Many of the states that have proposed "vouchers", are not trying to eliminate public education, only provide an escape route for low income families who have a child who maintains a certain academic excellence. The students that attend schools that are too busy running what amounts too and resembles a juvenile detention center, than a place of education.

These so-called vouchers are actually grants for students who have shown they can maintain an acceptable grade level, under these horrendous conditions and are clearly recognized as someone who is there to learn and should be allowed a positive learning environment. They would be allowed to use these grants to most likely attend upper class public schools! Of course the option would be there to attend secular, or private academies, but it is unlikely the parents could make up the financial difference to attend, or that many of these private entities, would meet the required standard.

The problem is that by making these grants available, the politicians of the state would also be admitting that many of their schools are to say the least, failures!!! No career politician, will ever admit that he/she was/is a complete and total failure on any issue, not if they want to remain a career politician anyhow!!

The alternative, the one SS is referring too, is to stop what they feel is another attempt at affirmative action, or anything that would give the peasants, an opprotunity to be competitive!!! This program will be available to all students, who are currently attending public school, or have already been attending private or secular academies. The problem is most of them are prepay programs, that will only accommodate those who have the money to spend on private schooling already. You pay for the education, and a voucher will be returned to the government upon completion of a semester or two, and the parents will then obtain a refund. How many good low income students who attend the failed public schools will be able to come up with $12,500-25,000, in advance, so they can get their refund months later??? What if they have more than one child???

Another interesting aspect is that more, parents who have there children in the academically successful, public schools, knowing they will be reimbursed, will "use" the vouchers as another advantage, to send their upper class kids to private schools. As the attendance dwindles in public schools, the education level will continue to decline, and they will eventually have to close or become another of the failures in our system!!!

There is absolutely no, evidence that private schools are any better at teaching the general population, than that of the public school systems. None!! Private schools do not have to deal with the general population, and most depend on strict enrollment criteria, which requires a maintained level of academic excellence, and the most important requirement is that your parents must be loaded!!! If the public schools could adopt these standards none of them wuld be failures either, cause only smart kids would attend!?! Sorry, but this sounds like welfare for rich people to me!!!

Me, I personally think they need to fix the problem, the public school system!!! Neither dems or repubs want this problem fixed, they want to continue to exploit and extort from it though!!! You want to provide grants for public school students, for their individual academic achievement, I am for it!!! But any program that is specifically be used by the rich, who already attend private institutions, please, stop!!!

Buck S. N.

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.

Up-front cost is not part of any system I am aware of. Can you please link me to your source on this?

The proposed system in Colorado doesnt work like that. It would be paper-less. Parents would assign their voucher credits to an approved school ahead of time. They would not have to provide the money up front.

And why shouldnt they be allowed to? It is their tax money too.

Under the current system they are basically screwed out of their own tax money. They have to pay for public schools in addition to paying for private school. But they have just as much a right to that money as any other tax payer. Right?

Then what are you worried about? Why not let parents make the decision?

If what you say is true, nothing will change.

It isnt welfare if they are actually paying for it. Not sure where you got that idea.

Me too. Vouchers will fix the problem.

Yeah, we masterbate at night thinking about the number of problems this will cause and how rich we will get off of it. It just feels wonderful.

If everyone gets an equal chunk, I dont see how that favors the rich. And if you maintain that there is no evidence that private schools offer a better eduaction, then I dont see what you're afraid of either way.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

http://www.publicpurpose.com/pp-edpp.htm

To summarize, not only do private schools cost 30% less than private schools, and this includes the more expensive elite schools. It is 42% without them. More importantly, results; pick your subject. In reading proficiency for 4th grade, private students score 14% higher, in 8th grade 21% higher, and 12th grade 16% higher. Math? 4th grade is 4% higher, 8th is 20% higher and 12th is 22% higher. Private students have a 5% higher graduation rate. They are also 250% more likely to graduate from college. They are not only doing more, they are doing it with less.

__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:

Quote:

there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.

The result:

Quote:

By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.

You mean the private sector does better at less cost? No way. That's a first I tell you.

