CALIFORNIA COMMENTARY : Power to the Parents! : The Choice initiative would provide equal access to good schools, public and private, for all children--rich or poor.

The Parental Choice in Education initiative is being circulated throughout the state for signatures to qualify it for November’s ballot. When it qualifies, Californians will have the opportunity to assume leadership on the critical issue of education reform.

The initiative aims to improve all schools, public and private. It does so by giving all parents a choice of schools for their children. Parents could choose any public school for their child and would receive full state funding (about $5,200 per child). Or they could choose a private school, in which casr they would receive about $2,600 from the state. The scholarship would be similar to the financial assistance provided by the GI Bill at the federal level or Cal Grants at the state level.

The initiative is not about public versus private, but about good versus bad. There are good public schools, but access to them is limited. This initiative would provide the public equal access to these and other good schools.

The initiative would achieve several goals that the education Establishment has long sought--parental involvement, school-based management, increased spending per child and smaller teacher-student ratios in the classroom. In addition, it would achieve several goals sought by parents, including accountability and a focus of attention on the classrooms.

The need for this initiative is obvious. For too long the public has waited for improvements in its education system; special committees, community groups and political task forces have made their respective proposals, but to no avail. Our schools are worse today than they were five or 10 years ago. No one denies this, not even the education Establishment.

In fact, because of the sad state of our schools, state Sen. Gary Hart and Assemblywoman Delaine Easton, chairs of their respective education committees, recently proposed the development of public “charter” schools (a key part of the parental choice initiative). Charter schools would be free of much of the public-school bureaucracy and allow teachers to concentrate on the classroom. Of course, the flaw in their proposal is that without some incentive for charter-school teachers, there is not much hope that their plan will succeed.

In addition to the state of our public schools, there is the practical issue of how to meet the needs of more than 2 million new students by the year 2000. Under the current system, only one thing can result from this: increased personal taxation.

If private schools are encouraged to assist in meeting this challenge, the need for increased taxes could be avoided. Conversely, if private schools are not encouraged to bear some of these children’s needs, the number of private schools may dwindle, dumping more students into our overloaded public schools, placing further stress on the system.

So why is the initiative controversial? Because it takes power and money from the few, the bureaucrats in Sacramento, and gives it to the many--parents and teachers. Instead of being forced to accept the proposals of faceless bureaucrats (or any special-interest group) in the future, parents would be able to choose a public or private school that serves their children’s needs best.

The public should know that the “educrats” have written numerous letters praising the excellent programs of our state’s many private schools. And public-school teachers have shown their high regard for the private schools, too, by sending their children to these schools. The percentage of public-school teachers who send their children to private schools is three times that of the public at large.

The parental choice initiative incorporates these fine schools into our educational funding and allows all parents to choose them. This breaks away from the current system in which, unless you are rich enough to pay twice for education--taxes and private school tuition--or move to a better neighborhood, you are trapped. Perhaps this is why the highest support for choice is among the poor and middle class.

Nearly 90% of California parents send their children to public schools; only 10% send their children to private schools. Isn’t this elitist? Why shouldn’t all parents be extended the same choice?

The educrats don’t want parents to have control. The fact that the initiative will result in education funding going toward a quality education, and for less money, escapes them. The children’s education is not their first concern, money and power are.

The controversy has not stayed in the education Establishment. Many business leaders and educators, those who know competition brings excellence, are not willing to publicly support the initiative, not because it lacks merit but because they fear that they will be picketed or otherwise intimidated by the powerful teachers’ union.

The educrats’ strategy to defeat the initiative is to keep it from getting on the ballot. They have, to their credit, made the best use of their access to public schools by sending students home with statements against the initiative. In addition, they have requested that school boards statewide produce proclamations against the initiative.

It is no surprise that an organization that would deny parents the right to choose schools would also attempt to deny the public the right to vote on this issue.

Numerous parents of public- and private-school students and California taxpayers support the initiative. They support it for one reason: The money will go toward education, not a bureaucracy. No more politics. No more games with the children. Just education.

Some business leaders are backing the parental choice initiative. The Technology Leadership Council, a coalition of high-tech corporate leaders, has been very supportive, as have other industry executives, community leaders, parent groups and a broad coalition of those who feel we critically need to improve our intellectual capital.

And many public-school teachers favor the initiative. They support it because they know that it would free them from the bureaucracy and give them the opportunity to teach.

The public must not be duped by the Establishment. If all public schools are meeting the needs of our children, the truth will be told when parents have the right to choose.

In the final analysis, the public must address these simple questions: Are public schools better today than they were 5 or 10 years ago, after the many “reform” efforts and spending increases? Are we prepared to continue to put our trust in educrats when they tell us that they will fix the system? Finally, aren’t parents better qualified to select and monitor their children’s education than the educrats? Your answer will be reflected by the November election.