You're automatically insisting that the "current waste" will continue under a more competitive program. The public schools will be forced to compete. They will be forced to cut wasteful spending and budgeting. They will be forced to get rid of excess overhead. It'll either be that or die.
The NEA, NAACP and all kinds of others will wail and gnash their teeth and fuss and have a veritable fit. I think the Feds could administer this just as well as the states. I think there would be plenty of overhead in the beginning, but the larger problem (and the primary reason that the Feds would have to get involved) is that there are states (like Georgia's Democratic administration) where the governor and the state administration have vowed not to make vouchers available to the citizenry.
I would prefer the vouchers to be administered on a state level, in any event. State collegiate level programs (like Georgia's HOPE Scholarship program) have a much better track record than Federal programs; I am sure that would remain the case on the grade school level. You get no arguement from me on that. I insist, however, that once the schools are forced into a competitive situation, that as a direct result of decreased costs, that the NEA will lose much (if not all) of their power. The schools will (in many cases) dump union teachers and hire from outside their ranks; once this happens, the better teachers will find positions in schools where they desire results - the ones who are only there for a check (and today find themselves protected by the Unions) will fall by the wayside.
I have to reiterate - I have no desire to pay for substandard public schools where wasting money is the norm. All I am asking is for me to have a say in where my dollars go. Of course, by asking that, the Dems turn me (and everyone else here who wants that) into some kind of heartless pariah. Now if asking for the opportunity to direct my own school dollars is a form of welfare, then maybe I don't understand what welfare is.