__________________
See y'all after the election. Good luck to whichever Republicrat you are voting for.

I will see what I can find, but I can't do it right now. You listen to Rush he was the first person I heard mention the prepay proposal. He didn't see anything wrong because it would show that the parents were serious about their child’s education!

That's good, any proposal should not create more problems, and a false sense of hope, for the poor!!

No they have the option of allowing their money to teach their children in public school. If they choose to go elsewhere then it is their choice to not take advantage of the system their tax dollars provide. They have the option, poor people under the current system have no option.


The ones already in private schools are not my concern, it is the ones who will leave the public system, crippling it further!

If it is set up in a manner where only the rich can take advantage, it's welfare for the rich. If every student can actually benefit, I would be more inclined to see if it would work!!

Good for you, I however am not convinced it will be effective raising the education level for all citizens, not at this point anyway!

The public school system is no more or less corrupt than the rest of the government programs. It just depends on who is in charge and directing the final destination of tax payers cash, for the most part taken under false pretence!!! Masturbate on your own time, keep the details to yourself!!

I don't either, if that is the way we go. On the other hand the money is allocated for our public schools to be well ran, educational facilities, and the American people are not getting their moneys worth.

I only maintain that if your child isn't doing well in public school then private school, may not be the answer either!!! If a child is doing good in a private setting, then most will also excel in a public environment! So where is the advantage, other than having a child with credentials, for college?? I am not afraid of nothing, except stupid people!! I am not convinced it will be successful, IMO! So save the dramatics! I answered you, now what do you think about the first part of my post which has been proposed in several states including Florida, I believe? What is Colorado proposing?? Are they trying to eliminate public schools or are they truly concerned about raising the academic level of their students in general???


Buck S. N.

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.

Blacks and Hispanics were 300% more likely to graduate if they attended a private school.

__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:

Quote:

there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.

The result:

Quote:

By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.

__________________
See y'all after the election. Good luck to whichever Republicrat you are voting for.

Voucher systems will vary by state or city, so it is possible. This is the first time I have heard of a pay-up-front plan.

In any event, it still would not matter, since Parents could still opt to stay with the Public system. The two systems are not mutually exclsuive. In the end it is still increasing the number of options poor people have. Not decreasing them.

The end result is that they pay twice for education; once through taxes and once through private schools. This system will be more fair in that it will credit them back the tax dollars they are not using.

Which would be fine except for one small point: They arnt allowed to opt out of the Public school system.

The Voucher program would give them that option. You are supporting my argument.

Vouchers give opportunities to poor people they would not otherwise have.

Vouchers are more fair to wealthy people as well.

Who loses?

Why will it cripple it further?

They take money out of the system, but then the system no longer has to support them. So it is a wash. Public schools arnt losing anything they didnt have before.

The rich getting their tax money back = welfare? Huh?

It really sounds to me like you want to use the current system to punish the rich for being rich...

THATS your defense for Public Education? heh heh heh

Then lets give the Private sector a shot at it.

So having one choice is better than having two choices? Is that your logic?

Because if you have two choices, chances are one is going to be better than the other. That is how competition works.

If public schools are really better, you have nothing to worry about. No one has suggested vouchers should be mandatory. Stay in public school if you want.

Look at my previous posts. That is a summary of their proposal.

Vouchers are a supplement to the public program. The only way the public program could be eliminated is if EVERYONE decided to use vouchers. The only way that would happen is if the private schools provide a better product.

So there is not a reason to be anti-voucher. It gives the poor more choices is all.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

This makes total sense, and the evidence I've seen shows it to be true. Just like comparing any government program with a corresponding program in the private sector. The private one beats the government one hands down. Now any of us in the private sector have to worry about losing our jobs if we aren't productive and efficient. The same applies to those private schools...where as in a public school, it's almost impossible to fire a teacher.

__________________
Tiger got to hunt, Bird got to fly, Man got to sit and wonder 'Why, why, why?'
Tiger got to sleep, Bird got to land, Man got to tell himself he understand.
~Bokonon

one of the points in the link is that job turnover is much higher in private schools than public. I imagine that is part of the reason for success, if not much of it.

__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:

Quote:

there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.

The result:

Quote:

By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.