Book review: School-choice expert demonstrates power of parents in school wars | Opinion

I would be lying if I said that Corey DeAngelis’ new book, “The Parent Revolution,” did not leave me feeling angry.

Not for the same reasons that it makes his detractors mad, I’m sure.

The Cato Institute scholar’s new tome digs into the origins of the recent school choice movement and pegs that beginning as a time that many parents, myself included, would prefer to forget: COVID.

It was the era of school closures, maddening mandates, ascendant teacher’s unions and remote “learning” — or “remotely learning,” as DeAngelis describes it.

More importantly, it was the era when parents, thanks to the window into the public school day that “virtual learning” provided, came to realize that public education as we know it is not and never was a truly public good.

For DeAngelis, that was the moment when everything changed.

It was the moment when parents woke up, got organized and started demanding more control over their children’s education.

At the core of “The Parent Revolution” is the idea that students are best served when they have educational options available to them through education savings accounts, or ESAs, which allow public tax dollars to fund and follow the student, whether by paying tuition for a private or parochial school, funding tutoring services, buying home-schooling supplies or paying other education-related expenses that are not otherwise feasible for many middle-and-low-income families.

Whatever the case, ESAs allow parents to act in the best interest of their children and give kids the opportunity to learn in an environment that best suits their individual needs and values.

While critics wrongly assert that rerouting funds in this manner misappropriates dollars that otherwise “belong” to the public school system, DeAngelis correctly points out that having money follow the student is part of other public policies. Consider the GI Bill, Pell grants, and even some Head Start programs.

“We don’t force low-income families to get their food [via food stamps] from residentially assigned, government-run grocery stores,” DeAngelis says. So why don’t we apply the same policy to primary and secondary education?

That doesn’t seem unreasonable.

DeAngelis also synthesizes the manifold controversies that erupted across the nation over school policies on obscenity in books, bathroom use, and critical race theory, as well as how engaged (and enraged) parents began to push back on progressive school board agendas.

In many cases, parents successfully kicked out problematic school board members. In some cases, such as in Virginia, they used their firepower to reject high-level elected officials and candidates — those whose inane statements, such as “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach,” only confirmed what most of us already believe progressives think about parents.

Remaking school boards was only one salvo in the parent revolution, though. Improving public school leadership is good. Ensuring that all students have options is the real target.

In some sense, DeAngelis has written a playbook for how to fight back against progressive government and its wholly owned subsidiaries, the teachers unions.

He offers not only insight into navigating the that challenges parents will face on the road to school choice but also gives convincing, research-backed arguments about how the benefits of education freedom extend well beyond youth and into society writ-large.

School choice programs are correlated with lower crime rates, higher incomes and stronger families, for example.

Of course, progressive government and educator unions aren’t the only opposition that school choice advocates face. Sometimes, the greatest obstacles are in the Republican Party.

Such has been the case in Texas, where, DeAngelis notes, there was greater support among GOP primary voters for a nonbinding pro-school-choice ballot proposition than a pro-life one.

Yet, in the last legislative session, an expansive ESA bill failed several times in the House, despite a strong Republican majority.

As someone who has spent most of his life in Texas, DeAngelis has a personal stake in the school-choice push here and promised, along with Gov. Greg Abbott, that there would be political consequences for Republican lawmakers who continue to block education reform.

Indeed: Nine pro-school-choice primary challengers unseated incumbents, with three more sent to runoffs that are next week.

Of course, it isn’t over until it’s over; the Legislature won’t meet again until next year.

But if similarly situated states, such as Iowa, are any indication, Texas is on its way to an even bigger school choice program than previously imagined.

I said at the beginning that “The Parent Revolution” made me angry, but I should qualify that anger is righteous. I, for one, am thrilled that education freedom is the silver lining to all the consternation that has embroiled our schools of late.

The case that DeAngelis makes for school choice isn’t just compelling, it’s inspiring. It’s a reminder — and perhaps a warning — to all who read it, that parents acting on behalf of their kids’ interests are far more powerful than any school board, teacher’s union or policy maker.

And finally, it’s a clarion call to those who have been hesitant or complacent with education policies.

We are entering an era of education reform. Answer the call.

Do you have an opinion on this topic? Tell us!

We love to hear from Texans with opinions on the news — and to publish those views in the Opinion section.

• Letters should be no more than 150 words.

• Writers should submit letters only once every 30 days.

• Include your name, address (including city of residence), phone number and email address, so we can contact you if we have questions.

You can submit a letter to the editor two ways:

• Email letters@star-telegram.com (preferred).

• Fill out this online form.

Please note: Letters will be edited for style and clarity. Publication is not guaranteed. The best letters are focused on one topic.