Force charter schools to take the worst students that the public system is stuck with, and you'll very quickly find that they will perform just as poorly as the public system.
Let the public system expel anyone it doesn't like (preferably into the charter system), and miraculously, all metrics will improve.
As a bonus, you'll also find that the political support for vouchers will evaporate overnight.
> and you'll very quickly find that they will perform just as poorly as the public system
Has there even been enough time and experimentation to generate evidence for this? Do you have any sources you’re willing to share?
> As a bonus, you'll also find that the political support for vouchers will evaporate overnight
I find this to be really cynical, as if a better or more efficient alternative source of education cannot exist. Do you really think that a single public school system with no competition, the negatives of teachers unions, and a dismal track record has zero room to improve? To me these blanket attacks against private options are basically saying that no one can do better, which is not a view we would hold about most other things in our society. Choice and competition are inherently good.
You can do almost the same thing by only allowing charter schools to accept vouchers if the vouchers cover the entirety of the education costs. The first thing that happens when you introduce vouchers at the cost of a charter schools' tuition is that they raise the price of education so that there is a nominal financial barrier to overcome that poor parents can't afford.
Let the public system expel anyone it doesn't like (preferably into the charter system), and miraculously, all metrics will improve.
As a bonus, you'll also find that the political support for vouchers will evaporate overnight.