Where Do We Go From Here?

CLOSING REMARKS                                                                                          -Click Here to download-

JOHN E. COONS

Delivered at the Inaugural Conference of
The American Center for School Choice
WWW.AMCSC.ORG
at The National Press Club, Washington, D.C.,
November 9, 2009

After such a day my role now seems less a closing than an opening. Whether you stood for or against the empowering of ordinary parents, all of you have given us a glimpse of possibilities new as well as familiar. Insofar as they are new, they fit the Center’s resolve to cultivate many gardens in pursuit of school choice. Insofar as they were old, they gave us the assurance of standing in a rich tradition.

But, before I briefly retouch some of these ideas, heartfelt thanks are in order. To begin, The American Center for School Choice thanks the Bradley Foundation for the foresight and generosity that has made today’s conversation possible. For twenty years you have been the hero of the Milwaukee miracle and its many positive radiations. You have made a difference for thousands of struggling families and set a high standard for all of us.

Second, we are profoundly grateful to the De La Salle Christian Brothers who have ever and always encouraged choice, both in their own vocation and by patiently and generously supporting the conversation that has now become the American Center.

We thank also Jim and Fawn Spady as well as an anonymous donor, all of whom have recently supported the enterprise.

Next, looking toward the inside, the Center is thankful to – and for – its twelve very distinguished associates, many of whom you have heard from today. Their individual insight and experience taken together make the Center itself a resource of unique significance. The Associates constitute a growing family of minds, a synergy with the horsepower necessary to drive historic change. There is much to be done, and their genius, dedication and balance make the Center its well-tuned instrument.

Thanks, finally to my fellow directors who have been relentlessly generous in resourceful ways – in challenging times. You have also been shrewd. In my view the Board’s finest single work has been to recognize, there amongst ourselves, the living embodiment of the personal gifts and experience that were necessary to the executive role. This they found in our wise, prudent and tireless organizer and CEO, Michael Guerra. Mike saw how the thing could be done; and he did it.

So, now, you have seen and – in diverse ways – supported our first public steps. But why? In just what ways does the Center promise to be anything new and different – a true Novum? What does the Center add to the other benign energies long struggling on behalf of choice?

We can start by asking whether the Center’s mind is consistent with the vision of these pioneers. In every respect, the answer is yes; ACSC shares the same hope for a new deal for disadvantaged families through choice. We all start from this common ground; it is the Center’s resolve merely to expand that field of thought. Broadly speaking, it adds to the domain of discourse about – and action for –choice in four ways:

• First, it extends the ideology of choice in a manner that is congenial to new audiences while still serving the old.

• Second, its aggregation of associates is unique; and confederation multiplies the power of these individual minds.

• Third, the Center identifies and proposes a new agenda of specific and salient research.

• Fourth, in the aggregate these three elements constitute the capacity for a new mission of education, civic reform, and parental choice through litigation and public initiative.

To be more specific, the Center is designed to address the middle-of-the-road citizen in moral terms that are familiar. The message is in harmony with – but enriches – the respected wisdom about market efficiency, competition and test scores. In its website it will feature specific historical, ethical, social and legal works of its own associates and others aimed at the mind of the media and the mind-in-the-street. Paradoxically, it will encourage confidence in markets by recognizing the non-economic, private and social roles played by this unique brand of consumers – that is by parents. The public can assess the importance of parental decision making separately from its stimulation of competition among suppliers. The parent will stand out as a unique and subtle sort of consumer whose non-economic roles enhance our appreciation of school choice, hence, perhaps of markets in general.

The Center will also serve the education of the public by enriching access to diverse models of choice already designed – and to be designed – by associates, both to fit the legal structures of particular states and to serve the widely varying needs of local leadership. This national network will aid both public and private actors, whether the instrument proposed be charters, refundable tax credits, vouchers, home schooling – or schools conducted in clusters of neighboring homes. The Center was conceived as an intellectual Walmart for a very mixed clientele. Its electronic archives will, of course, be open to all, but this national web of expert associates will make the enterprise, in practice, a creature of flesh and blood, giving confidence and practical back-up to reformers around the country.

In addition, the Center will both conduct and broker research. As broker it will seek funding sources for its associates and for academics, think-thanks and individuals who are prepared to address relevant unasked questions. And now I will end with but a few examples of such empirical, educational and legal questions worth addressing.

First, should society worry that the absence of choice deeply affects the self- habits of American parents and their children? Within limits – why should disadvantaged parents not to be allowed make their own mistakes and learn like the rest of us? Is coercive assignment and daily custody by the state a remedy for the effects of poverty, or is it instead another invitation to irresponsibility and dependency?

The Center would ask, second, what is the actual content of the public values curriculum and the degree of consistency with which it is taught. Does Caesar really have a message, or is coercive school assignment in effect a values lottery? If so, what is the point of limiting choice?

Factual inquiries of this sort – and their answers – will suggest to state and federal jurists remedial rights of parents. Is conscription of the child an unlawful expropriation of the parental right to custody? In your own lifetimes, you may see the rediscovery of potent juridical ideas about parental status. The pre-constitutional powers of “the people” specifically reserved in the 10th amendment have yet to be construed; the idea of reserved power suggests a realm of family rights grounded outside artificial social compacts. And it is your generation who will learn whether our unnecessary conscription by wealth also troubles both the1st and 14th Amendment with their distaste for pointless discriminations. In any case there is groundwork to be laid now for the judicial rescue of children, parents and society by people like yourselves – and, specifically now, by The American Center for School Choice.

I am supposed to close. If a prayer were proper, I’d make it one of thanks for the hope – now enhanced by The Center – that you will all share in the adventure ahead. May you find this epic vocation as personally rewarding – and as much sheer fun – as it has been for me.