Vouchers [Politics/Religion]

[hobbit]

I have no kids in school, so my depth of understanding on this is somewhat limited.  But, I agree with 99% of what Mr. Blader has said.

I'm paying taxes for services I don't use - so what, its a public service and a damn fine one at that.  Even my libertarian leanings have no issue with this 

ANY money given for vouchers is money that is either being taken from already strapped public schools, or could at least goto these schools.  A voucher system would honestly kill some public schools and further marginalize many others.  They deserve it because they suck?  BS - fix em.

Wanna fix the public schools - it really starts with the parents anyway.


(a public school product with no regrets)

[Uisce Beatha]

ANY money given for vouchers is money that is either being taken from already strapped public schools, or could at least goto these schools.  A voucher system would honestly kill some public schools and further marginalize many others.  They deserve it because they suck?  BS - fix em.

Not necessarily true.  Our system would take no more than $3000 away from the public school - leaving about $4000 in the public school system with one less student to educate.  The economics are complicated given non-student costs but, simplified, it's more money per student left in the public schools.  Smaller classrooms, eventually fewer schools built and so on.

Wanna fix the public schools - it really starts with the parents anyway.

Yes it does.  100% plus.

[spacey]

ANY money given for vouchers is money that is either being taken from already strapped public schools, or could at least goto these schools.  A voucher system would honestly kill some public schools and further marginalize many others.  They deserve it because they suck?  BS - fix em.

Not necessarily true.  Our system would take no more than $3000 away from the public school - leaving about $4000 in the public school system with one less student to educate.  The economics are complicated given non-student costs but, simplified, it's more money per student left in the public schools.  Smaller classrooms, eventually fewer schools built and so on.

Based on my understanding of the (now rejected) Utah proposal, the $4k only definitely remains in the system for the duration of a 5 year testing phase. Beyond that, there is no certainty whether the money will continue to remain in the public school system. In the end, it could still be a net loss for public schools.

I guess part of my problem is that with all the public outcry of "our public schools are failing our students" I have yet to see any clear evidence that this is, in fact, true. What I see is that public schools do not take the place of good parenting (which, IMO, includes being active and involved in a child's education.) But then again, neither do private schools.

[Walfredo]

We'll see how the model Oklahoma is using works for the future.  We decided to use gambling addicted parents to fund our school system.  So as long as parents keep gambling for their children we should be all good. 

Surprisingly only a small portion of the estimated and heavily advertized revenues from gambling is actually reaching our school systems.     So we may have some kinks to work out until everyone starts gambling away all their money like good merkans. 

[Uisce Beatha]

ANY money given for vouchers is money that is either being taken from already strapped public schools, or could at least goto these schools.  A voucher system would honestly kill some public schools and further marginalize many others.  They deserve it because they suck?  BS - fix em.

Not necessarily true.  Our system would take no more than $3000 away from the public school - leaving about $4000 in the public school system with one less student to educate.  The economics are complicated given non-student costs but, simplified, it's more money per student left in the public schools.  Smaller classrooms, eventually fewer schools built and so on.

Based on my understanding of the (now rejected) Utah proposal, the $4k only definitely remains in the system for the duration of a 5 year testing phase. Beyond that, there is no certainty whether the money will continue to remain in the public school system. In the end, it could still be a net loss for public schools.

As you noted, it's a test period.  If at the end of the test period the numbers don't add up the entire program can be scrapped.  This initiative wasn't for a permanent program.  It was for a trial run and we (6 of 10) still didn't want to give it a run.  You've heard my reasons for opposition.  They make sense for my family in a very selfish way.  I don't think the reasons the opponents threw about justify giving up on something that might be very good.  The risk was effectively nil.

Utah is growing like crazy.  We're building schools left and right.  What difference does it make if even 20% of the students leave public schools (and take their full $7k with them) if we don't need to build new schools, hire more teachers, run more buses, etc.?  The difference is essentially a loss of power for the NEA/UEA and that's why they pumped $4 million into fighting this initiative.

Obviously there's a financial aspect to the supporting side too.  Our school lives on a shoestring budget.  My wife is the coordinator for our annual dinner auction - the proceeds of which are entirely necessary in keeping the doors open.  Vouchers would help fill the classes, expand the student base and otherwise help in a financial sense.  I get that five by five.

Like you said it's not black and white.

[MFAWG]

I read somewhere that private schools in Utah are having a tough time filling enrollments, and people saw this as a state subsidy for private education, which is supposed to be 'Compete In The Marketplace' resulting in a better education.

I dont know if it was a just a bunch of lefty hogwash, but taken on its face that doesn't sound cricket to me.

[Uisce Beatha]

I read somewhere that private schools in Utah are having a tough time filling enrollments, and people saw this as a state subsidy for private education, which is supposed to be 'Compete In The Marketplace' resulting in a better education.

I dont know if it was a just a bunch of lefty hogwash, but taken on its face that doesn't sound cricket to me.

Our school has a waiting list through middle-school grades.  My oldest is 12 and I don't know the situation in the high-school.  It may or may not be the same.

Can't speak to any other schools of course.

The problem with what you read on this issue is that you get half-truths no matter who authored the piece.  Both sides were less than completely honest.  I will say that I have zero respect for the NEA/UEA after this.  While they weren't on my Christmas list previously their rhetoric/bull*feces* during this campaign soured me forever.  In my opinion, they were nothing more than scaremongers.  The falsehoods they spouted were unbelievable.  The proponents weren't angels and there were some real whackos chiming in but the 'official' support was fairly accurate.