A federal school voucher program, or “universal school choice” as supporters call it, is a key piece of the Right’s agenda to dramatically change education as we’ve known it. A central element in the Project 2025 agenda, the effort began a little over a week after President Donald Trump took office and signed an executive order aimed at expanding the use of public funds for private education.
The Privateers: How Billionaires Created a Culture War and Sold School Vouchers
Josh Cowen
Harvard Education Press (2024)
Then, earlier this month, as part of a broader reconciliation bill that also proposes extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, Republicans advanced a $20-billion federal school voucher program. And just last week, on the very day the Supreme Court blocked the use of federal funding for religious education, the House passed a domestic policy bill that would create a $5 billion federal school voucher program, the majority of which would be used to pay for religious education.
Despite mounting evidence that such programs are both ineffective and unpopular, school choice remains a cornerstone of the MAGA agenda. In order to better understand the reasons behind this enduring support—and what can be done to push back against it—RD recently spoke with Josh Cowen, a professor of public policy and author of The Privateers: How Billionaires Created a Culture War and Sold School Vouchers.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Can you tell us a bit about what led to this book?
Over the past 20 years, evaluating various public programs, especially in education, I’ve always sought to examine what is or is not working for kids and families in education, and why. School voucher programs have historically shown some of the most significant negative impacts in education, with effects comparable to the test score declines seen after events like Hurricane Katrina or COVID-19.
By 2019, the research community largely believed that vouchers were on the decline, as newer programs continued to show increasingly poor outcomes for students. Despite this, in the last few years, there’s been a surge in states passing or expanding voucher programs, particularly in Republican-led states that supported Donald Trump in 2020. This shift prompted me to ask why these harmful programs continue to gain traction.
My conclusion points to the rise of Christian nationalism, which has played a key role in reinvigorating support for vouchers. This movement is part of a broader wave of right-wing cultural battles, including book bans and debates over race and gender in schools, which have given new momentum to the push for school choice programs.
I appreciate your recognition of the role of the Christian right and Christian nationalists. But how do voucher programs continue to advance given that right-wing views are actually minoritarian?
One word: billionaires. And a few in particular….Betsy DeVos, of course, but also Charles Koch and the Koch network [who] are big players in the voucher scene that I don’t think folks are as well aware of. And there are newer figures such as Jeff Yass in Pennsylvania, Wilson Dunn, and two billionaire pastors in Texas. But it starts with DeVos and Koch at the top of the pyramid. And then you have your usual suspects (the Heritage Foundation, etc.).
The very first paragraph in the education chapter of Project 2025 [calls for] the ending of the Department of Education—the chief anti-discrimination authority in the United States when it comes to schools—which is why they’re trying to do away with it.
Paragraphs two and three are about vouchers, but that’s gotten less coverage even though it’s a major priority for the Trump agenda and for right-wing think tanks. This is a key piece of their long-term education agenda, which needs to be understood as part of an overall effort to remake schools and, in particular, to win funding for private religious education.
Can you say more about Betsy DeVos’ relationship to the school voucher movement?
The DeVos family has been the chief force behind school vouchers. As journalist Katherine Stewart says in her book, the modern American Republican Party, specifically its religious wing, is a product of [the] billionaire family in West Michigan. She refers not only to Betsy DeVos but to her in-laws and husband as well. Public policy, especially promoting religion, has been a DeVos priority since the 1970s.
Betsy DeVos’s niche is vouchers, and she’s been pushing these for at least 25 years. She has stated clearly that the whole point here is to “advance God’s kingdom,” lamented how public schools have taken over community centers and advocated for churches to replace them, with vouchers serving as the vehicle for this transformation.
Despite significant effort and investment, vouchers have faced voter resistance, leading to a slow and costly push through state legislatures. The voucher lobby has been claiming that there’s a groundswell of parent support, but what’s really happening is that red state legislatures have become more “MAGA-fied,” and the DeVos family has strategically invested in Republican primaries.
Could you elaborate on the role of the Christian Right as key players in the push for school vouchers, particularly how their influence has magnified legislative power to facilitate this? Are their tactics primarily electoral or more focused on culture wars?
There’s a strong electoral component to this strategy, particularly at the state legislative level. The voucher push could not have succeeded from a policy perspective without an electoral strategy targeting these legislatures. In Project 2025, Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, explicitly identifies school vouchers as a key litmus test for future “conservative presidential candidates.” This creates a clear, explicit connection between pro-voucher efforts and electoral politics.
