Reader comments
Voucher 'threat' sparks debate
134 comments | Read story
CB | 1:29 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Wow! Dave Clark and Steve Urqhardt have really got an anti-public-education
agenda. These two southern Utah reps have been hard at "work"
undermining public education. And now the anti-teacher/pro-voucher camp is
trying to raise $300,000 just to push along the CAMPAIGN for vouchers. A lot
of money wasted on a bad idea. And just where are they planning to come up with
the cash to fund the actual vouchers? That's right, folks, from the
coffers of our already over-strained, under-funded public education system. We
already have a teacher shortage because these VERY guys, our representatives,
cannot put together enough money to pay our teachers or provide learning
materials for our students. And don't forget last year's sweeping
cuts to teacher retirement benefits which further discouraged an already
shrinking number of prospective teachers from entering the profession. And now
they're going to take out MORE money to fund vouchers. Does this make ANY
SENSE?
Dave doesn't want us to "misinterpret" his comments as a "threat". Of course not. We might see his agenda a little too clearly. The voters of southern Utah might get smart and stop supporting him. Come on, southern Utahns, let's vote this guy OUT OF OFFICE!!!
Dave doesn't want us to "misinterpret" his comments as a "threat". Of course not. We might see his agenda a little too clearly. The voters of southern Utah might get smart and stop supporting him. Come on, southern Utahns, let's vote this guy OUT OF OFFICE!!!
ABC 4 News | 1:47 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Is the political battle over school vouchers in Utah starting to interfere with
your child's education? Well, that's what one Utah parent is wondering
after - according to her - she was asked for an anti-voucher contribution during
a recent parent teacher conference. On November 6th, Utah voters will be asked
to vote for or against a new voucher plan. That plan would provide up to 3
thousand dollars of state money for parents who want to send children to private
school. But now one parent claims those against Referendum One may be crossing a
line. Here's what she says happened when she went to a parent teacher
conference last week. The parent claims, "We went through about ten minutes
of the conference and then she handed me an envelope and asked me if I was
interested in donating money to the fund against the voucher system." The
parent also says she was stunned when asked to contribute money during the
parent teacher conference and then when she refused, says a heated exchange took
place. "When I said no I'm not interested, I support the vouchers, she
continued to go on and tell me why I was wrong�
Comments continue below
CB | 2:21 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Jason, you don't seem to understand that there already IS competition to
public schools. There is no monopoly. You, the "consumer of the
education product" already have choice. Private schools already exist.
Charter schools already exist. The question is about who should fund your
choice.
Part of that question regards the standards to which all of those choices are or are not held. Currently, private and charter schools are not held to the same standards as public schools. Private school teachers DO NOT HAVE TO BE LICENSED. Did you know that? Yep. Private schools can hire any Joe Schmoe off the street to teach your kids. When private and charter schools are held to the same standards as public schools, then it might make more sense to discuss dipping into already depleted public education funds to pay for your individual choice.
And that's the real question. Is it the responsibility of the rest of us as taxpayers to further deplete the limited funds of public education to pay for your personal choice? I think not.
If you prefer private or charter school for your child, that's fine. You are, afterall, the "consumer." And YOU can pay for it.
Part of that question regards the standards to which all of those choices are or are not held. Currently, private and charter schools are not held to the same standards as public schools. Private school teachers DO NOT HAVE TO BE LICENSED. Did you know that? Yep. Private schools can hire any Joe Schmoe off the street to teach your kids. When private and charter schools are held to the same standards as public schools, then it might make more sense to discuss dipping into already depleted public education funds to pay for your individual choice.
And that's the real question. Is it the responsibility of the rest of us as taxpayers to further deplete the limited funds of public education to pay for your personal choice? I think not.
If you prefer private or charter school for your child, that's fine. You are, afterall, the "consumer." And YOU can pay for it.
enough | 2:28 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Regarding vouchers, "When in doubt, go without!"
Tim | 5:24 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Hearsay and second-hand information...
Is anyone who comments here smart enough to provide references, names, facts, and other small details?
Sounds like suburbian folk-tales to me.
Is anyone who comments here smart enough to provide references, names, facts, and other small details?
Sounds like suburbian folk-tales to me.
dyc | 6:10 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
I really hate unsubstantiated claims such as the one made by ABC 4 News. If
you're going to make a statement like yours, then give us the actual facts
with names, schools, etc. At least that way we can verify instead of just
spreading rumors.
And for those of you who are so busy talking about failing schools, when was the last time you truly helped and volunteered in your school instead of just loudly proclaiming it was a failure. Schools fail when parents, teachers, and children aren't working together as a team. Are you a good team member or just a complainer?
And for those of you who are so busy talking about failing schools, when was the last time you truly helped and volunteered in your school instead of just loudly proclaiming it was a failure. Schools fail when parents, teachers, and children aren't working together as a team. Are you a good team member or just a complainer?
KMarkP | 6:22 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
to Jason.
A "failing public school system?" In Utah? By what measure do you figure this? Is it the ultra-stringent NCLB that labels a school as "failing" if one student fails a single test? Statistics, and most parents, will tell you that Utah's public schools are doing an outstanding job. Much better than the national average, in fact.
Of course there are failing students. There have always been failing students and there always will be. Some students will fail even in a private school.
Please refrain from spreading the myth that Utah's schools are failing. Go to your child's parent/teacher conferences next week and ask the principal for some hard facts. You will be enlightened.
