Wisconsin's Republican candidate for governor, Tim Michels, has named several “top” policy priorities since winning the party's Aug. 9 primary: preventing crime in Milwaukee, creating jobs, “election integrity” and outlawing perceived critical race theory in schools.
But the “top priority” the construction executive has provided the most detail about — though his statements remain vague — has been his pledge to bring “competition into the education marketplace” and introduce universal school choice in Wisconsin.
“Competition is a great motivator,” Michels told a crowd in Green Bay last month, a standard line from his stump speech. “In our business, if we're not innovating every day, we're losing. … We are going to create competition. We are going to improve education. And we are going to make sure that future generations of Wisconsinites have the skills to be leaders in this state.”
Implementing universal school choice would be a sweeping overhaul of the state’s K-12 education system — a hot-button election issue as the Nov. 8 general election looms.
In last week’s Marquette Law School poll, 71% of independent voters said they are “very concerned” about public schools — the highest of any issue surveyed.
There was a strong partisan divide on where funding for schools should go, as well, with 46% of Republicans preferring more money for private schools rather than public schools compared to 45% preferring the reverse. Among Democrats, meanwhile, 93% would choose more money for public schools and just 5% for private schools.
The Cap Times spoke with three education experts about what implementing universal school choice in Wisconsin could look like.
What is the current state of school choice in Wisconsin?
In Wisconsin, every student is assigned a space in a public school based on where they live. If, for whatever reason, their parents don't want them to attend that school, they have a series of options.
Those include options keeping them in public schools, like open enrollment to another school district and public charter schools, or enrollment in a private school paid for by their family.
In 1989, the state established the first parental choice program that offered public funding to some students to attend private schools — the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program.
In the decades since, the state has added another in Racine, a statewide program and another specifically for students with special needs.
The Milwaukee and Racine programs are limited to families with income below 300% of the federal poverty level, while the statewide program is for those below 220% of the federal poverty level. The statewide program also has an enrollment limit — a cap on the number of students per year that can participate in the program — that will phase out beginning in the 2026-27 school year under current state law.
Data released Friday by the state Department of Public Instruction showed that enrollment in the four private school parental choice programs increased 6.7% from last fall to 52,189 students this year. Public school enrollment is at 807,657, according to DPI.
What does "universal school choice" mean?
The path to universal school choice likely includes eliminating enrollment and income caps on voucher programs that help families pay for private schools.
Michels’ education blueprint is scant on details of what exactly a universal school choice program would look like, but states that “Wisconsin families will have access to a school that meets their needs, regardless of their income or zip code.” Michels’ campaign did not grant an interview or provide answers to submitted questions by deadline for this story.
In Friday night’s gubernatorial debate, Michels once again said he would implement universal school choice, adding that the state’s K-12 education system “can't get any worse” and that empowering parents will improve learning outcomes.
He did not offer specifics about his plan for universal school choice, but did not dispute the premise that such a program “would open up private school attendance to any student at taxpayer expense.”
One bill from the most recent legislative session offers a possibility of what that could look like.
Republican lawmakers approved a bill to remove caps on existing private school voucher programs last session, but it was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who wrote in his veto message that he objected “to the drastic impact it could have on families,” citing a DPI estimate of a cost to property taxpayers exceeding $500 million in a school year.
“It is remarkable to me that many supporters of this bill, who commonly express concerns about property taxes when it comes to supporting more than 800,000 public school children in our state, are apparently unfazed by the fiscal impact this bill could have on families due to the way these programs are funded,” Evers wrote.
Effectively, every private school participating in the state’s voucher system would receive a certain amount of money per student enrolled; this year, vouchers are $8,399 for students in grades K-8 and $9,045 for those in grades 9-12. Students already attending schools participating in the parental choice programs who currently do not qualify for a voucher because of their income would then have state funding attached, likely cutting the portion of a private school bill their family had previously covered.
John Witte, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor of political science and public affairs, helped evaluate the state’s first voucher program in Milwaukee. Witte said a universal choice option is significantly different from the income-based programs that exist now — programs he believes have some merit.
“(The difference between) supporting universal vouchers and targeted vouchers is a huge chasm,” Witte said. “And you can easily support targeted based on the argument … that you're giving choices to people that don't have them and not be in favor of universal vouchers, and that's my opinion.”
While other forms of school choice could also be open for expansion, it’s unclear without more details from Michels’ campaign what universal school choice would look like under his administration. One potential example would be the legalization of parent-led “microschools,” often formed by groups of parents who come together to pay a teacher or tutor for their children outside of a school setting.
What are the potential benefits of universal school choice?
Proponents argue that schools would be forced into a system of competition, improving outcomes for all, while also stressing the benefits for individual students who need something different than what their public school is offering.
“I think students do better, I think schools do better and I think teachers do better, quite frankly, when schools have to compete for the best teachers or the best programs,” said Libby Sobic, director of education policy at the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty.
Sobic argued that families will be more engaged and private schools can offer more support to students who need it.
Witte suggested that many students around the state would benefit from such a program, and that even public schools could see some initial improvements if private schools with more resources accepted some of the most challenging students in public schools.
Sobic said the state “cannot be afraid to try something new,” given its troubling results on standardized tests in recent years.
“We have kids who cannot read in our state,” she said. “Our proficiency rate is horrific for kids in math and reading. … I think we have to be willing to be innovative and being innovative means, one, trusting parents to make the decision and to being willing to say, ‘OK, that didn't work. Let's try something different.’”
What are the potential drawbacks?
When asked if she saw any potential benefits to universal school choice, UW-Madison education and law professor Julie Underwood, a public school advocate, was direct: “No.”
“My ideology is that public schools train people for democracy,” she said. “You have to have an educated public in order to have a democracy, and I would like everybody to equally have a chance to have a good education, and that’s not the way the private sector is set up.”
Underwood expressed concerns about a lack of accountability for schools participating in the choice program, suggesting it could be an issue for employment law, students’ rights and financial accountability.
“I have a problem with public money going to private entities without any regulation on them,” Underwood said.
Long-term, Witte and Underwood both suggested the system could drain resources from the public school system and leave the students who aren’t able to get into a private school behind. They both also expressed concerns that private schools might not accept students who present more behavioral or language needs, for example, leaving lower-funded public schools to work with them.
Initially, Witte added, the state would effectively be funding two separate school systems.
Witte, who described himself as a “conservative, Republican voter often,” suggested the people who would most benefit from a universal school choice system are those already attending and paying for private schools themselves — including those who can afford it without any subsidy from the state.
“What you're doing is if you subsidize everybody, you're subsidizing upward in the income stream, the wealthier people are getting a subsidy,” Witte said. “I don't think that's good public policy, in any area.”
