(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)



(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)



![]()
(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)
In a bipartisan appeal, Senators Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins wrote a letter to Secretary Duncan asking him to reverse the Departments decision to rescind Opportunity Scholarships to 200 DC school children (HT Whitney Tilson).
The letter reads:
Dear Secretary Duncan,
We are following up on our letter dated March 17, 2009, asking that you refrain from making any administrative rules or policies that would disrupt the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP) or prevent the grantee from accepting applications and students for the 2009-2010 school year. Prior to a response to our inquiry, we were disappointed to learn that you subsequently made the choice not to allow new students to enroll in the program.
By preventing new scholarships from being awarded, you are effectively ending a program before Congress has had the opportunity to consider reauthorizing it. Therefore, we respectfully request that you consider reversing your decision.
As we noted in our letter to you, the future of the OSP is presently under consideration by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. We will be holding hearings on the program in May, and Majority Leader Reid has promised floor time to consider a reauthorization proposal. We respectfully request that you refrain from implementing significant changes to the program until we have an opportunity to review the program’s results, hold public hearings, and have a thoughtful debate about the future of the program.
Your recent decision to suspend the program for new entrants will hurt families who are searching for other options for their children. We understand that many of these parents had been notified that they would, in fact, receive scholarships for their children. Now that the DC Public School’s out of boundary process has been completed and the majority of public charter school deadlines have passed for the 2009-2010 school year, the suspension decision will leave these families with little or no opportunity to explore viable alternatives.
We will continue to support the D.C. Public School System in its efforts to improve outcomes for all students. However, in the interim, we must continue to provide options such as the OSP and provide families real choices in ensuring access to a quality education for their children.
We thank you for your immediate attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Joseph I. Lieberman
Susan M. Collins

Despite Obama and Duncan’s best efforts to conceal their steps to kill the D.C. voucher program by acting on Friday afternoons, they have utterly failed at burying this story. The hits just keep on coming.
In the latest round we have Morton Kondrake picking up on the appeasement metaphor I used in my WSJ piece:
“In a demonstration of obeisance to union power, however, Congressional Democrats refused to re-fund a private school voucher program in the District of Columbia and the administration swallowed the decision. Obama and Duncan say they have hopes to “work with” the unions rather than openly confront them and capitulation on D.C. vouchers may have been a goodwill offering. Whether appeasement will buy cooperation remains to be seen.”
George Will seems to be channeling Juan Williams’ fury:
“As the president and his party’s legislators are forcing minority children back into public schools, the doors of which would never be darkened by the president’s or legislators’ children, remember this: We have seen a version of this shabby act before. One reason conservatism came to power in the 1980s was that in the 1970s liberals advertised their hypocrisy by supporting forced busing of other people’s children to schools the liberals’ children did not attend.
This issue will be back. In a few months, the appropriation bill for the District will come to the floor of the House of Representatives, at which point there will be a furious fight for the children’s interests. Then we will learn whether the president and his congressional allies are capable of embarrassment. On the evidence so far, they are not.”
Peter Roff writes in U.S. News and World Report:
“Former North Carolina Sen. and Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards liked to go around talking about the “two Americas.” Where education is concerned, he may have been on to something. There’s one America for the elites, like members of Congress and the President and Mrs. Obama, who send their children to private schools; and there’s one for everyone else, the regular people who, at least in the District of Columbia, are seeing the educational dreams they have for their children shattered on the altar of politics.”
And Adam Schaeffer over at Cato has given Arne Duncan an award. Unfortunately for Duncan it is the Chutzpah Award.
All of this is on top of the greatest hits collections, volume one and two, as well as a bunch of other hot singles from the Washington Post and others too numerous to mention in this 30 second commercial.
How can Obama, Duncan, Durbin, and the rest stop this pain? One easy solution is to do the right thing, follow the evidence, and renew D.C. vouchers.

Arne Duncan of Friday Night Massacres fame has an op-ed in the WSJ today.
I’m not sure how someone can take 707 words to say almost nothing of substance, but Duncan somehow manages to do it. What little he has to say seems to be this — If we improve the quality of data about low-performing public schools they will experience pressure to improve and will respond to that pressure:
“When stakeholders — from parents and business leaders to elected officials — understand that standards vary dramatically across states and many high-school graduates are unprepared for college or work, they will demand change.”
Didn’t Duncan get the cue card from his teacher union masters that it is now spelled “steakholders“?
But more to the point, does Duncan really think that the central impediment to school improvement is that we lack information about how bad things are? Really?
Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for improved data, but it seems to me that we already have plenty to understand the magnitude of the problem.
In addition, it’s not at all clear how Duncan will get us to that dreamy, far-off land “when stakeholders [sic]”, “when parents,” “when educators,” and “when community leaders” will do the various things he describes once they have improved data. Does he really think that dangling $5 billion in federal funds in front of the states will get the improved data he wants let alone all of the proper responses to the information (that all of these folks already possess)?
Lastly, Duncan has the gall to repeat: “We must close the achievement gap by pursuing what works best for kids, regardless of ideology.” Given how he willfully has ignored the D.C. voucher evidence as he moves to kill that program for ideological reasons, he isn’t exactly credible.

Someone should send Arne Duncan a get well card. A Friday afternoon passed without another sneaky political trick to kill the D.C. voucher program. Maybe he was sick and just couldn’t muster the energy.
Or maybe his conscience is getting to him and he could no longer betray his commitment to “do what works for kids” regardless of predisposition or ideology. Maybe he was sick before and is now getting better.
Whatever the case may be, let us wish for the physical and policy health of the Secretary so that he does what is right by D.C. vouchers with good body and spirit.

Arne Duncan explains to Science magazine why school choice is so important (if you are wealthy and white and can move into the suburbs with good public schools). If you are poor, Black, and live in D.C. you should wait until we get around to improving the public schools. It should be any day now.
Anthony Williams and Kevin Chavous explain in the Washington Post why “We want freedom by any means necessary.” Man, the Washington Post has been solid in support of D.C. vouchers.
Mary Katharine Ham has a piece on the Weekly Standard web site that explains why “it’s clear that, when given a choice, Democrats are more petrified of unions than they are interested in doing something that works for some of the most underserved kids in the District.”
And my colleague Bob Maranto has a piece in Front Page Magazine that explains: “By voting to kill the DC OSP, the Democrats in Congress have placed themselves in opposition to the educational needs of low-income, minority, inner-city children. If they ignore, deny, or minimize the importance of this rigorous evaluation of the program’s effectiveness, they also would be pitting themselves against President Obama, who has repeatedly called for respecting the role of science and data rather than money and lobbyists in making public policy, including education policy.”
(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)
Old Illinois hands Durbin, Duncan and Obama loom large in the battle over reauthorization of the DC Opportunity Scholarship program. Today, the Chicago Tribune weighs in an editorial named Do What’s Best for Kids:
Durbin told us he’s “not ruling out supporting this” voucher program. He’ll await further evidence at hearings to be chaired by Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.)
Sen. Durbin, Secretary Duncan, the evidence is piling up on your desks. The burden of proof is squarely on you to prove why, after so few years, we should stop—and stop evaluating—a program that is showing certifiable prospects of changing the futures of disadvantaged kids. You gentlemen know the embarrassing truth of what we’ve said previously: Opponents of school vouchers don’t want to snuff the life out of this program because they think it’s failing, but because they fear it’s working.
This is an excellent opportunity for both of you to acknowledge that you’ve been too hasty—and that if vouchers do work, the Obama administration will want to expand them, not quash them. As the now-president put it, we need to do what’s best for kids.