Private School Vouchers, Hegemony Theory, and Rural Education

• In Event: Navigating Equity-Oriented Praxis in Rural Spaces in a Polarized Political Landscape

Abstract

Objective
This paper uses cultural hegemony theory (Gramsci, 1971; Louw, 2001) to investigate discourses used to advance private school voucher bills in Nebraska, where over half of public schools are rural. These bills represent a financial threat to under-resourced rural districts, as well as the intersection of white, Christian hegemony and neoliberal efforts to destabilize education as a public good (Cervone, 2023).

Theoretical Framework
The post-2020 cultural backlash can be understood as attempts to maintain hegemony, or the domination of one group through the creation and maintenance of the consent, generated through discourses accepted as legitimate by those they seek to dominate. The more natural and obfuscated these discourses, the better they are at creating hidden power. Hegemony theory states that this domination follows predictable patterns (Gramsci, 1971; Louw, 2001), which educational leaders can leverage to resist.

Methods and Data Sources
This study used critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2013) framed by following questions to analyze publicly available documents, including media reports, candidates’ and elected officials’ websites, and hearing transcripts:
• What is the nature of the context within which the communication is taking place?
• Which group(s) is socially and politically dominant?
• How did it get to be the dominant/powerful group?
• How does it stay dominant/powerful?
• How does it manage the discourse(s) within its society?
• Who is resisting the managed discourse(s)?

Results
While nominally non-partisan, Nebraska’s unicameral Masket (2016) identified it as one of the most rapidly polarizing statehouses, which has accelerated since 2016. The voucher bills were brought by a conservative, white, senator representing wealthy suburbs and backed by the governor and senators statewide.

In 2023 and 2024, voucher supporters used discourses that appealed to equity and diversity and tapped into fears of economic non-competitiveness, while neutralizing equity-oriented opposition and obfuscating their intentions. Proponents used phrases like “every single Nebraska child should have access to the best education, no matter their zip code.” However, in unscripted moments, proponents expressed contempt for public education and racist rhetoric.

Opponents attempted to draw attention to the obfuscation, noting discrimination of private schools and arguing the bills served to enrich “certain individuals and corporations under the guise of serving kids.” In 2024, an opponent called out the anti-democratic intent: “the only apparent reason for the introduction of LB1402 at this time is to effectively preempt the right of the people to meaningfully exercise their legislative authority through the power of the referendum.” Just as they had the previous year, opponents mobilized for a successful signature drive to put a referendum on the ballot. However, it seems likely that elected officials and out-of-state groups will pour money into fighting it. As one blogger wrote, “Vouchers, after all, must be protected from democracy at all costs.”

Significance
This study identifies the discourses used by school voucher proponents to advance anti-democratic policy. By calling attention to these discourses, proponents of public education and democracy can begin to frame discourses capable of resisting this project, particularly in rural places already threatened by the neoliberal nature of education policy.
(499/500)

Author

• Sarah J Zuckerman, University of Nebraska - Lincoln