality because they live it every day. When children struggle academically, face bullying, require specialized instruction, or seek an education aligned with their family’s values, parents deserve options—not lectures from political activists.
There is much emphasis on private schools’ ability to set their own admissions standards and missions. That is precisely why many parents choose them. Diversity in education means allowing different schools to serve different needs. Public schools, charter schools, religious schools, independent schools, and homeschooling families all contribute to a vibrant educational ecosystem. Educational freedom does not require eliminating public schools; it requires ending the assumption that public schools should be the only schools supported by public policy.
It is also worth noting that New York’s leaders have repeatedly acknowledged the value of educational alternatives. Charter schools, career and technical education programs, specialized academies, and dual-enrollment opportunities all reflect the same principle: different students flourish in different environments. The federal scholarship program simply extends that principle to more families.
New Yorkers should reject the false choice being presented. Supporting educational freedom does not mean opposing public schools. One can believe in strong public schools while also believing that parents deserve alternatives when those schools are not the right fit.
Gov. Kathy Hochul should move forward with participation in the federal scholarship program. Doing so would not weaken education in New York. It would strengthen families by trusting them with a responsibility they already have: deciding how best to educate their children.
Educational freedom is not a threat to New York’s future. It is an investment in that future.
Jason J. McGuire is Executive Director of New York Families Foundation.
Image Credit: Lightstock.com/784397 (Alejandro Díaz)