Panelists and members of the audience traded versions of data meant to provide substance but never quite convincing. At one point Mike Fox, chair of the Ohio House Education Committee, charged that an AFT report on the Cleveland voucher plan was a "fantasy paper." Fox was an author of the voucher legislation and is a strong supporter of vouchers for urban parents.

Researchers on the panel didn't fare much better, however. Paul Peterson of Harvard U., author of a controversial study of the Milwaukee voucher plan, and Eric Hanushek of the University of Rochester, author of a study on school spending, could present little evidence of public schools improving because of local vouchers. One of the main arguments for vouchers is that competition will improve public schools. There is evidence, Hanushek said, "that public schools improve if there is a mechanism to put pressure on them," but he didn't limit the pressure to vouchers.

Others on the panel argued for greater support and policies to improve all schools rather than give a few students a way to opt out of the public school system. "People are selling vouchers as if they were a silver bullet," said Barbara Clark, assemblywoman from New York. James Rhoades, chair of the Senate Education Committee in Pennsylvania, also said he opposed his governor's voucher plans because they would have included less than a sixth of the students in the state. "I need to ask what am I doing for all kids," he said.

After a local elected official from an urban district charged that state policymakers were not around to help parents and communities push for improvements, Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson showed his dander. "That's hypocritical," he said. "We need a lot of efforts, not just vouchers, and I am the first one to support whatever will get quality into the schools. Public officials are ready to stand up for that, but I don't find any union people willing to do that."

Saying he would like some of that pressure in New York State, Louis Grumet said policymakers should improve every school and get rid of barriers, such as tenure. He considered it ironic and troubling that society has demanded schools serve children with disabilities and set very high standards, then policymakers devise voucher programs "so parents can get away from the disabled and the standards."

The AFT report, attacked by Fox and others, charges that the Cleveland voucher program is more costly than commonly believed. Furthermore, 67 percent of students receiving vouchers in the first year were already in private schools or were kindergartners. Almost one-half of the students attended four new schools, two of which were started by a local businessman who, AFT said, is a major political supporter of the governor and key legislators who support vouchers.