Just brilliant. Of course it remains to be seen whether it will work. In principle it should, assuming the unions don’t succeed in killing it.

1. Turn complete control of matters related to education over to the states and eliminate all federal funding for education.

Democrats are generally against vouchers, and Republicans are generally for them. Democrats are perceived as being advocates of the poor, and Republicans are generally perceived as being advocates of the rich. Whether or not this is the case doesn’t matter, because we’re more concerned about the perception than the reality. What matters is that Republicans can hammer away on this issue as being an example of how Democrats say they’re for the poor, but that it’s just words with no action. By pushing hard for vouchers for the poor, Republicans can run ads that say “We’ve heard your cries and your suffering as your children go to schools where they have to walk through metal detectors and where drugs are easier to get than math books. But do you have any other option? With vouchers, you will. Republicans are working to pass an education reform bill that provides a $20K-per-student voucher to families that earn less than $40K per year. These vouchers will allow you to send your child to the school of your choice, even expensive private schools like Barack Obama’s kids go to. But Democrats are blocking the way and preventing this option from becoming reality. Who’s really on your side? Vote Republican, vote for the sake of your children.”

What Republicans need to do is push hard on issues like this that matter a lot to voters who would otherwise never think of voting anything but Democrat. But I don’t believe these voters can’t be coerced away. I think they only vote Democrat because they don’t know the truth. If they did, they’d run all the politicians from both parties out of town. But Republicans can become advocates for a voting bloc they traditionally lose, the poor, by hammering away on this issue. And by helping the poor when it comes to education, it might help all children, rich or poor or in between.

Case in point, the DC school system. It was recently taken over by Michelle Rhee, a Harvard grad who is now chancellor of the school district. She’s shaking things up, and some people don’t like it. One of the teachers talks about “chaos and dysfunction” and a parent calls her “misguided and reckless” and says that she’s playing “a dangerous game.”

But the school district ranked dead last in the nation prior to Rhee’s hiring. Did you get that? It was the worst performing school district in the entire country. 88% of the kids can’t read (and I’m guessing most of the 12% who can don’t read very well). Just 8% are proficient in math. When roughly 90% of the students are failing in a school district, shouldn’t you be willing to try just about anything? If I were a parent in that district and somebody came in and said “We’re giving every child a pet octopus in order to improve computer skills” I’d say “Sounds crazy, but what have we got to lose?”

Children will be required to pass a series of exams administered by the state in order to progress from grade to grade and to receive a high-school diploma. Children may take these exams whenever they like, as many times as they like and progress through their schooling and attain their degree as fast as they can pass the exams. These exams would be structured to test students true level of education and would be constantly improved to ensure that teachers do not “teach to the test.”

Alternative testing would be available for students in grades 9-12 depending on a number of “tracks” they could choose from related to specific vocations. Students could choose to take exams related to a “business” track, a “medical” track, an “engineering” track or any number of options, and they would then be likely to choose schools that cater to these specific tracks.

Vouchers would be distributed on the basis of children passing the exams to move from one grade level to another. If a child can pass the exams to move from the 7th grade to the 10th grade in one year, they would receive three vouchers in one year. If a child takes two years to pass the 7th grade exams they would only receive one voucher. Parents who have children with diagnosed learning disabilities would be eligible for special vouchers to aid with related, additional costs.

Neither teachers nor schools would be required to have any accreditation or education. However, testing data for the students of every school would be easily accessible to parents and therefore the schools that do the best job of preparing students to pass the standardized exams would naturally be the schools to which parents would want to send their children and this would create the incentive for schools to hire the best teachers possible, which would likely be those with the best education, experience, and track records. After all, given easily accessible alternative options, who would choose to send their kids to a school where the students have a 10% success rate on the standardized exams?

This new educational system would give parents more control over the education of their children. It would give children more choices as to what they want to focus on, while still providing a well-rounded education in the basics like math, reading and writing, history, and sciences. It would give teachers and schools more autonomy and flexibility. It would lead to higher pay for teachers and administrators, as well as higher-quality education for students. It would energize the educational system, making California’s students more competitive with other students around the country and the world.

My mother was an elementary school teacher for about 15 years in Southern California and I was her part-time teacher’s aide for much of that time. In fact, that’s how I paid my parents back after they covered the $1,200 repair bill after I backed into some guy’s car…

Growing up with a school teacher in the family I got about as close to being a teacher as you can get without having the actual job. And of course I was a student in the public school system. I also attended two different private schools for 4th through 6th grades and can attest that private schools are not always better than public schools as some might have you think.

The fundamental problem I saw with the public school system was that too much control was given to people not directly involved with the individual schools. While I believe in standards for testing, I believe that parents and teachers on a school-by-school basis should decide how they are going to meet those standards. I believe each teacher should be able to choose his or her own curriculum rather than having it forced on them by a district or by an organization even more divorced from the day to day realities of the classroom. I believe parents should be given more responsibility and control for the education of their children, and that when the government does too much, it makes parents and teachers feel powerless, they give up trying to do anything extraordinary, and our children suffer for it.

I believe the fastest way to improve the educations our children receive in the state of California is by making schools compete against each other for the privilege of educating our children. By allowing parents to choose which school their child will go to it will force administrators to improve their school or see it get shut down. Although it may seem scary to administrators and teachers because there is the threat of losing their job, this is no more scary than what other people employed in non-government jobs face every day. And ironically, it will not put teachers at risk, it will actually lead to them having more control over their jobs, better chances for advancement, and those teachers who are good teachers will get paid more, perhaps much, much more, than they are getting paid now.

Think of it from the perspective of a school principal. In a competitive market he becomes the CEO of his school. If nobody wants to use his school, the school goes out of business, his students will go to other, better schools, and he’ll have to find a new job. That’s scary. So he is going to be very motivated to find the best teachers he can so that he can advertise that he has the best teachers and get as many parents as possible to put their children into his school to maximize revenues. To get those good teachers he’s going to have to pay them well and treat them how they want to be treated. Many, if not all, of the factors that lead to a good education can be improved by making the public school system competitive and establishing proper incentives.

Would this cause any problems? Sure, progress always causes problems. Cars caused problems for people who made a living off of making horse carriages. But I believe the benefits far outweigh costs in this case. If you see challenges to the plan I’ve proposed please let me know what they are so I can refine my platform in time to run for Governor of California in 2020.