I am a conservative. So not surprisingly, I'm no fan of universal healthcare. But, I am a tentative advocate of universal education- surprise, surprise!
A central tenet of conservative political thought is a fervent opposition to any sort of expansion of federal government power and interference with personal freedom, both of which occur in a universal healthcare proposal. Universal education is different, and actually turns out to be more in line with conservative thought than you might initially think.
So, an examination of universal education is in order. Yes, it sounds like universal healthcare, and I suppose appears very similar on the surface. Universal healthcare advocates want to grant medical insurance coverage to every American by federal legislation. The intent of this program is laudable, but the realities of such a system would probably cause more harm than good. Universal healthcare takes away citizens' freedom (remember, that’s a conservative tenet) to choose health insurance for themselves, and would greatly expand government bureaucracy and spending (the other conservative value I mentioned).
Now, universal education, on the other hand, would have the government entirely (or at least nearly entirely) pay for all eligible citizens' postsecondary education. True, such a program would cost the government billions in taxpayers' dollars (and conservatives hate taxes just like they hate spending), but this program may not be as socialistic and anti-conservative as it seems.
Firstly, universal education would not force students to attend a specific school, like universal healthcare forces a specific medical insurance plan upon citizens. Secondly, no massive governmental bureaucracy is necessary to execute and enforce it.
The basics of universal education, as I currently envision it, would go as follows. Any person with a high school diploma is eligible to receive a government grant to attend a postsecondary trade school or college. The government would not pay for all colleges, though- only public or perhaps even just community colleges. Private universities' tuition costs are far too high to be feasibly paid for by the government for millions of people. A student who drops out or is expelled loses his eligibility.
I know this plan would cost billions and billions of dollars, and yet I've been insisting it's actually somewhat conservative in nature. So how do I justify that claim? Well, I think one of the foundations of conservative (and therefore usually Republican) thought is demonstrated by the cliché, "Give a man a fish, and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and feed him for a lifetime." Democrats want to give needy Americans handouts (or "fish," to stick with the clichéd metaphor). That's compassionate and honorable, and a good thing to do, but you have to supply people dependent on the state with “fish” every single day of their lives. Multiply that by several million, and you have a big, costly problem. Republicans, on the other hand, would rather give Americans the opportunity to empower themselves so that they may support themselves ("teach them to fish"). This approach is a "one and done" approach- it helps the citizen once, and he needs no more help from the governmen. It is far more efficient and cheaper than the Democratic approach. This principle is the foundation of the justification for universal education.
Now, I'll demonstrate the long-term, money saving effects of the proposal. It requires a massive initial investment, but would more than pay for itself. People with college degrees are able to acquire jobs which pay significantly higher salaries than those without, meaning the citizenry of the country will become richer. As another result of this, the issue of universal healthcare becomes less important- a better educated citizenry means more people can afford the insurance offered by private healthcare companies.
The true value of universal education is that it addresses many of America’s social ills: poverty, crime, racism, and illiteracy. Research demonstrates that education helps fight all four of these problems. And, unlike social welfare programs which only offer short-time relief for poverty, universal education provides Americans with the long-term tools they need to better their own lives. In essence, it is the ultimate way to teach all of America “how to fish,” thus resulting in all Americans being able to “feed themselves for a lifetime”- no government interference necessary. It’s a conservative’s dream.
