If there’s anything to the idea of reincarnation, then I’m going to go way out on a limb and suggest that Missouri Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick might have once been the PR point man for the Greeks in their battle with Troy. I can imagine the piece he would have written about that large horse sitting outside Troy, and how marvelous it would be if it rested inside the city instead.
Perhaps you read Mr. Fitzpatrick’s opinion piece that appeared in the News-Leader this past Saturday, April 10. (Educational Reform Should Have Bipartisan Support). Who can argue with his title? Indeed, there are certainly some statements he makes that I can wholeheartedly endorse, but like the Trojan Horse, I’m a little worried about what he seems to be hiding inside this inviting exterior. He seems to raise more questions than he answers. Let’s take a closer look.
Mr. Fitzpatrick’s goal – we finally learn – is to speak in favor of SB 55 and HB 349 in the legislature. He is ‘disappointed to see (legislative) opposition’ to these bills. This would presumably include members of his own party, since his party controls that same legislature. That might raise our first red flag.
Both these bills would create a voucher program which Mr. Fitzpatrick claims gives parents ‘more control over their children’s education’. True or not, what is unmentioned is that these are also bills which unquestionably provide public funding for private school choices, something that has historically not been favored by Missouri voters – or legislators.
I have stated before, and will honestly state again: I remain undecided, in principle, on the merits of charter schools. I have written columns listing pros and cons of charter schools (and home schooling, and other related ventures), and will openly re-state that under the best of circumstances, these programs can do things that public schools cannot. But past nationwide performances of charter schools, in particular, have generally not justified whatever potential they may possess. Partly this is because legislatures seldom, if ever, provide for accountability measures for the funding these schools receive and the services they provide.
So, when someone pushes this hard, with such potentially misleading arguments, we should at least get suspicious.
I mentioned misleading arguments. Mr. Fitzpatrick mentions, as part of his justifications that a ‘new problem’ is that ‘some kids might not be able to attend their public school because it is closed’, as if an unprecedented pandemic which has previously kept kids home for safety reasons is somehow tipping the scales toward providing public funds for private school choices. Really? Does that not somehow sound contrived?
Another question: Why is Mr. Fitzpatrick writing this piece? He was a legislator in the past but is now State Treasurer. He is neither a legislator nor an educator. Why venture an opinion? One notes that these bills would create a “Missouri Empowerment Scholarship Board”, which is chaired by the Missouri Treasurer. Would this provision grant him and his office extra political influence in how these education funds are spent?
I don’t claim to be an expert on all provisions of these bills. But It should be noted that the MSTA, MNEA (statewide groups of educators), MSBA (school boards), and MASA (administrators) are all opposed to both bills. Is this not troublesome? Was education-related input ever sought? These are two among several other questions needing asking here.
Mr. Fitzpatrick’s piece itself seems highly misleading (even ironically partisan?), and possibly self-serving. On that basis of his piece alone, we should be worried about a possible Trojan Horse in our midst.
Comments are closed