A "failing public school system?" In Utah? By what measure do you figure this? Is it the ultra-stringent NCLB that labels a school as "failing" if one student fails a single test? Statistics, and most parents, will tell you that Utah's public schools are doing an outstanding job. Much better than the national average, in fact.
Of course there are failing students. There have always been failing students and there always will be. Some students will fail even in a private school.
Please refrain from spreading the myth that Utah's schools are failing. Go to your child's parent/teacher conferences next week and ask the principal for some hard facts. You will be enlightened.
SECJEC | 6:39 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
The public education system is failing? Jason Bourne, please don't make
broad generalizations that can't be supported by any sort of factual data.
Children in public schools continuosly out perform their counter parts on AP
tests and national tests. Your logic is flawed as well. The voucher system does
not create new schools and break the "monopoly." Private schools exist
now and you are free to enroll your child in one of the many private schools at
any time. How did you lose the opportunity to do so? Not having a voucher law
does not prevent you from choosing alternative schools. If you are rich enough
to afford this "special" education already, the 500$ the government
throuws at you under the voucher program is nothing more than your light bill
each month. Let's not kid ourselves, the voucher system is nothing more
than a tax rebate for the wealthiest citizens of Utah. The 3000$ will not allow
most people to send their children to private schools. There will be no change
in the schools, just the ammount of money in the pockets of those that already
send their children to private schools.
Anonymous | 6:43 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Jasone Bourne,
Prove it. You said our Utah schools are a failing system. Now you and your other paid board watchers have a responsibility to prove your false claims true.
If you actually lived in Utah you would see that the Public school system here despite its lack of full-funding achieves some of the highest rates of graduation (Jordan led the nation last year, and Davis the year previous), highest academic performance and test taking on AP and college level credit from High School students and taking of these types of tests. Those are end-goals of public education and indicate that Utah has one of the best Public systems in the nation.
Prove it. You said our Utah schools are a failing system. Now you and your other paid board watchers have a responsibility to prove your false claims true.
If you actually lived in Utah you would see that the Public school system here despite its lack of full-funding achieves some of the highest rates of graduation (Jordan led the nation last year, and Davis the year previous), highest academic performance and test taking on AP and college level credit from High School students and taking of these types of tests. Those are end-goals of public education and indicate that Utah has one of the best Public systems in the nation.
Petey | 6:44 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
By the way, what ABC 4 news described above is illegal. If you know of teachers
or PTA or anyone that is campaigning or soliciting $$$ or signatures during
school time or on school grounds, please remind them for their own potential
good.
Personally, I don't know what the big deal is. I don't see vouchers as making a huge impact one way or the other. But I'm willing to give it a shot. The math and the hold harmless clause work for me, and I have 4 kids that will stay in public school regardless and a wife who's taught in the public school system for years.
Someone above mentioned $300,000 that the pro-choice in education folks, I don't see anything about the $3 million coming in from national interests to attack the Utah Legislature.
Personally, I don't know what the big deal is. I don't see vouchers as making a huge impact one way or the other. But I'm willing to give it a shot. The math and the hold harmless clause work for me, and I have 4 kids that will stay in public school regardless and a wife who's taught in the public school system for years.
Someone above mentioned $300,000 that the pro-choice in education folks, I don't see anything about the $3 million coming in from national interests to attack the Utah Legislature.
Anonymous | 7:05 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
What about children in rural schools who don't have an option for an
alternative school? Does anyone care about that? What about children with
learning disabilities or emotional problems? Do we care if the teachers these
children are qualified?
The public schools seem to have failed the average student, yet, the private schools I've seen promote an elitist attitude and do not have programs that work well for every student. In many ways they teach children to choose what they want to learn and are not as concerned with what is necessary to learn to handle post high school life.
Concerned Grandmother
The public schools seem to have failed the average student, yet, the private schools I've seen promote an elitist attitude and do not have programs that work well for every student. In many ways they teach children to choose what they want to learn and are not as concerned with what is necessary to learn to handle post high school life.
Concerned Grandmother
Hypocritical Pro Voucher Ads | 7:20 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
It is interesting how Mr. Clark said that the anti-voucher ads are disingenuous.
I think the pro-voucher ads are disingenuous. They want you to know how much
money the NEA is spending on TV ads, but the nightly barrage of TV ads are pro
voucher. So if the NEA is pumping so much money into the fight, why are there
more pro voucher ads on TV? The pro voucher campaign just gives me a queasy
feeling. It is like they are not being honest or forthright and are very
hypocritical. At least local teachers contribute money to the NEA, so if the
money comes back to Utah, at least most of it came from Utah. On the other
hand, nearly all of the campaign money for the Parents for Choice group
originates from out-of-state.
JBean | 7:41 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
CB,
For the record, you lump private with charter. Not to expose your ignorance or anything, but charter schools are public schools, not private.
Also, private schools, according to the voucher law, must hire teachers with a Bachelor's degree or higher in thier subject, or with significant career expertise in the field. The only thing not required is a "teaching certificate". Big woop. A teaching certificate doth not a wonderful teacher make.
What are you anti-choicers afraid of anyway? People not choosing you, it can only be assumed.
For the record, you lump private with charter. Not to expose your ignorance or anything, but charter schools are public schools, not private.
