In 1729, British satirist Johnathan Swift (author of Gulliver's Travels) published an essay entitled "A Modest Proposal For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being A Burden to Their Parents or Country, and For Making Them Beneficial to The Public" in response to famine in Ireland and Britain's reluctance to offer assistance. His "Modest Proposal" was quite simply to respond to the famine by encouraging people to eat their children. It had the desired effect in Britain of causing general disgust and horror — a good deal more reaction than the general public apathy toward the plight of the Irish poor had thus far raised.
I think, after nearly 300 years, it's time for another "Modest Proposal" for the consideration of the US voting (and tax-paying) public. I propose that we let market forces — good old American capitalism — govern our public education. The current property-tax funded system is clearly unfair: it forces people to support the education of other people's kids (OPK), it makes home ownership much more difficult and expensive, and, as the necessity for No Child Left Behind has starkly demonstrated, we're not getting our money's worth.
I therefore propose that we stop all taxpayer funding of education. This country has a long and noble tradition of privately-owned for-profit educational institutions. Why should we not turn our public schools and state colleges and universities over to private ownership? People will simply pay market price for their children's education. For those who may not be able to find affordable education, we'll make tax credits available because, after all, the community does have some interest in making sure that the children of the poorer classes don't become a burden on the taxpayers later on in life.
With this modest proposal, we'll improve the quality of education (after all, schools will compete for the best — and wealthiest — students), taxpayers will be relieved of an enormous burden (OPK), and new sources of wealth will open up for investors in the new educational corporations. After all, education is just another service, and you should get what you pay for.
If, perhaps, you might think that my "Modest Proposal" is just too far-fetched to be even considered, or some kind of libertarian utopianism; if, by some stretch of the imagination, you might consider my "Modest Proposal" patently absurd because of the obvious inequities it would foist on society (creating an underclass of the uneducated who could not afford schooling — after all, tax credits only apply if you make enough to pay taxes), then, think again. This is precisely the approach that the conservative-libertarian political block is proposing, not to solve the education crisis, but to address the health care crisis in this country. Simply put, if this scheme so obviously wouldn't work for education where children's futures are at stake, what possible reasoning could suggest that it would work in health care where people's lives are at stake?
H. Les Brown, MA, CFCC
Copyright © 2008 H. Les Brown
Comments