Penna Dexter
It was hard fought, but North Carolina recently became the 10th state to approve a universal school choice program. The effort began in 2013 with the creation of North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarships. Now, the legislature has expanded the program to grant eligibility to all students in the state, though the amount of the scholarship declines for higher-income families. Families can use the assistance for the schooling of their choice, including private school tuition, instructional materials, and homeschooling expenses.
School closures during the pandemic forced education online and into homes across America. Some parents found a lot they didn’t like in what the public schools were teaching their kids. The Washington Stand reports that, since the pandemic, “1.2 million K-12 students have not returned to public school, with 26% choosing to homeschool.”
Legislatures in states across the nation are responding. Just since 2022, universal school choice has been enacted in Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, and West Virginia. During the same period, 8 other states, have either expanded existing programs or created alternative school choice programs.
School choice has its opponents. When North Carolina’s legislature took up a choice bill, Governor Roy Cooper declared a “state of emergency,” warning “that the Republican legislature is aiming to choke the life out of public education.” The issue led State Rep. Tricia Coddle to switch parties, from Democrat to Republican, and provide the majority needed to override the governor’s expected veto.
Governor Greg Abbott is calling the Texas legislature into special session this month with the express purpose of passing school choice for every child. During the regular session, the Texas Senate passed a bill, but the House did not. The governor promises consequences for Republicans who choose teachers’ unions over Texas parents. When Iowa governor Kim Reynolds faced a similar situation last year she got involved in nine House primary races. In January, Iowa passed universal school choice.
Texas lawmakers: choose the easier way.

Kerby Anderson
As we get closer to the election season with primaries and a general election, we should once again consider how to prevent election fraud. The goal should always be to make it easy to vote and hard to cheat.
Yet whenever the discussion turns toward preventing election fraud, it is often met with the response that this is a solution in search of a problem. We are told there is very little voter fraud, and when it exists it doesn’t affect the final vote in any significant way.
My response has been to ask a question: “Since you do admit there is voter fraud, how much voter fraud do you think is acceptable?” We wouldn’t accept that argument from a bank president if there were problems with the daily reconciling of bank accounts.
Recently Rachel Alexander made the same argument by asking, “What If We Excused Other Crimes the Way We Do Election Fraud?” Many polling places don’t provide a paper trail of the vote. Imagine telling an IRS agent during an audit that “you have no receipts or records for the last few years, so agents need to believe you.” I think you know the answer to that question.
She reminds us that in the banking industry “employees are fired and can be prosecuted if the numbers merely seem off. As with cashiers at stores, a typical amount of money is expected to come in daily. If that number starts being low, security measures like cameras and keystroking devices are put in place to try and discover the theft.”
She then points to various anomalies in several states from the last two elections that always seem to benefit one party. She also documents the fight in courts to prevent video surveillance of ballots being dropped off.
I think we should expect the same professionalism from our elections that we expect from other areas of our society.