Tim Kearns’ column on school vouchers on Thursday was so ridden with errors that it is difficult to know where to begin my critique. Nevertheless, I will try.

The author begins by purporting to support school vouchers, but then spends the rest of his column deriding them. First, he mentions that public schools “ought to be designed to educate, not to drive their competitors into the ground.” But driving their competitors into the ground is exactly what public schools serve to do.

That is exactly why private schools have not been able to thrive in this nation as much as they do in other industrialized nations such as Canada, Britain and Germany, all of which have extensive traditions of providing public money for religious schools. Had vouchers first been introduced years ago in this country, alternative private schools most likely would already have sprung up, even in the rural areas that the author describes.

Kearns also misses the mark when he states that conservatives would like to see public education “to go the way of the liberal Democrat.” I can only speak for myself when I say that I, as a conservative, support free and effective public education for all students, but that education should be entirely the purview of the states. Any federal interference tends to be counterproductive, leading to excessive mandates, paperwork and costs.

All of the voucher programs currently in place have been created by state and local governments, and that is as it should remain.

Chris Swenson

Alumnus

Washington, D.C.