One thing to look for when you write an opinion piece - which arguments don't your opponents challenge. When your opponents can't find a good counter-critique on an issue, a neutral observer should feel pretty comfortable with it. Here are two points I made in my editorial that haven't been challenged in posted comments or emails I received:
1. That a voucher system will eliminate the need for mandatory testing.
Given all the negative comments on the No Child Left Behind Testing, it seems that even opponents of vouchers concede a well-designed voucher plan will save millions in administrative costs and millions of hours of educational time.
2. That our colleges/universities aren't the world's best while our primary/secondary schools are not the world's best.
Opponents of vouchers seem to have no explanation for this. I have a simple one: There is competition across colleges and universities but without vouchers there is not among K-12 schools. The intriguing issue is that competition among K-12 schools would be more fierce than colleges, since there are so many more K-12 schools in any given 20-mile radius.
I keep getting comments that indicate I must have a hidden agenda for school systems. I don't. I send my children to my local public school, and I attended public schools growing up too. I guess I am just pro-choice on this issue, while the left isn't. Kind of ironic ...