However, electoral strategies are just one part of how political actors organize and mobilize. Major interest groups, particularly those tied to the Koch network, are well-known for creating astroturf organizations. Americans for Prosperity, a prominent Koch-funded group, focuses on grassroots activities like door-knocking, distributing literature, and phone banking. Organizations like Betsy DeVos’s American Federation for Children target legislators directly through traditional lobbying.
These groups operate with immense financial resources. CNN obtained an investor slide deck from the American Federation for Children, revealing that, since 2013, they have spent over $250 million on pro-voucher political activities. Of course, their efforts reportedly won back $25 billion in state voucher funding—which suggests a return of $100 in taxpayer dollars for every $1 invested by DeVos’s people and demonstrates their remarkable effectiveness in achieving policy goals.
This high-stakes approach mirrors strategies used for other [Christian] Right priorities, such as book bans. For instance, campaigns often highlight so-called ‘angry parents,’ only to reveal that it’s just a single individual challenging 20 books. These efforts are frequently tied to astroturf groups like Moms for Liberty, which amplify these isolated incidents into broader cultural and political movements. These strategies underscore the combination of high-dollar funding and calculated grassroots tactics used to advance their agenda.
For education justice advocates and organizers, what strategies have worked—or failed—in blocking the school voucher movement?
It’s important to remember that no school voucher system has ever passed through a statewide ballot initiative—ever. That’s why proponents have had to primary out Republican legislators and push these bills through state legislatures instead. Historically, voters have acted as a deterrent, and even Republican legislators were a barrier. And these measures haven’t even been close; they’re usually rejected by margins like 65-35, similar to abortion politics.
There’s actually a clear overlap between the anti-abortion movement and the school voucher push: they share the same funders, organizations, and playbook. In my state, Betsy DeVos is a key player, but the tactics and networks are strikingly similar across the country. Since ballot initiatives have repeatedly failed, proponents have shifted to using supermajorities in Republican-controlled legislatures to advance their agenda. On the opposing side, there are teachers’ unions, stakeholder groups like superintendents’ associations, and some organized resistance. I’ve written about these groups and spoken to them, but the opposition lacks a unified, billionaire-funded network. Instead, the real counterweight is the voters themselves.
So what kind of political infrastructure would be helpful in combatting voucherization? Or would it be better to mobilize voters directly?
I think the courts play a significant role in this issue. On one hand, campaign finance laws—especially after Citizens United—have enabled dark money to flow into think tanks and super PACs which can now coordinate with political candidates. This has amplified the influence of wealthy individuals and organizations.
On the other hand, federal courts have been pivotal in advancing school voucher systems. While state courts have historically been more hesitant to approve these measures, federal courts—dominated by Republican-appointed judges since the Bush era—have largely endorsed them. The first major Supreme Court case on vouchers, Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), upheld vouchers in a narrow 5-4 decision, stating that they did not violate the Establishment Clause. However, the Court stopped short of further involvement, which still paved the way for subsequent initiatives, including a federal voucher program in D.C.
More recently, three Supreme Court cases— Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer (2017), Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020), and Carson v. Makin (2022)—have expanded voucher policies. These cases shifted the focus from the Establishment Clause to the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The argument now is that if states fund private school choice programs, they must allow participation by religious schools, or they risk violating individuals’ Free Exercise rights.
In Carson v. Makin, the Court even ruled that religious schools could use voucher dollars specifically for religious education, significantly broadening the scope of these programs. This decision came just three days before Dobbs v. Jackson, where the same six conservative justices overturned 50 years of reproductive rights precedent.
In the long term—over the next 25 years—any effort to address these issues must include convincing the courts of the fundamental inequities inherent in voucher systems. As I argue in my book, these programs cater to those who align with the values of Christian nationalists, leaving those who “don’t look, love, or live” according to that mold excluded. At some point, this reality must be directly confronted in legal challenges.
Can you say more about the connection with the reproductive justice movement?
The rollbacks to reproductive freedom are nothing more than right-wing religious nationalism. There isn’t even a pretense of an economic libertarian rationale for them. In fact, under any reasonable, expansive definition of freedom, personal autonomy—control over one’s body—should be foundational. But that’s not what these people care about. They’re not interested in freedom or liberty; their goal is to impose a [Christian] nationalist vision of public policy.
This explains how the same six conservative justices can simultaneously endorse vouchers under the banner of ‘education freedom’ while stripping away reproductive rights. They define ‘education freedom’ as taxpayer dollars funding religious education, but how can this idea of freedom coexist with the erosion of reproductive freedom, marriage equality, freedom of speech, or even the right to read books Betsy DeVos and her allies disapprove of?
