Florida Supreme Court Blocks School Vouchers

Parent Cafe
21

<p>A.S.A.P., I think that we are all hoping to find a solution to a problem that is still growing. While we are trying to implement redistribution schemes, the overall cost of providing education is climbing much, much faster than inflation. The overall objective seems to reshuffle the decks of cards to find some windfall, all the while paying little attention to the "pot" that is dwindling because we have reached a level of property tax saturation. I do not know much about California and the full impact of Prop 13, but I can tell you that our Texas Robin Hood plan is a gigantic failure. Texas tried to reshuffle the 30 billion of income and use the tax basis of rich districts to support poorer ones. Since 1994, the changes have amounted to a benefit of $500 per pupil at the poor districts but a LOSS of $27,000 per pupil in assets. </p>

<p>Time has come to allow "novel" ideas to emerge. Throwing more money at the problem is not necessarily a solution -a quick look at the expenses/improvement ratio at Washington, DC schools suffice. Further, this issue is not black on white. Supporting a voucher system -or an even better system of tax deductions/credits for private tuition- does not equate to a death penalty for the public school system. Both systems deserve the opportunity to operate and compete concurrently to provide a better education.</p>

22

<p>"And what infuriates you, Xiggi, teachers? Sorry, I take offense to that."</p>

<p>CGM, do you EVER bother trying to understand what people write? </p>

<p>And, by the way, how much more are YOU willing to pay for education? Would you support lifting the limitations of Prop 13 and align your property taxes with Nebraska or Texas? Do no bother, I know the answer.</p>

23

<p>citygirlsmom -
Unfortunately, many people don't see the connection between vouchers and the disolution of public education. One reason it's important to continue this debate is so people can see what is at stake here.
Some people do want to use taxes to fund religious schools and want to see all education privatized. Would the disolution of public education be a good thing for the country? We need to ask this question and encourage debate. I think most people in this country don't want to see our public schools eliminated, but I could be wrong.</p>

24

<p>"Some people do want to use taxes to fund religious schools and want to see all education privatized."</p>

<p>ASAP, do you realize that the use of vouchers would actually grant the government a bigger say in the affairs of private schools? </p>

<p>Public schools are here to stay. Just not the same type of public schools. However, private schools are not the ones causing the abandonment of schools in urban areas; by abdicating its responsibilities to incapables, our government is!</p>

25

<p>I think the poster's point using the 300 students reference was specifically pointing out what a nightmare this decision is going to be for the children who have been using vouchers and will now be uprooted. That's pretty darn cruel, but there are people who will always put principles over people.</p>

<p>Another observation, as the parent of private school children, I happen to be a philosophical conservative but on a selfish, personal level, I oppose vouchers for the exact reason that they bring governmental intrusion. My children went to an expensive school with excellent test scores, but the school started to lose enrollment and began to accept many scholarship students (money was not an issue for the school, but numbers were an issue) and the entire culture changed. From a diverse, racially mixed school where everyone worked together and achieved success, it became a school with many problems brought in by families who had no stake in or commitment to its success. When my child was harassed and assaulted because she "thinks who she is because she has a father" we decided to make a change. From the bastion of liberal tolerance, diversity and thought to a religious school where everyone really is welcomed and nurtured.</p>

<p>Third: individual teachers are among the most dedicated professionals one could ever know (my daughter dreams of being a biology teacher) and I have nothing but respect for them. Teachers' unions, however, are hotbeds of craven corruption. The indictments, convictions and sordid details make that irrefutable. Even the best of unions exist for the purpose of advancing their membership and educating children is purely incidental. Of course, in this day and age, the NEA and its ilk are really about gaining political power and advancing a political agenda.</p>

26

<p>I agree that the problem of our failing schools is not black and white, and cannot be solved only with more money. In some of our poorest schools, money would help A LOT.</p>

<p>Would vouchers lead to the elimination of public education? It could. Maybe it wouldn't have to, but I haven't been able to grapple with how taking funds from a limited source would not harm the institutions now depending on every nickel from that same pot. Perhaps my imagination is limited in this regard.<br>
Even if we could give money to private schools and still have the same amount for public schools, I still would have difficulty with giving tax money directly to religious schools through vouchers. I'm against be supporting religious intitutions with tax money. I think religious institutions should be very wary of accepting government funds, as well, if they value their independence.
xiggi - I see your latest comment mentions the government intrusion. (Sorry I'm not as promt in replying, but I have interruptions of life here ...)
So we agree on this problem. Most private schools in this country are church affiliated. Many people are fine with funding religious schools, but this is where I just can't agree.</p>

27

<p>
[quote]
there are a lot more than 300 real students with real families who find themselves in public schools that you or I would move mountains to keep our kids from having to attend. There are thousands of students in poorly performing public schools.