Also, private schools, according to the voucher law, must hire teachers with a Bachelor's degree or higher in thier subject, or with significant career expertise in the field. The only thing not required is a "teaching certificate". Big woop. A teaching certificate doth not a wonderful teacher make.
What are you anti-choicers afraid of anyway? People not choosing you, it can only be assumed.
Mrs. Teacher | 7:43 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Teachers should NOT be using parent teacher conference times to discuss their
views on vouchers, unless they are asked for their opinion by the parent. Then,
they have a right to answer honestly. All this hubbub about one teacher making
a comment to a parent when voucher advocates can do whatever they want at a
private school. How about the football game betwwen Judge and Juan Diego this
weekend. Anyone notice the pro-voucher signs being handed out to children to
hold up during the game? How about fliers being sent home with private school
children at Blessed Sacrament? Where is the outrage about THAT? Are there
double standards? Yes. Why? Because public schools are held accountable not
only to parents but to taxpayers.
Vouchers mean we'll be subsidizing private schools' right to do whatever they want, while still holding public schools to a higher standard. Vouchers? NO!
Vouchers mean we'll be subsidizing private schools' right to do whatever they want, while still holding public schools to a higher standard. Vouchers? NO!
Teacher | 7:45 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Any teacher who would ask for money from a parent to support anti-vouchers is
way out of line. I can't believe anyone would do such a thing. If they
did, they need to chastised immediately by their superiors. I'm a teacher
and I would NEVER do such a thing. Kudos to those who are making valid points
against some of the unsupported claims made by Jason. People get education
mixed up with business. In business, you measure success by the amount of
profit you make, or the amount of materials you can turn out. Children come to
us as teachers with individual needs and desires. Many a time I've seen a
smart, capable student choose not to apply themselves or decide not to reach
their potential. I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make them drink.
I have students in my class that would make great progress if only I had a
little bit more support from home and from having an aid in my classroom. My
job is difficult and very challenging, but I do my best and I get excellent test
scores. I am NOT failing my students.
Teacher's Family | 7:49 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
"I find this highly offensive--" that the reaction of the
"offended" legislator is reported before the alleged
"threat", which is never actually explained. That's too common
with reporters, especially on issues like pro- and anti-vouchers.
The emotional response gets the emphasis; the News Story focuses on the debate rather than on the facts behind the debate.
We can draw our own conclusions if we are told what Clark (is alleged to have) said. Inserting your interpretation of the result of the remark is not a proper substitute for reporting it as it happened.
You'd get an "F" in my journalism class.
If you want to be a reporting hero, explain what no one in the media wants to tell us: the actual dollar amounts being spent on education per child, what happens if a family takes a child to another school, the public education budget versus the amount proposed for the voucher experiment.
We've asked several reporters and talk-show hosts to put these answers out there.
They'd still rather report on the fact there is an emotional debate.
The emotional response gets the emphasis; the News Story focuses on the debate rather than on the facts behind the debate.
We can draw our own conclusions if we are told what Clark (is alleged to have) said. Inserting your interpretation of the result of the remark is not a proper substitute for reporting it as it happened.
You'd get an "F" in my journalism class.
If you want to be a reporting hero, explain what no one in the media wants to tell us: the actual dollar amounts being spent on education per child, what happens if a family takes a child to another school, the public education budget versus the amount proposed for the voucher experiment.
We've asked several reporters and talk-show hosts to put these answers out there.
They'd still rather report on the fact there is an emotional debate.
Reality | 7:50 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
No teacher asked for money at PT conferences because they haven't happened
yet. That was a nice try to light the fire though.
People are finally seeing certain legislators for what they are worth.
vouchers is going to go down by a large defeat and then what will they do? Bring up a new bill next session. When you have legislators who spend their career BUILDING CHARTER SCHOOLS what do you expect? They are going to keep on trying or else their own business will fail.
Orem finally voted the guy out that was building them but I believe the guy from Spanish Fork is still in there.
Time for them to listen to the public.
WE DON'T WANT VOUCHERS! WE WANT GREAT PUBLIC SCHOOLS!
and no our schools in Utah aren't failing. We are at the top of the class even with horrible funding. just think what we could do with great funding!
People are finally seeing certain legislators for what they are worth.
vouchers is going to go down by a large defeat and then what will they do? Bring up a new bill next session. When you have legislators who spend their career BUILDING CHARTER SCHOOLS what do you expect? They are going to keep on trying or else their own business will fail.
Orem finally voted the guy out that was building them but I believe the guy from Spanish Fork is still in there.
Time for them to listen to the public.
WE DON'T WANT VOUCHERS! WE WANT GREAT PUBLIC SCHOOLS!
and no our schools in Utah aren't failing. We are at the top of the class even with horrible funding. just think what we could do with great funding!
Fundnig For Vouchers | 7:53 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
CB and others have asserted that funding vouchers will deplete already
insufficient funds for the public school system.
Where's the evidence for your claim?
Will someone please tell me where to find this information for myself?
Where's the evidence for your claim?
Will someone please tell me where to find this information for myself?
arc | 8:01 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Reality,
We want vouchers. We want great public schools. We want great students and teachers. We want..
The public does want vouchers. The NEA, UEA, school boards, and anyone that listens to them don't want vouchers. Can you say monopoly and power?
Go read the voter info pamplet - the fair review. It will be a good thing, if not for the education system, just because the UEA doesn't want it.
Let's make schools better. Lets get rid of the UEA and the NEA.
