Beyond the Rhetoric: What Americans Really Think About School Choice 

A reality check from the front lines of the national conversation 

When EdChoice President and CEO Robert Enlow joined Pedro Echevarria on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, the conversation offered more than just a rundown of education policy—it offered a rare glimpse into how Americans feel about school choice, in real time. Through live caller feedback, the interview exposed both how far the movement has come and how far public understanding still has to go. 

Dispelling Common School Choice Myths 

The conversation began by cutting straight to one of the most persistent myths in education policy: that school choice programs—especially vouchers—undermine public schools. 

“It is patently false, and we know it to be false,” Enlow said. “Every study that’s been done on school choice with public finances has shown it has not had a negative impact on public schooling.” In fact, public education funding has steadily increased—up 13% in the past decade to $850 billion nationwide. “It’s not a spending problem,” he continued. “It’s an outcome problem.” 

More than anything, Enlow emphasized, it’s a safety problem. “Parents want their kids to be in a school that is safe,” he said, pointing to a core motivator that often gets lost in policy debates. “That’s the number one thing we hear from families—far more than academic rankings or curriculum. They want to know their child will come home safe every day.” 

That’s what’s driving many families to explore school choice—not ideology, but concern. When asked whether private schools are the real beneficiaries of voucher programs, Enlow flipped the premise. “It’s families who benefit,” he said. “There’s not a single dollar that goes to a private school unless a parent chooses that school. The funding follows the student—not the system.” 

Redefining Equity: Who Really Benefits? 

If concerns about funding dominated the start of the conversation, questions about fairness quickly followed. One caller from New Hampshire voiced frustration that taxpayer money could subsidize private school tuition for families who may already be able to afford it, while cooperative school districts continue to struggle. 

Enlow challenged that premise head-on: “We already provide substantial public funding to wealthy families through traditional public schools. When a millionaire moves to an affluent district and sends their child to a public school that spends $17,000 per pupil, no one questions the use of those tax dollars.” But when a working-class family wants to use a fraction of that—say, $5,000—for a private or charter option, he explained, critics suddenly cry foul. 

For Enlow, the real inequity is not how public dollars are used, but who gets to decide where they go. “A system where your zip code determines your options is fundamentally unjust,” he said. “School choice breaks that connection. It allows the public’s investment in education to follow the child—not the district lines.” 

Teachers Know: Choice Helps Families 

Support for school choice isn’t limited to parents—it includes educators who see firsthand how the system is falling short. Michael, a public school teacher from North Carolina, called in to share his perspective: He supports school choice because he’s watched too many students slip through the cracks of a one-size-fits-all system. He believes families deserve more options. 

Enlow welcomed the perspective and pointed to data that confirms what Michael and many educators already know: school choice and strong public schools can coexist. According to EdChoice’s latest polling, 60% of teacher union members support education savings accounts (ESAs) when asked in general terms. When they understand how ESAs allow families to use a portion of their education funding to personalize learning, that support jumps to 74%. 

Later in the program, Janine—a 30-year veteran educator from Kentucky—called in with a similar message. Teachers like Michael and Janine reflect a broader truth: many educators see school choice not as a threat to their profession, but as an essential tool to help students thrive. As Enlow noted, “They see it as a way to create the conditions where all schools, including traditional public schools, can better serve families.” 

Accountability That Starts with Parents 

Another caller from Wisconsin raised an important concern about accountability: If private schools are receiving public funds, shouldn’t they be held to the same testing and oversight standards as public schools? 

Enlow acknowledged the need for accountability—but reframed the question. “Accountability should start with parents,” he said. “If a school isn’t serving their child well, they can leave. That’s a level of accountability that doesn’t exist in the traditional system, where you’re often stuck with whatever school your zip code assigns.” 

He also pointed to the competitive effect: multiple studies have shown that when school choice programs are introduced, nearby public schools tend to improve their performance more quickly. “Competition doesn’t hurt public schools—it helps them get better.” 

The Federal Role: Support Without Control 

The conversation also touched on the federal landscape, particularly the proposed Educational Choice for Children Act currently included in the House budget. Enlow described the legislation as a tax credit scholarship program designed to spur more private donations to scholarship-granting organizations. While the effort is federal in scope, he emphasized that the design respects state control and parental authority. 

“It does a great job of balancing the roles,” he said. “Education belongs at the state level and in the hands of parents. This is a truly private program—it allows individuals to give to nonprofits that support families directly.” 

Backed by decades of research, Enlow made the case that school choice is one of the most well-studied education reforms in the country. “We’ve now reviewed 188 studies on school choice outcomes. Of those, 166 show positive gains for students, 11 are neutral, and only a small number show negative effects.” 

Civil Rights Protections Are Non-Negotiable 

Ted from Chicago called in to raise a more nuanced concern. As both a teacher and a union member who supports school choice, he pressed Enlow on what dismantling the U.S. Department of Education would mean for students with disabilities and other vulnerable populations. 

Enlow clarified EdChoice’s position: “We absolutely support maintaining federal civil rights protections in education. That’s not up for debate. The real question is about how those protections are enforced—not whether they should exist.” 

He noted that about 90% of education funding comes from state and local sources, and most meaningful policy decisions happen at that level. But that doesn’t absolve the federal government of responsibility. “Whether those protections are enforced by the Department of Education, the Department of Justice, or another agency—that’s an implementation question. The protections themselves are essential.” 

A Movement Shaped by Real People 

As the interview wrapped up, Enlow reflected on the range of voices who called in—parents concerned about equity, teachers advocating for choice, skeptics worried about oversight, and supporters seeking solutions. 

“School choice isn’t a silver bullet,” he admitted. “It’s not the answer for every family. But for millions of American families, it’s offering something they didn’t have before: a choice. And for students who were trapped in schools that weren’t serving them well, it’s quite literally changing their lives.” 

The next chapter for school choice isn’t just about expanding programs—it’s about getting implementation right, making sure families can actually access the options available to them, and building systems that prioritize children over politics. 

“This isn’t about ideology,” Enlow said. “It’s about kids. And they deserve better than the status quo.”

Robert Enlow is President and CEO of EdChoice. Click here to watch the full interview.