Whitmer actually vetoed the plan originally a year ago. And as early as then, the state GOP didn’t expect to win the #migov (save for a more recent post-primary fever dream) in #Election2022
So in February they set out to do an end-around Whitmer, leveraging a loophole that allows the #mileg to create laws without the #migov through a petition process.
Problem was, despite @BetsyDeVos buying signatures at $20 a valid name, they got snarled up in the broader state GOP sig-gathering fiasco in May. Despite folks like Mike Pence visiting MI to campaign for it. Doh!
(Hey, turns out when you build a party on undermining votes and election norms, you don’t have the infrastructure to do basic stuff like petition drives…see the #ReproductiveFreedom jump into action post Dobbs as a counter-example)
6/
Finally they submitted signatures 3 months late, and by then DeVos avatar @TudorDixon was the nominee and ready to carry the voucher mantle
Dixon spent some time talking about #schoolvouchers at first, in the “I want the $$ to follow the kids” kind of nonsense that DeVos acolytes mistake for school finance
Despite the fact that in MI that’s already what happens—just not to private school.
I and others argued most of the summer and early fall about the word “voucher.”
It’s a silly debate. These are vouchers. Not “voucher-like.”
But smart GOP folks know vouchers poll poorly. So any name but that!
9/
And anyway, by then Dixon had moved on to her book-banning, culture-warring, LGBTQ+ bullying “parents rights” platform
And that’s what she rode all fall, save for a quick visit by RGA chair and voucher hero @dougducey in October
10/
Needless to say, one way or another #schoolvouchers are dead in the water for now in #miched
But it’s important to understand the DeVos strategy here assumed the GOP would hold the #mileg
11/
That’s why they didn’t file in May, and waited to make sure the DeVos-bought signatures were valid instead of rolling the dice that they were—like Dixon’s were, it turned out. These were some of the same people.
12/
DeVos and co figured there was no particular rush, because the MI Sec State would be obligated to count signatures, and even if Whitmer won (which most expected), she wouldn’t be able to do anything to stop a GOP #mileg from ramming vouchers through in term 2.
13/
What they didn’t count on was both #mileg houses turning blue.
14/
It’s important to understand that #schoolvouchers are broadly unpopular in #miched, as they are in #azed, but as in the latter, the GOP was razor-close to enacting law anyway.
15/
Despite that public opposition, we would have vouchers today if the DeVos people hadn’t assumed $$ would substitute for organization and a healthy respect for electoral institutions.
16/
Their mistake allowed Whitmer and all the #mileg Dems to credibly point out they were all that stood in the way of a $500 million voucher scheme.
If it had already been in place, it’s a different kind of message.
17/
Next to the undeniable power of a vigorous defense of #ReproductiveFreedom, running against a DeVos vision for #miched was a huge part of the MI Dem message. And the results speak for themselves.
/end
PS: the moral of the story is that voucher activists rely on money to win. Michigan shows how out-working them, and making a robust defense of public schools for voters, can be a winning strategy. (Cc @pastors4txkids@pastors4OKkids@BadassTeachersA )
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵 1/ For those who haven’t been neck deep in #schoolchoice debates for two decades let me walk you through the evolution of this argument about outcomes—it was driven by #voucher research.
Early 1990s: #schoolchoice is a rising tide that lifts all academic boats!
2/ 1990s cont’d: #vouchers seem to look pretty cool: Cecilia Rouse’s dissertation finds positive test score effects in Milwaukee’s pilot program and so do Jay Greene and Paul Peterson (well, uh, no shock there 🙄)
3/ 2002-04: Maybe not. Peterson-led work finds + effects of a small privately #voucher program, but then Alan Krueger shows they were highly, ahem, sensitive to model/sample choice. (Who are *you* picking as your starting research QB: Peterson or Krueger?) journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.117…
1/ This piece is fine for what it is. What it and others are understating or flat out missing is the link between religious fanaticism and anti-democratic anti-election white supremacism in the school #privatization push nytimes.com/2022/09/01/opi…
2/ To give serious space to people like DeAngelis (a ~30 yo lobbyist-w/PhD) to give “thoughts” is appropriate for what the #vouchers movement is but to quote him intellectually rather than a political actor misses the role rightwing think-tanks have played in election denialism
3/ It’s esp problematic given the only real offset to #DeVos/DeAngelis is Mann himself who’s been dead since 1859 and isn’t even directly quoted at that.