We want vouchers. We want great public schools. We want great students and teachers. We want..
The public does want vouchers. The NEA, UEA, school boards, and anyone that listens to them don't want vouchers. Can you say monopoly and power?
Go read the voter info pamplet - the fair review. It will be a good thing, if not for the education system, just because the UEA doesn't want it.
Let's make schools better. Lets get rid of the UEA and the NEA.
Failing? | 8:22 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
CB, our failing public school system produces college entrance exam scores and
AP results significantly higher than the national average and is in the top 3 in
the percentage of students who graduate from high school. What is failing is the
Republican agenda to discredit public education any way it can, including the
stupid way the No Child Left Behind results are reported so as to label a school
a failure if it falls short in even one of 40 categories -- usually students
with disabilities do not perform at the same level as those without.
It is appalling that our legislators would even hint that an important issue would not be supported if its sponsors did not get on the voucher bandwagon.
I also fund it very hard to believe that a teacher asked for a handout to support the anti-voucher campaign. Sounds like an urban legend for me.
Choose private school if you like, but don't expect me to pay for it.
It is appalling that our legislators would even hint that an important issue would not be supported if its sponsors did not get on the voucher bandwagon.
I also fund it very hard to believe that a teacher asked for a handout to support the anti-voucher campaign. Sounds like an urban legend for me.
Choose private school if you like, but don't expect me to pay for it.
Instereo | 8:23 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
I'm amazed at the tactics the pro-voucher people use to support their
'arguements.' To me much of their retoric sounds like the anti-mormon
literature that was thrust upon me when I went on my mission. The pro-voucher
people use emotional adjectives, unsubstantiated stories, and fear mongering to
support their side. They are not honest about what they really stand for but
only tear down what they hate. I realize they are committed to their side but I
feel they are trying to pull the mote out of my eye while the beam is in theirs.
A comment about the article: when you give a voucher/tax credit to the school and it reduces the amount someone has to pay for private school, it's the same as giving the money to the people. You can't say you are giving it to the school and not the people. Also if only the middle class and upper classes can afford the school in the first place, it's a tax credit for the rich. To me it's simple, I'm going to vote NO on referendum 1. It's not honest, nor are the people that support it.
A comment about the article: when you give a voucher/tax credit to the school and it reduces the amount someone has to pay for private school, it's the same as giving the money to the people. You can't say you are giving it to the school and not the people. Also if only the middle class and upper classes can afford the school in the first place, it's a tax credit for the rich. To me it's simple, I'm going to vote NO on referendum 1. It's not honest, nor are the people that support it.
Totally Ineffective | 8:31 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
The voucher supporters are their own worst enemy. I was on the fence on the
voucher issue but will now vote against allowing vouchers due to the behavior of
the pro-voucher folks. Anytime I hear people state that their political
oppenents are supported by ultra-liberal or ultra-conservative groups, it tells
me that those people would rather "poison the well" than explain and
justify their position. The pro-voucher folks would be much more effective if
they launched a campaign to educate people about their position instead of a
propaganda campaign desingned to malign the character of their oppenents. The
postion of the anti-voucher crowd strikes me as the most reasonable. I'm
with "enough," "when in doubt, go without."
stevo | 8:34 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
you knew the threats and heavy hands would happen when the pro voucher masters
pulled the strings!
JotaB | 8:35 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
You say that you want to get rid of the UEA, well that means you want to get rid
of 18,000 educators in the state. People ignorantly attack the UEA like it is
some monolithic entity when in reality it is educators who organize to support
public education. Why is there such animosity towards an organization whose
goals are aligned with what most people want? Lower class sizes, a quality
teacher in every classroom, and a quality education for every student; these are
some of the goals for which UEA fights. Yes, UEA also strives to enhance the
lot of educators because the working environment is the learning environment.
If UEA has such a monopoly on power in this state, why did the voucher bill even pass? Why is the per pupil funding the lowest in the nation? Why is teacher pay so low that we have a teacher shortage? Where is the supposed power and monopoly?
If UEA has such a monopoly on power in this state, why did the voucher bill even pass? Why is the per pupil funding the lowest in the nation? Why is teacher pay so low that we have a teacher shortage? Where is the supposed power and monopoly?
L | 8:39 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Sometimes it is nececessary for me to use an extreme example to help me get
things straight in my head.
To me the question is should public money be used to support private facilities when there are already public supported facilities available.
For my example - In my community the electrical power is sold by the city. If I didn't like the power they were supplying I could go to the private power company and have them put a line to my house (franchise arrangements permitting) and I would buy power from them because I liked it better. Sounds good so far for freedom of choice,*** but then to expect the city to pay part of my bill to the private company of my choice seems out of place to me. ***
In addition the city still has to maintain the power line in front of my house and be prepared to serve me in case I don't like what the private power company is giving me.
I have no problem with private schools (or power systems) but I do not think public money should be used when there are public facilities available.
WOW-Maybe we should make all schools private.
To me the question is should public money be used to support private facilities when there are already public supported facilities available.
For my example - In my community the electrical power is sold by the city. If I didn't like the power they were supplying I could go to the private power company and have them put a line to my house (franchise arrangements permitting) and I would buy power from them because I liked it better. Sounds good so far for freedom of choice,*** but then to expect the city to pay part of my bill to the private company of my choice seems out of place to me. ***
In addition the city still has to maintain the power line in front of my house and be prepared to serve me in case I don't like what the private power company is giving me.
