Getty Images.
On November 5, voters in three states – Colorado, Kentucky and Nebraska – voted rejected state voucher programs for private schools.
Private school vouchers are a program where a family can use public dollars to spend on private school education. Arguments in favor of such a system have been made since the 1950s, when the famous libertarian economist Milton Friedman argued that allowing school vouchers would improve educational outcomes for children by increasing parental choice, promoting competition among schools, and reducing government inefficiency.
Friedman’s arguments came under fire in the following decades, not least in the classic on public policy Exit, vote and loyalty, in which German economist Albert Hirschman argues that Friedman overlooks an important mechanism available to parents in struggling schools: their ability to express their concerns through the democratic process.
Ohio policymakers have largely embraced private school vouchers. Last year the The Ohio General Assembly expanded voucher eligibility for private schools for all families in the state, regardless of income. According to reporting from the Ohio Newsroom, this has led to a fourfold increase in the use of private school vouchers, while private school enrollment has remained stable.
From FY 2023 to FY 2024, voucher use increased by 60,000 students, while private school enrollment increased by only 3,000 students. This means that 95% of new voucher use in 2024 came from students who were already enrolled in private schools or would have enrolled in private schools anyway.
This means that Ohio’s policy change to expand eligibility was largely a windfall for families already planning to send children to private schools. And because of the policy change that was implemented, this was likely a regressive windfall that mainly benefited affluent households. The most recent estimate of the size of total spending on private school vouchers in 2024 is approximately $970 million. For context, that is more than the state spent across the Department of Children and Youth (which administers state child welfare, child care, and early childhood education programs) and the Department of Natural Resources combined.
What do we get for these investments? Last year, when this expansion was being considered, my firm asked 23 Ohio economists what an expansion of Ohio’s school choice voucher program would mean for the state’s economy. They were lukewarm about the possible change. Only six thought the expansion would increase test scores, only three thought it would reduce poverty, while 11 believed it would lower the quality of public schools.
There are certainly arguments for limited use of school vouchers. I am mainly thinking of innovative educational models or schools that focus on technical education, schools with a connection to the workplace and vocational schools. Having innovative options for families who want niche offerings could help them learn and create new learning opportunities for students that didn’t exist before.
That said, it seems like Ohio’s school voucher experiment may have gone a bit far. Are we getting any value out of the hundreds of millions of dollars we pour into private schools with our taxes? If so, I’d like to see evidence of that. Because we certainly spend a lot more time on programs that cost much less.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
