I read and link to Kevin Carey a lot because he’s more often than not correct, and he’s also got a knack for explaining things in enlightening ways. For instance, check out this example where he compares accreditation taking it easy on Southeastern U to the FDA loosening toxicity tolerances for pregnant women.
So I find it strange when he writes bizarre things like this. After characterizing conservatives as wanting to kill poor people and start an empire (note to self – make sure to move out of the DC policy world before I succumb to the apparently irresistible urge to cast those I disagree with as evil), he scolds the Heritage Foundation for supporting DC vouchers on various grounds.
To take but one of the strange claims – there are a few to choose from – that a voucher program needs to account for all school funding to have any effect:
All the money needs to go toward vouchers, so public schools have no choice but to compete, and private firms have sufficient incentive to enter the market.This is simply not the case. To begin with, all the other voucher programs don’t account for all school funding. And partial voucher systems can have good or bad consequences – check out this paper that I’ve been sparring with Cato about.
PS, I’ve been meaning to respond to Andrew for a while now, but without my glasses, I can’t find the keyboard :) I’ll get around to it eventually.