The "school choice" movement is interesting, because it has managed to claim an egalitarian mantle, while really being an anti-egalitarian movement. Take this quote, excerpted from a news article by Rick Garnett:
"No parent should be forced to send a child to school that does not meet the child's needs," O'Brien said. "This is good legislation to allow parents to give their children the best chance possible to succeed. It makes school choice a reality for many children who lack the ability to find an educational environment where they can thrive."The result of school choice programs will be to let a few more children into private schools, while driving up the cost of education across the board and driving down the quality of the remaining public schools significantly (I talked about this in more detail here and here). Unless we fully commit to a private education system with guaranteed, fully paid vouchers for the poor (for any school they want to go to, not for a specific amount), "school choice" will help middle-class children (and those in certain religious communities with strong sectarian education programs) at the cost of damaging the situation for those who are truly struggling.
The "school choice" movement has been effective with their rhetoric, but don't buy into the idea that "school choice" is really about helping the disadvantaged.