New York is joining the federal scholarship tax-credit program. More options for families deserve a fair test—and real accountability.
School choice should not become a bad idea the moment a Democrat accepts it. Conservatives who want parents to have more options should welcome Kathy Hochul's decision on a federal scholarship program, even if they disagree with her on almost everything else.
On October 9, the New York governor announced that the state would participate in the federal scholarship tax-credit program. Chalkbeat reported that she pointed to potential benefits for public-school students as well as families using other educational options. Participation does not mean every family has received a scholarship, and it does not turn the governor into a convert to every conservative education policy.
The federal government's temporary regulations describe a nonrefundable credit for qualifying contributions to scholarship-granting organizations, beginning with the 2027 tax year. This is a tax-credit mechanism, not simply a new check handed to every parent. Its results will depend on implementation and which families actually receive assistance.
New York State United Teachers responded with a statement expressing profound disappointment and promising continued opposition. The union argues that the program threatens public education. Its separate October 8 statement also raised concerns about federal control and inadequate safeguards. Those objections deserve examination, but union opposition should not function as a veto over families' choices.
The central conservative argument is straightforward: an education system exists to educate children, not to guarantee that every child remains inside the same institutional arrangement. Supporting a neighborhood public school and wanting an alternative for a particular child are perfectly compatible positions.
A parent should not have to prove that all public schools are bad before seeking a different setting. One child may need a smaller environment. Another may need specialized help. A family may value religious education. These are reasons to ask whether an option works, not occasions to lecture parents about loyalty to a system.
Still, supporters should resist advertising choice as a magic word that eliminates financial scrutiny. A tax credit carries a public cost through forgone revenue. Scholarship organizations should be transparent about administration, eligibility and awards. Families should receive clear information about expenses a scholarship will not cover and services a school does not provide.
Those safeguards strengthen the case for choice. They help distinguish a real opportunity from a program that sounds generous while leaving ordinary parents tangled in paperwork. Conservatives should be especially impatient with any intermediary that consumes resources while making itself indispensable.
Hochul's move creates an opening rather than a finished success story. It should be judged by whether students gain useful opportunities, including students who remain in public schools, and whether the program earns the trust of the families it claims to serve.
Give the governor credit for making the decision. Then demand results. Parents need neither a union permission slip nor a partisan loyalty test before they can want something better for their children.
Marcus Bennett is a conservative commentator focused on crime, education, economic opportunity, urban policy, and American culture. Raised in a working-class community outside Atlanta, Bennett developed his politics around the belief that public policy should be judged by results rather than intentions. His columns frequently examine failing institutions, public safety, family stability, educational reform, and the political assumptions surrounding Black Americans. Bennett brings a skeptical, data-driven approach to political arguments and has little patience for ideological explanations that fail to match conditions on the ground.
Discussion
Loading discussion…