I have no problem with private schools (or power systems) but I do not think public money should be used when there are public facilities available.
WOW-Maybe we should make all schools private.
James | 9:01 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
JotaB, in response to your last questions:
Why last in spending? Utah has more children than the rest of the nation.
Why teacher pay so low. It isn't as low as the Union says for starters. It could be higher though and I have watched for years as the Union has fought against providing incentives for new teachers, your shortage concern. I remember one year the legislator appropriated X amount of money to provide NEW teachers with a substantial pay raise. The mighty Union stepped up and fought successfully to have the raise spread among all teachers. So a new teacher received a 3% increase of $24,000/yr while the veteran Union leaders received a 3% increase of $50,000/yr. And the mighty Union refuses to allow pay for specialized/shortage areas such as math, science, etc. New teachers received a $720/yr raise, Union veterans more than double that.
And power monopoly. I have watched as District officials will literally drop projects they have spent months working on when the Union leader gives a thumbs down. Watching that is a demonstration of power.
As for why it passed, people are getting tired of the Union powerplay and scare tactics. We are wising up.
Why last in spending? Utah has more children than the rest of the nation.
Why teacher pay so low. It isn't as low as the Union says for starters. It could be higher though and I have watched for years as the Union has fought against providing incentives for new teachers, your shortage concern. I remember one year the legislator appropriated X amount of money to provide NEW teachers with a substantial pay raise. The mighty Union stepped up and fought successfully to have the raise spread among all teachers. So a new teacher received a 3% increase of $24,000/yr while the veteran Union leaders received a 3% increase of $50,000/yr. And the mighty Union refuses to allow pay for specialized/shortage areas such as math, science, etc. New teachers received a $720/yr raise, Union veterans more than double that.
And power monopoly. I have watched as District officials will literally drop projects they have spent months working on when the Union leader gives a thumbs down. Watching that is a demonstration of power.
As for why it passed, people are getting tired of the Union powerplay and scare tactics. We are wising up.
arc | 9:01 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
JotaB,
I don't want to get rid of the teachers - just the union. It has done more harm than good. Any time we want to improve the schools the UEA and NEA block it.
Most teachers only sign up for the liability insurance.
Yes someone said something stupid and the anti-vouchers are looking for blood pounced on it.
I don't want to get rid of the teachers - just the union. It has done more harm than good. Any time we want to improve the schools the UEA and NEA block it.
Most teachers only sign up for the liability insurance.
Yes someone said something stupid and the anti-vouchers are looking for blood pounced on it.
Craig | 9:07 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
The government school system is largely the creation of teachers &
administrators, thus there is nobody else to blame for their problems.
Having the state "fund" education for each child does not require that the state "provide" the education through public schools.
Home-schooling is the cheapest form of education for the taxpayer and basic math dictates that vouchers which are less than the average per-child expenditure will definitively reduce the taxpayer's burden. Math also dictates that if more vouchers are used, more money is saved.
If every child in Utah used a voucher, school reform power would be in the parent's (the customer's) hands. This is the true fear of the UEA. The UEA opposes some vouchers because they would lead to more vouchers. UEA comments about vouchers hurting public education remind me of the old communist reasoning that the walls were put up to keep the Westerners out, not the East Germans in.
That so many public education teachers and administrators can't or won't see any other way to run things, like using vouchers, is a disturbing indictment to me of their qualifications to teach our children.
Fund education with vouchers, not with schools!
Having the state "fund" education for each child does not require that the state "provide" the education through public schools.
Home-schooling is the cheapest form of education for the taxpayer and basic math dictates that vouchers which are less than the average per-child expenditure will definitively reduce the taxpayer's burden. Math also dictates that if more vouchers are used, more money is saved.
If every child in Utah used a voucher, school reform power would be in the parent's (the customer's) hands. This is the true fear of the UEA. The UEA opposes some vouchers because they would lead to more vouchers. UEA comments about vouchers hurting public education remind me of the old communist reasoning that the walls were put up to keep the Westerners out, not the East Germans in.
That so many public education teachers and administrators can't or won't see any other way to run things, like using vouchers, is a disturbing indictment to me of their qualifications to teach our children.
Fund education with vouchers, not with schools!
Franz | 9:13 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
For all of you who think charter schools are not held to the same standards as
public schools, you need to know that charter schools ARE public schools. They
have the same expectations as any other public school and get the same funding.
Also, to say that private schools have no accountability is a little bit of a stretch. If you read the actual proposition it is clear that there are expectations. In addition, if the schools were that bad they would loose students; parents would not send their children there. I have encountered enough certified teachers to know that being certified means only that you jumped through the hoops. It does not mean you like kids, or can actually teach your subject. This is not to say that there are not excellent teachers in the public system; there certainly are. You should also know that there are teachers in the public schools who are not certified and are doing a great job. I would like to see a system that rewards good teachers whether they are "certified" or not.
Also, to say that private schools have no accountability is a little bit of a stretch. If you read the actual proposition it is clear that there are expectations. In addition, if the schools were that bad they would loose students; parents would not send their children there. I have encountered enough certified teachers to know that being certified means only that you jumped through the hoops. It does not mean you like kids, or can actually teach your subject. This is not to say that there are not excellent teachers in the public system; there certainly are. You should also know that there are teachers in the public schools who are not certified and are doing a great job. I would like to see a system that rewards good teachers whether they are "certified" or not.
