re: "Conservatives" agree to new entitlement program costing hundreds of millions per year

quote:

---

But the vast majority of this program would be for kids who don't use the public schools in the first place

---

Why should private school families have to pay for schools they aren't using on top of paying for their private schooling? Calling this "new spending" is very disingenuous IMO.

quote:

---

Net new spending. There would be some reduction of state spending because the cost of this entitlement per person is less than the cost of public school per person.

---

There is also the tax deduction for private school tuition. Ultimately, does this actually add cost? Or is this just the government financing a cost shift? I’m aware that government spending has overhead, but not every program is the same - there is already public outlay for this program (education), it’s not completely unreasonable to assume it will result in some level of cost shift rather than purely new spending.

I think the notion that “conservatives” can’t spend money is pretty ridiculous. If you accept that there is a government, or the need for one, you accept that there is some level of acceptable spending. Getting an actual return on spending is what separates conservative policy from liberal policy which use less precise, more abstract measures of success.

Expanding school options and choice is one of those areas that could be argued to have a return on investment. I’m not necessarily advocating for this bill, just providing commentary on our current political environment. If “conservatives” can’t find any issues/programs worthy of investment, their only political purpose is to stymie more liberal policies, which is a losing proposition. It’s a position that relinquishes control to the other side. Its like playing an entire football game on defense.