[/quote]
Exactly. And the judges, in their infinite wisdom, decided it was better to let these 300 founder than to allow the experiment to continue. As we all know, there is a limited window of opportunity for all of our kids. The window was opened for these 300 kids, at least, but now has been shut again, and their chance is now lost. By the time the progressive do-gooders get around to the final, ultimate, perfect this-time-it-will really-work solution, more decades will have passed, with more children lost. The government schools/employees unions have had decade after decade of monopolistic control over the education of most American children, and their performance hasn't been impressive. Head to head competition works everywhere it's tried. It's not surprising those holding the monopoly don't want to relinquish it, but it's what has to happen.</p>

<p>I also think the "giving money directly to religious schools" is a red herring. G.I. Bill vouchers could be used anywhere, I believe, without letting the government camel get its nose into the tent. We could do the same with our K-12 schools.</p>

28

<p>driver - will you please stop referring to those who oppose private funding of religious education "progressive do-gooders." Your G.I. Bill is not a fair example, as its intent is college education, not primary and secondary, which the state has the obligation to provide. No state is mandated to provide college education.</p>

<p>Also, our government is threatening to withhold funds to universities that will not allow recruiters on their campuses. Not the same thing, but evidence that if government wanted to make some demands, it would have legal legs to stand on.</p>

<p>I feel that this is a good debate. Americans value public education. We're not doing a great job in many schools, but some are very good. Let's put our minds and resourses into improving public schools. That's what are taxes are intended to pay for. Let private schools remain truly independent.</p>

29

<p>The private funding of religious schools is an entirely separate issue from progressive do-gooderism--as manifested by the Florida Supreme Court--which attempts to solve a failing government school system by imposing mediocrity and failure uniformly. I think the GI Bill is a perfect example. The federal government assumed an obligation to provide college education for those veterans who wanted it, and they were free to take their vouchers to Penn State or to BYU. Why couldn't states meet their K-12 obligations in the same way? Oh that's right, the teachers' unions.</p>

<p>The Solomon Amendment issue isn't a good example, as in those cases the government is providing money directly to colleges in the form of grants....and the government is only asking that its recruiters be allowed the same access to job fairs as private sector recruiters.</p>

30

<p>So, driver, I take it you have no problem with taxpayers funding religious schools. Is that so?</p>

31

<p>I wouldn't want to see the government fund any private schools. That would turn them into government schools. The funding of education through vouchers simply funds education....the consumer of that education is then free to choose the type of school it should be.</p>

32

<p>So on this point we agree. The government shouldn't fund private schools.
So you would like the government to give all the money it reserves for education to individuals to spend as they choose?</p>

33

<p>
[quote]
So you would like the government to give all the money it reserves for education to individuals to spend as they choose?

[/quote]
In an ideal world, but I think it would have to be phased in (which is what was happening in Florida), and I doubt it would ever get anywhere near 100%. There will always be a place for public schools, the point is to demand performance from them through competition--which is what providing options for families would do.</p>

34

<p>Thirty years ago I was as ardent a support of vouchers as Xiggi and Driver, and for most of the same theoretical reasons. The problem is that the intervention of life and experience has diminished my belief in "magic wand" type solutions, which is what voucher systems are. Converting primary and secondary education from a socialist model to a capitalist model (which is the essence of vouchers) would not, in my opinion, solve the very real problems listed by Xiggi and Driver. </p>

