A law has been proposed. It will be defeated, but what is interesting to me are the Homeschool Defense League Association objections to it, because they reveal a particular way of dealing with politics. Here are some thoughts, having read the law in its current form, knowing these things are subject to change as they get banged about in committee. The law can be found in the attached document.https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills241/hlrbillspdf/5389H.02I.pdf

What the law does:

• The purpose of the law is to allow students to opt-out of the public school system and take some portion of those funds with them to any approved educational agency to make qualifying educational expenses.
• It creates two funds. One fund which is made of money to be disbursed to public schools and public school teachers based on enrollment and certain portion for teacher salaries. The other fund is for non-public school students who want to enroll in the program and receive qualifying expenses.
• It creates two categories of home school students, those who opt-in to be eligible for these funds called Family-paced educational schools, which have an additional testing requirement, and those who do not, Traditional home schools.
• The home school requirements otherwise remain unchanged for both types of home schooling.
• The following provision is added to apply to Family Paced Educational Schools.

Nothing in this section shall require a private, parochial, parish , home school, or family-paced education school to include in its curriculum any concept, topic, or practice in conflict with the school’s religious doctrines or to exclude from its curriculum any concept, topic, or practice consistent with the school’s religious doctrines. Any other provision of the law to the contrary notwithstanding, all departments or agencies of the state of Missouri shall be prohibited from dictating through rule, regulation, or other device any statewide curriculum for private, parochial, parish, home schools, or family-paced education schools.

Some background:
21 states in the union have some form of school voucher or educational savings account. Missouri lags behind in offering school choice. But just recently started the very limited tax-credit MOScholars program (most JPII families do not qualify for this program).
https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/which-states-have-private-school-choice/2024/01

In the big picture, I am in favor of school choice because I think parents should be able to choose the schools for their kids. On the other hand, I do also think there are very compelling reasons for the state to collect taxes for the purpose mandating that schooling occur. In my opinion, without that expectation even very basic education would be undersupplied. However, it is not necessary for the state to supply the schooling as well. I think moves toward giving parents more choice are generally better. One of the big barriers to parents picking private education of any type is the cost, for whereas public schools receive large subsidies and tax-payer help, private schools are generally reserved for the wealthy, and home school for the confident educational homesteader.

HSLDA’s Objection
I struggle to understand HSLDA’s objections.

On the one hand, home school freedoms are reaffirmed and slightly expanded (through the removal of one requirement), and on the other hand currently home school families have the option to opt-in to the regime of “qualifying educational expenses” through a separate legal category. HSLDA worries this will cause a rift in the home school community between those who would accept the government funds and those who would not. The HSLDA argues that government funds will have more strings over time and implies that home school families need to be protected from opting into the system.

HLSA has also objected to the FLEX schools program for similar reasons. They believe that allowing some homeschoolers to participate in government programs is a threat to the homeschooling ecosystem generally, and yet in other instances Dave Dentel at HSLDA has written approvingly of the dual legal regime, so I am not at all sure what HSLDA actually wants.

These programs would change the “community”. But I am not sure in what ways. Perhaps there would be many more homeschoolers, since their materials would be paid for and new opportunities available. Perhaps there would be fewer, since some would find and be able to afford the private school they like.

HSLDA does not consider whether the net result of the law would in fact be more homeschoolers or more private schoolers, or whether the general effects on education across the state would be good or bad. Their sole concern is the current homeschool community as they conceive it. I am agnostic and unsure how the quantity of home schoolers would change as a result of the law.

There is also the slippery slope argument. “First they ask for standardized reading and math tests, then they will be asking for mandatory assent to the tenets of Arianism. I don’t trust them.”

The slippery slope argument requires that the law changes multiple times. But the law enables a large constituency to grow up and benefit from it. Once given, it is a benefit that would be very hard to amend or end without major blowback. We have not seen rollbacks in any of the states that passed these programs 12 years ago, even as some of those states change from red to blue; I don’t know why I should bet that Missouri’s legislators will be trying to mandate curriculum changes at private schools and Family-paced schools in my lifetime. And further the financial benefits to Family-paced schools would be so small that it would be easy enough to quit and go back to normal homeschooling.

I always appreciate a principled objection to receiving government funds, but if the government is going to be spending tax-payer money on education and not asking for anything unreasonable in return, and still guaranteeing academic freedom rights for private and home schools, why not see it as a big win for Missourians? I like that some home school homesteaders are out there forgoing standardized tests and Child-Tax Credits. They are certainly more principled anti-state libertarians than me. I, however, want JPII families to be able to afford the best Catholic education in St. Louis.

I am in favor of this law and hope it passes as written. Though it won’t. I expect it to be killed in committee.