Hardly, counters state Rep. Carol Spackman Moss, D-Holladay. Vouchers ultimately will lead to a reduction of teachers and funding and that will bring more overcrowding.

The debate Thursday at the University of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics was the first face-to-face clash of the voucher-referendum season that will end with a vote in November.

Despite plenty of time for answers, an audience of college students and a pile of Oreo cookies as a teaching aide, the debate didn't change anyone's mind.

Moss said the state's voucher program would aid few families beyond the rich and middle class, who will walk away with a small state subsidy to send their kids to private school.

Despite arguments that vouchers will open private school doors to the poor, the $3,000 maximum annual subsidy would mean little to low-income families, she said. It would only be a token payment toward quality private school education.

"This is not the bill that will accomplish the most appropriate and most efficient education for our kids," said Moss, a retired public school teacher.

But Eyre, stacking Oreos, demonstrated that when a student leaves a public school for a private one, he would get $500 to $3,000 in voucher money, but the student would leave behind between $4,000 and $6,500 of the $7,000 in tax money that is annually spent on each public school student - that's four to six and a half Oreos.

"It's great for public schools because [it means] lower class sizes and more money," said Eyre, who, with his wife Linda authors books on family and nurturing.

The parents and students win, he said, because they have educational choices. "Parents are the wisest people to choose what their kids need."

After five years, Moss said, the so-called mitigation money for schools that lose students to private education will likely disappear. Worse, she argued, the voucher program fails to provide basic accountability for taxpayers' money. Private schools would only be required to give students one test annually.

On the other hand, public school student performance, she said, is scrutinized closely and the information is made available to all taxpayers.

"Many things are public about public schools. The same standards are not required for private schools," Moss said.

But Eyre argued that market forces would have a regulatory effect on private schools, which would be competing for students.

"Markets tend to produce creativity and competition and a lot of good innovation." he said.

In a straw ballot after the debate, the audience was closely split on the issue and no one raised a hand to indicate his or her opinion had changed as a result of Moss and Eyre's arguments.