The once venerable British magazine The Economist went looney left about 20 years ago when their honest skepticism about global warming morphed into a position of climate hysteria.

Ever since, the magazine echoes the propaganda of the left, not real news. Consider their recent bogus claim that school choice harms students.  Writing a stark warning against a broad voucher bill that allows low-income kids in Texas to receive as much as $10,000 in tuition support to attend private schools.  The editors wrote:

In theory vouchers turn education into a marketplace, rewarding good schools and punishing bad ones. In practice it hasn’t worked like that in America so far. Research shows that such reforms lead to bleak academic outcomes. Fifteen states have passed universal voucher programs, in which students from both rich and poor families are eligible. Early studies of single cities looked promising. But over time statewide analyses came to conclude that on average pupils do worse under voucher systems.

This is a complete fabrication.

We asked our friends at EdChoice which “statewide analyses” The Economist was referring to, and they were stumped. What we do know is that they ignored volumes of statistical evidence that prove the opposite.

EdChoice’s literature summary finds nearly universal benefits from choice programs:

We give The Economist an F grade here. We are also canceling our subscription and we hope you do too.