In the video, Weingarten took aim at former White House Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, Manhattan Institute’s Christopher Rufo, and American Federation For Children Senior Fellow Corey DeAngelis for advocating for school choice measures.

“They have not one thing that they offer as a solution other than privatizing or voucherizing schools which is about undermining democracy and undermining civil discourse and undermining pluralism because 90% of our kids go to public schools still,” she said. “They just divide. Divide. Divide. Divide.” //

Proponents of school choice measures have rebuked Weingarten’s remarks, arguing offering more education options to families accomplishes the opposite of what the union leader claims.

“This country was founded on the principle of individual rights. There is nothing democratic about forcing kids to remain in failing schools,” Angela Morabito, a spokesperson for the Defense of Freedom Institute (DFI) and former press secretary for the U.S. Department of Education, told Crisis in the Classroom (CITC). “The right choice for our country’s future is to allow families to access the schools where their children learn best.”

“Randi’s utopia is to have every kid in America stuck in a classroom that prioritizes failing standards, identity politics, and frivolous days of the year over academic achievement,” Michele Exner, a senior advisor at Parents Defending Education (PDE) told CITC. “She was the champion of school closures and is one of the main reasons students are suffering from historic learning loss.”

Recent polling suggests support for school choice is on the rise.

Funding should follow the student, not the school. //

gibbie | December 20, 2023 at 12:27 pm
If there is such a thing as systemic racism, its best example is the teachers unions preventing economically disadvantaged black children from attending better schools. //

Milhouse in reply to ChrisPeters. | December 20, 2023 at 8:40 pm

An argument can be made for public schools, as an education can help one to provide for oneself and to, in turn, contribute to our society.

Eating can help one keep on breathing, which is necessary for the above to happen, and yet that is not an argument for public commissaries. Instead we have private supermarkets, and those who need help are given subsidies by the taxpayer so they can shop there. The same goes for shoe stores; shoes are a necessity, but we don’t use that as an argument for setting up public shoe dispensaries. We make people shop for shoes at private stores, and we help those who need it. I can’t see an argument for why education should not be the same. Make everyone shop for their children’s education at private schools, and give vouchers to those who need help affording it.