Who’s Afraid of School Choice?

A Look at Opposition Rhetoric

For decades, critics of school choice have warned that it would destroy public education. From claims that funding would evaporate to predictions of catastrophic harm to students, the rhetoric has been dramatic—and remarkably consistent.

But is there any truth to these warnings?

In Who’s Afraid of School Choice?, we examined public debates over new school choice programs in eight states—Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Utah. This second edition builds on findings from the 2021 report, which revealed that the intensity of opposition rhetoric doesn’t depend on the size or scope of a program. Whether a program serves 1% of students or nearly all of them, critics employ the same heated arguments.

What We Analyzed

Our team collected and analyzed over 3,000 public statements made during legislative debates in these eight states. We focused specifically on comments predicting harm to district schools, filtering out unrelated arguments. Ultimately, 183 quotations were relevant and were scored on a scale of rhetorical intensity, from mild concern to apocalyptic predictions.

The findings confirmed a pattern we saw in the first edition: the level of opposition rhetoric remains constant, no matter the scope of the program. Smaller, targeted policies faced just as much criticism as large, universal initiatives.

The Rhetoric Doesn’t Match the Evidence

States with robust school choice policies have decades of experience disproving these claims. Research consistently shows that choice programs don’t harm public schools—in fact, they often lead to modest improvements.

Consider Florida, where expansive choice programs have existed for over 20 years. During this time, Florida’s district schools have outpaced national averages in test score improvements, even as hundreds of thousands of students utilized vouchers, tax-credit scholarships, and education savings accounts. Similar trends have been observed in other states with long-standing choice programs.

Yet, the rhetoric persists. Critics of even the smallest proposals often describe them as existential threats to public education. For example:

• In Alabama, one opponent declared that even a program available to fewer than 2% of students would “decapitate public education.”
• In South Carolina, a program designed to serve less than 1% of students was called “the first step to the death of public education.”

Such claims are clearly out of step with reality.

What This Means for Policymakers

The evidence is clear: school choice policies empower families and improve educational outcomes without the dire consequences predicted by opponents. And as this report demonstrates, efforts to scale down proposals to avoid intense criticism are futile. The level of opposition doesn’t depend on how many students a program serves.

Policymakers should focus on bold, universal programs that expand access to educational opportunities for all families. Instead of being swayed by fearmongering, they can rely on decades of data—and the tools in this report—to counter myths with facts.

To learn more about the findings, click here to read the full report.