Anonymous | 9:14 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
With the health insurance we will get healthy illegals and undereducated
citizens while the school employees increase their larder.
KC | 9:16 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
How many times do we have to tell the legislature that we DON'T WANT the
vouchers!! No matter how much money they raise or what else they tie it to, we
still don't want it. What else do we have to do?!
Laughing from out of state | 9:17 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Utah is almost Top 20% in per capita Ed spending and barely middle of the road
in ACT scores - grad rates don;t mean "jack" if you lower the bar far
enough.
What math teacher did some of you have that has vouchers draining the mis-managed coffers of the public education? If I take my kid out of public school and take out LESS than his SHARE (budgeted and paid in my ME in taxes) to subsidize a private choice, how is that draining the public resources?
America has become so used "writing off" it's tax money that it's conceded that it "BELONGS" to the NEA and the gov't to mismanage as they see fit.
What math teacher did some of you have that has vouchers draining the mis-managed coffers of the public education? If I take my kid out of public school and take out LESS than his SHARE (budgeted and paid in my ME in taxes) to subsidize a private choice, how is that draining the public resources?
America has become so used "writing off" it's tax money that it's conceded that it "BELONGS" to the NEA and the gov't to mismanage as they see fit.
Government Healthcare? | 9:19 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Now why are we providing health insurance for 360k Utahns? No offense, but I
thought socialized medicine was a democrat idea? HELLO, REPUBLICANS!!! Wake
up, we don't need socialized medicine in UTAH!!! Why do we keep electing
these jokers that pretend to be conservatives and really turn out to be big
government librerals. Something needs to change around here.
Laughing from out of state | 9:25 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Utah is almost Top 20% in per capita Ed spending and barely middle of the road
in ACT scores - grad rates don;t mean "jack" if you lower the bar far
enough.
What math teacher did some of you have that has vouchers draining the mis-managed coffers of the public education? If I take my kid out of public school and take out LESS than his SHARE (budgeted and paid in my ME in taxes) to subsidize a private choice, how is that draining the public resources?
America has become so used "writing off" it's tax money that it's conceded that it "BELONGS" to the NEA and the gov't to mismanage as they see fit.
What math teacher did some of you have that has vouchers draining the mis-managed coffers of the public education? If I take my kid out of public school and take out LESS than his SHARE (budgeted and paid in my ME in taxes) to subsidize a private choice, how is that draining the public resources?
America has become so used "writing off" it's tax money that it's conceded that it "BELONGS" to the NEA and the gov't to mismanage as they see fit.
Craig | 9:36 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
L, in answer to your question, if the city were also "paying" your
power bill, it would be OK to expect that the city pay part of the private
company bill - provided the private cost did not exceed the public cost. Each
citizen would and should receive equal benefit. Who provides the service is
irrelevant.
Privatizing all public schools is indeed the answer. Change the paradigm from funding schools to funding education via parents and all of education will be forced to improve.
Imagine what kind of cars we would be driving if we could use taxpayer money to buy cars, but only from a government car company? The rich would drive Toyota's while the rest of us drove overpriced Yugo's. If we then allowed the taxpayer money to buy cars from Ford, GM, Toyota, Hyundai. Honda, etc., what would be the end result of the government car company? It would change or die, and that would not be a bad thing for society.
Don't fear a new society with vouchers and possibly without public schools.
Privatizing all public schools is indeed the answer. Change the paradigm from funding schools to funding education via parents and all of education will be forced to improve.
Imagine what kind of cars we would be driving if we could use taxpayer money to buy cars, but only from a government car company? The rich would drive Toyota's while the rest of us drove overpriced Yugo's. If we then allowed the taxpayer money to buy cars from Ford, GM, Toyota, Hyundai. Honda, etc., what would be the end result of the government car company? It would change or die, and that would not be a bad thing for society.
Don't fear a new society with vouchers and possibly without public schools.
JotaB | 9:40 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
arc,
You missed the point, you can't get rid of UEA with out getting rid of the teachers because UEA is the teachers! Professional educators who have devoted their careers to teaching and have done and studied the research to know what works and what doesn't work.
Please tell me the harm that UEA has done.
You missed the point, you can't get rid of UEA with out getting rid of the teachers because UEA is the teachers! Professional educators who have devoted their careers to teaching and have done and studied the research to know what works and what doesn't work.
Please tell me the harm that UEA has done.
CB | 9:41 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
KC, we have to GET OUT AND VOTE!!!
We have to vote against the vouchers. Then, we have to vote out of office the representatives who are pushing this agenda.
We have to vote against the vouchers. Then, we have to vote out of office the representatives who are pushing this agenda.
cdmom | 9:46 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Some flaws that have been commented on here:
Private schools under the voucher law will NOT have to hire a teacher with any college degree. The only requirement came in the amendment(HB 174) that says that the teachers will have to pass a background check.
Your school PTA CAN ask for donations to fight vouchers or discuss vouchers during school time and on school property. As long as the people doing the asking are PTA members and not the employees of the district they can ask for donations and talk about vouchers. BTW, they do not need to have both sides represented when talking about vouchers. Just like the legislators do not have to have both sides represented at their "town meetings for vouchers".
Private schools under the voucher law will NOT have to hire a teacher with any college degree. The only requirement came in the amendment(HB 174) that says that the teachers will have to pass a background check.