Their concept of freedom is narrow and self-serving, and the only unifying thread across these seemingly contradictory stances is [Christian] nationalism. Philosophically, that’s the connection: the prioritization of Christian nationalist values above all else. Politically, it’s evident in their agenda. For example, Project 2025 has been meticulously documented as a roadmap for restricting reproductive freedom—not just abortion, but also contraception and general reproductive healthcare.
In the courts, this alignment is even more striking. The same week the Supreme Court overturned 50 years of reproductive rights with Dobbs v. Jackson, they expanded the rights of religious schools to receive taxpayer funding in Carson v. Makin. That decision allows private religious schools to discriminate based on their [religious beliefs], including requiring families to sign “sexual morality pledges” that ban behaviors like being divorced, gay, or pregnant as a teenager.
These efforts aren’t always coordinated step by step, but they share a common goal: reshaping America to reflect Christian nationalist values. The attacks on reproductive freedom and the push for “education freedom” are two sides of the same movement, funded and driven by overlapping groups and ideologies.
What about racial justice movements? Could you elaborate on the connection between school vouchers and anti-DEI efforts?
The Heritage Foundation has released reports that nearly suggest the problem with public education lies in the growing number of students of color. In 2022, a report titled “School Choice Can Reduce Wokeism in American Education” linked school choice—specifically vouchers—with combating “wokeism” in schools. The Foundation has continued to argue that charter schools, which serve a disproportionate number of students of color, have become “too woke” in their approach to education.
Historically, vouchers were linked to the resistance against Brown v. Board of Education and racial integration in schools. In the 1950s, some states, including Texas, required parents applying for a voucher to sign an affidavit stating they were doing so to avoid racial integration. This racial element has carried over into modern voucher politics, as seen in the rhetoric surrounding school choice today. Christopher Rufo, a leading figure in the anti-CRT movement, has tied universal vouchers to growing distrust in public schools, particularly over issues of race and gender.
Ron DeSantis, Governor of Florida, is a prominent figure advancing both voucher systems and anti-DEI agendas. In May 2022, he signed the largest voucher system in the U.S. and shortly thereafter defended a public school curriculum that suggested slavery had economic benefits for enslaved people. Such rhetoric, once considered politically damaging, now serves to reinforce the agendas of political figures like DeSantis, who are pushing for school privatization and the diversion of public funds to religious, private institutions while promoting a form of Christian nationalism.
If you were to recommend your book to others, what are some key strategic insights or reasons why people should pick it up?
First, vouchers do not solve educational inequality. The results are devastating: three-quarters of voucher users were already attending private schools before using them. Vouchers also pose a financial threat to public schools, whether your child attends them or simply benefits from them as community hubs. They defund public schools, and the outcomes for children who use vouchers are dire.
Second, it’s important to note that recent voucher systems aren’t about school choice for parents—they’re about schools choosing who gets in. These schools determine admission, and they can reject children who don’t fit their criteria. The rhetoric around vouchers suggests that parents can pick the best school for their child, but the reality is that the schools are doing the picking.
Third, vouchers discriminate against vulnerable kids and families. The push for vouchers is deeply intertwined with the rise of Christian nationalism within the American political landscape. The same groups advocating for vouchers often promote misleading narratives, like the false claim that Donald Trump won the 2020 election. So, if you’re unsure about where you stand on vouchers, keep in mind that they represent a direct threat to public schools, they limit parents’ actual choices, and they disproportionately harm vulnerable children. Ultimately, this movement is part of a broader political agenda that prioritizes right-wing Christian nationalism.
Since the publication of the book, have there been any developments that either confirm or complicate your findings?
Since the release of the book, there haven’t been developments that have undermined my findings or arguments. In fact, right-wing critics, such as “Libs of TikTok,” the Heritage Foundation, and the authors of Project 2025, have been eager to challenge the narrative I present. Such a reaction actually signals that I’ve touched a nerve. My book complicates the claim that the voucher movement is a purely grassroots, parent-driven effort—in fact, it has been a political operation for decades.
Normally, when you write a book, you hope that it will still be relevant by the time it’s published. I didn’t anticipate the resurgence of Project 2025 (which I was able to address in the book’s epilogue), nor the central role vouchers would play in Trump’s education platform. This continued, sustained push, which still remains a key issue in political debates, stands out as a major development—especially with states like Tennessee and Texas planning new initiatives. That’s the biggest surprise—how persistent the voucher movement has been.
