A Libertarian defense of Amendment 2: Freeing Kentucky’s families to choose. | Opinion

The recent slate of editorials and articles in the Lexington Herald-Leader opposing Amendment 2 typically argues that directing public funds to private institutions is not only misguided but also discriminatory, fiscally draining and regionally biased.

However, these perspectives overlook a fundamental principle central to Amendment 2: empowering individuals — that is, parents and children instead of entrenched institutions. From a classical libertarian perspective, the school choice debate behind Amendment 2 centers on expanding freedom for families and ensuring that every child, regardless of circumstances, has access to educational options that meet their needs—not exclusively the needs of locally monopolistic public school systems.

First, let’s address the claim that Amendment 2 is a tool for segregation or merely a funnel to support religious schools, as some critics allege. The reality is that current public school attendance models inherently disadvantage students from low-income areas, trapping them in underperforming schools with few opportunities for improvement. Vouchers, educational savings accounts, and other school choice mechanisms potentially disrupt this cycle by giving families the ability to access schools—public, private, or charter—that are better suited to meet their children’s needs. Far from reinforcing inequality, school choice provides a pathway for disadvantaged students to escape failing systems and access better educational opportunities.

Critics of Amendment 2 also claim that school vouchers will “drain” public resources from public schools, but this argument ignores a fundamental economic reality: competition drives improvement. A one-size-fits-all public school system operates much like any monopoly, often lacking the incentive to innovate or improve because it faces no competition. Introducing choice compels public schools to be more responsive and ultimately more accountable to the communities they serve. When public schools compete for students, they have a stronger incentive to enhance the quality of education they provide. This benefits students who leave for other options but also benefits those who remain in the public system by fostering an environment of continuous improvement.

Opponents of Amendment 2 also argue that school choice will disproportionately harm rural districts, where there are fewer private schools from which to choose. But this perspective is arguably short-sighted. As evidenced by the most recent Kentucky 2022-2023 School Report Card, many of these areas are already struggling with lackluster educational outcomes. School choice can be a game-changer for families in these underfunded regions by providing funds to help parents access alternative educational options, whether that’s online schools, hybrid models, or specialized private tutors. It is precisely in these underserved districts where the flexibility of choice can have the most transformative impact.

Finally, while elementary and secondary education are public goods, it fails to follow that education must be exclusively delivered through state-run schools. In health care, housing, and dozens of other areas, public funds are used to provide vouchers or subsidies that empower recipients to choose private providers. Why should education be any different? If the goal is to ensure every child has access to a quality education, then public policy should prioritize the child—not the system.

Libertarians fundamentally believe in the power of competition, freedom of choice, and market-based solutions. Amendment 2 is not an attack on public education; it’s an opportunity to bring dynamism and opportunity to a rigid system that too often fails Kentucky’s children. Every parent deserves the right to decide what’s best for their child, and every student deserves access to an education that fits their unique needs, not one predetermined by their zip code. Amendment 2 embraces a future where education is driven by the needs and aspirations of families, not local and state bureaucracies. Let’s trust Kentucky’s parents and allow them to help the General Assembly choose the best path forward for their children. Because when individuals are given the freedom to choose, innovation and opportunity ultimately follow.

Dr. Ken Miller is a registered independent and was recently a registered Libertarian.