This commentary is by Sen. Martine Larocque Gulick, D-Chittenden Central.
The die was cast from the first day of the legislative session and its ultimate fate was sealed with the formation of the committee of conference: true education transformation would not occur this year, even if H.454 passes. Stacking the Senate Education Committee and then the Committee of Conference with lawmakers who are strident in their support of private schools was never going to end well for reform.
In the last week of the regular legislative session I voted for an education reform bill that I thought would do some good in improving our expensive system with its unnecessarily complex governance structure. The provisions of that bill were passed by the Senate but did not hold once negotiations started between the House and Senate and were instead sidelined for special interests, and in a strange maneuver the Senate conferees moved away from the very provisions they had voted on. These sections of the bill were important and many were negotiated away from the final reform package.
There are those to blame for this failure who made it clear that it is no longer about maintaining the four historic academies; there have been ample opportunities to carve them out of reform as they play a role in education delivery. It is now about a “mosaic” or “ecosystem” of private schools. These were terms used over and over during negotiations.
But supporting the “mosaic” was never what education reform was about. It was about lowering education costs, improving quality and increasing equity. This “mosaic” needs to stop relying on Vermont taxpayers to do its fundraising. Vermont is simply too small to maintain this expensive and complex system.
Sadly, Democratic and Progressive voters in certain parts of Vermont ardently support the “choice” that our current system offers and refuse to see the harm it does to the entire system.
They refuse to see that public education is a tenet of democratic values and should be supported and encouraged to the greatest extent possible. The entitlement programs that allow these Vermonters to send their child to a ski school at a reduced cost are more important than fighting for statewide reform.
If we believe a public education system is a common good, this bill does not underscore that belief, and in fact it opens up the very real possibility that we someday face litigation that could lead to universal choice and the privatization of education — expensive propositions that favor the elite.
The “mosaic” of publicly funded private schools will be happy whether or not the bill fails. If it fails, these schools continue to benefit greatly from the status quo, and if it passes, there are enough protections that they will continue to thrive at the expense of the system as a whole.
Regardless of the outcome, true systemic education reform is not an “unsolvable problem” rooted in a philosophical difference. It is a very real issue of economics and equity that is very solvable and that requires political courage.
I will be voting no on this bill and refuse to partake in education reform that continues to support taxpayer-funded entitlements in a cash-strapped state.
