EDITORIAL: Ebert comes out in favor of school choice

The newest promoter of school choice might shock you.

The Clark County School District recently announced that some district families will receive a $1,000 reimbursement for transportation costs. Eligible families must be zoned for a 1- or 2-star school and then use open enrollment to attend a 3-star or higher school. Open enrollment allows families to leave their zoned school and attend a district school of their choice that has additional capacity.

Because the district has nearly 200 schools that received a 1- or 2-star rating, many families will be eligible. They still need to find a qualifying school to attend. Even with open enrollment, some high-ranking schools are at capacity and aren’t accepting new students. Another challenge will be educating parents about this option, especially with school starting soon.

“CCSD’s Open Enrollment program allows families to choose the school that works best for them,” Superintendent Jhone Ebert said in a statement.

That’s a laudable and much-needed goal. Her language should also be instantly familiar to anyone who has followed education policy debates over the past decade or two. It’s the same argument used by supporters of school choice.

Department of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos once wrote that her vision for American education is “to give parents freedom to find the best option and fit for their children.”

“Every child deserves the best education available, regardless of their ZIP code,” President Donald Trump wrote in a 2025 executive order promoting school choice. “However, for generations, our government-assigned education system has failed millions of parents, students and teachers.”

“The reasoning for school choice is straightforward: Parents best know the needs of their children,” we wrote in 2021.

There’s a key distinction here. The district’s program is limited to those who end up attending traditional public schools. When Ms. Ebert talks about “the school that works best” for a family, she means a district school. After all, families can receive these funds only if their children attend a higher-performing district school.

But the principle that Ms. Ebert lays out isn’t limited in this artificial way. Families should be able to choose the school that works best for them — whether it’s a private school, charter school or traditional public school. Some may choose to homeschool.

Several states, including Arizona, Florida and Texas, have done this through education savings accounts. These ESAs give parents a portion of the money that state and local governments would have spent on their child. The funds go into a use-restricted account that parents may use to pay for educational expenses, such as tuition, tutoring or textbooks.

Currently, more than 1.5 million students participate in some type of private school choice program. It will likely take a while to ramp up, but the new federal Education Freedom Tax Credit will give many more students access to education scholarships. Thanks to Gov. Joe Lombardo, Nevada students will be able to take advantage of it as well.

These choices have been great for families participating — and for students remaining in public schools. A 2025 Urban Institute study looked at the long-term outcomes of Ohio’s school choice program, called EdChoice. It determined that the voucher program “had positive estimated impacts on students who remained in public schools.” The “effects are particularly pronounced for Black students and students from low-income families.”

It’s encouraging to see Ms. Ebert and the district embrace school choice. Now, they need to expand their definition and fight to truly help every family find the best school for their child, regardless of whether that’s in the public school system.