<p>Children aren't widgets, and you can't outsource their education, or improve productivity through time and motion analysis. If you converted to a wholesale voucher system you still end up with pretty much the same teachers teaching the same students in the same communities with pretty much the same resources. Xiggi might lose his bloated administrative overhead from the socialist model, but have you seen CEO salaries lately? Are you prepared to have Ken Lay or Dennis Koslowski running your kids' school? - that's the runout on the capitalist model. You will not end up seeing a dramatically higher percentage of your education dollars being spent in the classroom, your inefficiencies would just shift (and not much, at that.) The alternative view is an ideological fantasy. You can only squeeze so much education out of so many teacher salary dollars, regardless of your model. There's a place for the capitalist model and a place for the socialist model. It's folly to think that either is the perfect solution to every problem.</p>

<p>Given that, I have changed my viewpoint from supporting the dramatic, "magic wand" solution to working within the current system to improve it by oversight and vigilance. It's not as gratifying, and requires dull, repetitive "work", but it actually can improve the situation. A little at a time. (I wish I could find my old pro-voucher letters to the editor. My, was I wise for a 25 year old!)</p>

35

<p>"There's a place for the capitalist model and a place for the socialist model. It's folly to think that either is the perfect solution to every problem."</p>

<p>Well said, Kluge.</p>

36

<p>I guess my first question would be: How has oversight and vigilance improved the public schools over the last three decades? And what has happened to the talented kids, from decent families, who spent their school years during that time in "failing schools?" At what point do we say "enough?"</p>

<p>Next, I would point out that no one is suggesting a "magic wand wholesale " conversion to vouchers. The Florida 300 were just a baby step in the right direction--an experiment, really--but even that tiny bit of competition was too much for the school employees union to tolerate. So they crushed it.</p>

<p>I would also take issue with the notion of private schools as being exercises in capitalism...they are actually much more communalistic than the supposedly "socialist" (your word) public school model. Have you visited a parochial school lately? No Koslowskis. Nor are there any in our non-sectarian private day school, which is run by a board of trustees consisting of administrators, faculty, parents, and alumni--some of whom fit all four categories. We actually do have a few very sharp heavy-hitter business people on our board, who provide us with expert judgement at no charge, and sometimes even sweeten the pot with their personal funds when we have a particular project--such as the one where we "rescue" deserving students from Philadelphia public schools by providing full scholarships.</p>

<p>As for the "efficiency" issue--private schools have to live within their means...public schools, at least the suburban ones, can just raise your taxes. We spend less per student than our exorbitantly expensive, highly-touted public school system does. Your claim that providing vouchers=outsourcing to private sector business is cartoonish, and not the way it has to be.</p>

37

<p>The Florida Legislature passed a bad law. Interested groups recognized it to be unconstitutional and took the voucher system to court. The court agreed this was unconstitutional. So instead of criticizing the legislature and Governor for making poor decisions, wasting taxpayer dollars and then creating a situation that will possibly be disruptive to the students, parents and school personnel, they attack the judges and the responsible groups that rang the warning bell and who warned them about the proposal before it even left the committee. </p>

<p>I think it is the responsibility of American citizens to question illegal acts in this most legal manner. I applaud them, they are the same groups that are dedicating their lives to providing decent educations to our children.</p>

38

<p>driver -Our country has many, many excellent public schools. They are not all failing. The ones that are really in trouble are often in very poor areas where the families are not giving the kids the support they need, nor are they supporting the schools. Where parents are involved in the schools, the schools do well, public or private. One of the fears public school advocates have is that many of the caring families will leave a school in a poorer area for a richer one, leaving the poorer school with even fewer involved parents. You call this creating competition. That's one way of looking at it, except it's very unfair competition - teachers and administrators can't create a good school with a population that isn't involved with their education.
The florida "experiment' was "crushed" by the court who saw it as unconsitutional. Had it been accepted as lawful, would anyone who wanted a voucher now be entited to one? It would have set the precedence of a whole new system of fund allocation that really is beyond the court to decide. This should be a public debate, not something decided by a court case.
There are some good parochial schools, but suffice to say, I would not want to funnel our tax dollars into them. I know you don't consider vouchers that go to religious schools "direct support", but it actually would be, for all intents and purposes. I won't touch your comment about "No Koslowkis". In the schools, I don't know, but in the Church....
Public schools also have to live within their means. It's disingenuous to say they can just raise taxes. No. Any tax increase in California must be approved by 2/3 of the voters. The voters....those who have to pay the taxes. You can be sure that these increases are only approved if they are VERY necessary for the maintenence of a certain level of education that the taxpayers want and have come to expect. The schools can't raise taxes. Only the people in the community - the majority, or only if 2/3 agree as in CA, can do that.</p>