Your school PTA CAN ask for donations to fight vouchers or discuss vouchers during school time and on school property. As long as the people doing the asking are PTA members and not the employees of the district they can ask for donations and talk about vouchers. BTW, they do not need to have both sides represented when talking about vouchers. Just like the legislators do not have to have both sides represented at their "town meetings for vouchers".
Education is for the children | 9:47 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
The focus of the educational system should be on educating our children. A
parent has the most interest in ensuring that their child is educated. However,
the current educational system leaves little choice to many parents. Vouchers
will increase a parent's power to educate their child by giving them a
choice (and funding that choice).
The anti-voucher crowd seems more concerned with protecting teacher's jobs than educating children.
Good teachers should be well-paid for their services, but the government schools (aka. public schools) do not reward the good teachers. Instead, the government schools succumb to the influence of teacher's unions that are sometimes more interested in protecting their own jobs than educating our children.
Good teachers will benefit from vouchers and private education, because they will be compensated for their skill and achievement. Poor-performing teachers will not benefit from vouchers and private education, which explains some teacher's resistance to vouchers.
We need to focus on educating our children and we should be willing to compensate those teachers that embrace innovation and excellence. The best way to do that is outside of government-run schools.
The anti-voucher crowd seems more concerned with protecting teacher's jobs than educating children.
Good teachers should be well-paid for their services, but the government schools (aka. public schools) do not reward the good teachers. Instead, the government schools succumb to the influence of teacher's unions that are sometimes more interested in protecting their own jobs than educating our children.
Good teachers will benefit from vouchers and private education, because they will be compensated for their skill and achievement. Poor-performing teachers will not benefit from vouchers and private education, which explains some teacher's resistance to vouchers.
We need to focus on educating our children and we should be willing to compensate those teachers that embrace innovation and excellence. The best way to do that is outside of government-run schools.
QOTU | 10:04 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Frankly, I'm amazed that anyone is surprised at the political game playing
described in the article. That's how the voucher bill passed by 1 vote in
the first place. Legislators were called in for some "convincing" by
Republican leadership. Threats and arm-twisting were used to get the votes. For
those of you saying we need to "vote them out of office", November
2008 is too late. Getting rid of legislators who don't represent their
voters must begin in MARCH, when neigborhood caucuses are held. Elect convention
delegates who will represent your views. Legislators such as the ones
you're mad at do NOT listen to their constituents; they listen to their
convention delegates.
Scott | 10:05 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
The question is not can I send my kids to any School that I want to, that I have
always been able to do if I am willing to commit my personal funds to support
what I believe is best for my children. But why should we give vouchers for
those who choose to send their children to private Schools, if they want their
children to go to a private School they need to be prepared to pay for it, that
is their choice. But we should not take money away from the public School system
and give it to them because what we are providing is not good enough for their
children. If they take their children elsewhere we should be able to spend more
per pupil on all of the children that stay in the public system, you do have a
choice, spend your own funds or let your child go to public School. IF THEY WANT
THEIR CHILDREN TO GO TO PRIVATE SCHOOLS, THEN LET THEM PULL OUT YOUR
WALLETS!!!!!
Anonymous | 10:07 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Let me ask you this anti-voucher people: How many of the teachers who were
recently arrested for sexual abuse were certified teachers? I had a teacher in
seventh grade that would throw desk and chairs when we would give a wrong answer
he was a certified teacher. Just because you are certified does not mean you
are a good teacher.
Also what happened to the millions of dollars that was just given to public education from the Legislature last year. They are still saying they need more. Throwing money at the problem is not going to make it go away. Adress the true source of the problem and then maybe we will get somewhere.
VOTE FOR CHOICE, VOTE FOR VOUCHERS!!!
Also what happened to the millions of dollars that was just given to public education from the Legislature last year. They are still saying they need more. Throwing money at the problem is not going to make it go away. Adress the true source of the problem and then maybe we will get somewhere.
VOTE FOR CHOICE, VOTE FOR VOUCHERS!!!
Uneducated | 10:23 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Wow for months I have been laughing at these commercials and asking myself..
self who would ever utilize these stupid adds to place their vote?
But this blog gives me my answer.
Come on people do research. Read the bill. Understand the constitution.
I thought Utah was a conservative state. You know liberty, limited government, equality, but no insteas we want to rip off the rich for the poor.
People act like the money in these vouchers doesn't come from taxes?
Has given a person more agency in utilizing their own tax dollars ever been a bad thing. Of course who wants freedom when we can be told what to do by a commercial.
P.S. And believe it or not I too am a Teacher and sadly a member of the NEA.
But this blog gives me my answer.
Come on people do research. Read the bill. Understand the constitution.
I thought Utah was a conservative state. You know liberty, limited government, equality, but no insteas we want to rip off the rich for the poor.
People act like the money in these vouchers doesn't come from taxes?
Has given a person more agency in utilizing their own tax dollars ever been a bad thing. Of course who wants freedom when we can be told what to do by a commercial.
P.S. And believe it or not I too am a Teacher and sadly a member of the NEA.
To Scott | 10:27 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Vouchers do not illiminate paying for education. They do pay for it. Every
paycheck and than again every year around April. Or do you want them to pay for
your children and thiers, cause that seems fair but than again who wants to be
fair.
Taxes | 10:48 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
What kind of Stupid government lets thier tax payers help decide where some of
thier taxes go. Wow what a concept.