<pre><code> We should take a good look at the many fine public schools in this country and find out what they are doing right, and try to duplicate that in the poorer areas where the schools are failing. I believe working within the communities to insure family involvement will prove to be a cornerstone of school improvement accross the board.
</code></pre>

39

<p>Driver, we have excellent public schools in our community. They send students to all of the top Universities in the country, while also providing full educational services to students with all sorts of physical, mental and emotional disabilities, as they are required by law to do. Being in California, as A.S.A.P. notes, they can't raise taxes even if they wanted to. Parents are involved at all levels of the schools. School Board meetings are well attended. But to be honest, it's because the community is composed of affluent, well educated families sending predominantly bright, well fed, well discliplined kids to school, and following up to help out. </p>

<p>On the other hand, there have been private schools in California which have closed their doors in the middle of the school year. Does that mean "public=good, private=bad"? Of course not. What it means is that it's a complex problem. When you undertake to educate every single kid in the country, regardless of each kid's abilities, support at home, nourishment, emotional and mental stability, etc., it's going to be hard. You're not going to do a perfect job. Right now as far as I can see the perceived advantage private schools have over public schools is hard to separate from the simple fact that private schools don't have to educate every kid in the country. They can reject the physically, emotionally, and mentally disabled. They can reject the ones with "problem" parents. They can reject the ones that are disruptive. They can reject the ones whose parents don't support the ideals and philosophy of the schools.</p>

<p>Public schools can't. Their assignment is to educate every single kid. I don't see how encouraging the ones with more involved parents to opt out by giving them vouchers is going to result in an overall improvement of things.</p>

40

<p>"The Florida Legislature passed a bad law. Interested groups recognized it to be unconstitutional and took the voucher system to court. The court agreed this was unconstitutional. So instead of criticizing the legislature and Governor for making poor decisions, wasting taxpayer dollars and then creating a situation that will possibly be disruptive to the students, parents and school personnel, they attack the judges and the responsible groups that rang the warning bell and who warned them about the proposal before it even left the committee.</p>

<p>I think it is the responsibility of American citizens to question illegal acts in this most legal manner. I applaud them, they are the same groups that are dedicating their lives to providing decent educations to our children."</p>

<p>Mr B, with all due respect, I could have written your eulogy-sounding post.</p>

<p>It contains all the bells and whistles needed to appease the crowd, doesn't it? Oh yes, the good people of NEA saved the day -and the children- from a distruptive situation. Oh yes, the "citizens" and not the NEA/ACLU mercenaries had to queston the "illegal acts." Come on!</p>

<p>Have any more sobbing violins in reserve? What you have at work here are belligerent and well funded goons who are simply opposed to changes, to any changes for that matter. They attacked and will continue to attack any proposal for changes that undermine their grip on the $350 billion gravy train. </p>

<p>With that Florida decision, the children lost. </p>

<p>Now, setting aside my "passion" and anger, allow me to pose a simple question. Do you have any evidence of the tidal disruption that the use of vouchers created? Do you have ANY facts that support how detrimental school choice might be? As I wrote before, there are many studies available for anyone who want to read them. They are just a click way. </p>

<p>Again, what are YOU so afraid of? Is it THAT apparent that private schools with a voucher system would be SO MUCH better that a exodus would start from day one? Public school students may have to give up quite a bit, and surprisingly a number of luxuries that are daily fodder when funded by Other People Money. Not all private schools are converted country clubs! And for Kluge's comment on Tyco-esque salaries, why don't we take a look at the pay scales at a few Texas school districts where superintendent pay packages are getting awfully close to the $400,000 mark. And in exhange of "what" I may ask? </p>

<p>Lots of time have passed since the 1983 publication of a Nation at Risk, but we are still anchored in a true Mexican standoff. Soon or later, families will start feel in a very tangible way the burden of the weight to educate their children. And when real dollars will be needed, you can bet that the issue of school choice will come up. As soon as the tide changes, your army of selfish followers will become a legion of deserters. Self-interest and self-preservation will still be rampant among your ranks. </p>

<p>But please, do not pretend to be the lone voices who intervene on behalf of the children. Thirty more years of status-quo are hardly a solution for the next generations.</p>