Craig | 10:53 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
Scott, I can answer why. If society has accepted that children's education
is necessary and beneficial to society, then that reasoning applies to EVERY
child, not just those currently attending public schools.
If you are only going to give taxpayer support to kids attending government schools, then the parents of those attending private schools should not be charged the taxes earmarked for the government schools.
Indeed, you don't really need vouchers to fix the current system, you could readily accomplish the same thing by simply making those that use the government schools pay for them, while those who use other systems pay for those.
I home-school my six children and my oldest (18) will graduate from BYU this Spring in Physics. If I had placed my six kids in government schools it would have cost taxpayers ~$36,000/year, and I paid my taxes for other kids on top of funding my own. To offer a $2500/yr tax break to me to save $36,000/yr year for twelve years is not only fair but makes financial sense to everybody but the UEA education lobby.
If you are only going to give taxpayer support to kids attending government schools, then the parents of those attending private schools should not be charged the taxes earmarked for the government schools.
Indeed, you don't really need vouchers to fix the current system, you could readily accomplish the same thing by simply making those that use the government schools pay for them, while those who use other systems pay for those.
I home-school my six children and my oldest (18) will graduate from BYU this Spring in Physics. If I had placed my six kids in government schools it would have cost taxpayers ~$36,000/year, and I paid my taxes for other kids on top of funding my own. To offer a $2500/yr tax break to me to save $36,000/yr year for twelve years is not only fair but makes financial sense to everybody but the UEA education lobby.
Dick | 10:55 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
In answer to Anonymous' questions, I'll state the following.
I would assume the teachers that are arrested for sexual abuse were certified. I'm not sure what relevance that has in the discussion. In my view, there can be good and bad teachers that are certified and good and bad teachers that aren't certified.
My opposition to vouchers is based on a simple principle. Currently, parents have choice on where they send their children for an education. Thus, the "pro-choice" and "anti-choice" labels being used in this argument are dumb. The choice exists whether we have vouchers or not. I do not believe taxpayers should subsidize that choice. It's as simple as that.
Why should parents who choose to educate a child in a private school get a tax break that parents who choose not to have children at all don't get?
This whole issue is about money, not choice.
I would assume the teachers that are arrested for sexual abuse were certified. I'm not sure what relevance that has in the discussion. In my view, there can be good and bad teachers that are certified and good and bad teachers that aren't certified.
My opposition to vouchers is based on a simple principle. Currently, parents have choice on where they send their children for an education. Thus, the "pro-choice" and "anti-choice" labels being used in this argument are dumb. The choice exists whether we have vouchers or not. I do not believe taxpayers should subsidize that choice. It's as simple as that.
Why should parents who choose to educate a child in a private school get a tax break that parents who choose not to have children at all don't get?
This whole issue is about money, not choice.
Anonymous | 11:01 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
"illiminate" good grief - please learn to spell.
No longer middle of the road | 11:11 a.m. Sept. 25, 2007
I was undecided on the voucher issue until reading many of these comments and
based upon what I've read here the answer is -
PRO-VOUCHER
As an accountant I have to see the reasoning that the cost of educating children with vouchers is less than the cost of educating in public schools per student. It will benefit all to have vouchers. Those receiving vouchers will be able to choose to take children to other schools leaving more money for public schools. It's a win-win situation.
As for the competition factor I have to agree that more competition will force educators to be top of the line or lost out. We are a free-market economy enforcing socialized education. This needs to stop. Based upon what I've seen the free-market tends to work significantly better. Those with the best product will win in the long run.
Tax money is OUR money and we should be able to choose how to spend it!
PRO-VOUCHER
As an accountant I have to see the reasoning that the cost of educating children with vouchers is less than the cost of educating in public schools per student. It will benefit all to have vouchers. Those receiving vouchers will be able to choose to take children to other schools leaving more money for public schools. It's a win-win situation.
As for the competition factor I have to agree that more competition will force educators to be top of the line or lost out. We are a free-market economy enforcing socialized education. This needs to stop. Based upon what I've seen the free-market tends to work significantly better. Those with the best product will win in the long run.
Tax money is OUR money and we should be able to choose how to spend it!
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Tigers vs. Miners by the numbers 2:32 a.m.
- Springville vs. Dixie by the numbers 2:25 a.m.
- Wasatch vs. Juan Diego numbers 2:22 a.m.
- Mustangs vs. Tbirds by the numbers 2:02 a.m.
- Nuggets win after clock review 1:41 a.m.
- Robbery ends poorly for one suspect 1:20 a.m.
- Wednesday on TV 12:59 a.m.
- Integration is possible on TV 12:59 a.m.
- Herbert talks land issues in D.C. 12:59 a.m.
- Developer looking to buy RSL share 12:58 a.m.
- Utah group finds homes for orphans
- Pratt pleads not guilty to sex charges
- Y. tight ends talented tandem
- Hair-pulling raises more questions
- Jazz blow big lead, hang on
- Utes get extra motivation
- BYU soccer incident still popular
- Senators want food tax restored
- Lobo land like home for BYU lineman
- U. hopes to keep clicking
- House passes health care bill
266 - TCU showdown has big implications188
- Lobo suspended185
- Cougars crush hapless Cowboys155
- Senators want food tax restored152
- Utah Jazz fall apart against Kings131
- TCU 4th in AP poll; U. 16th, Y. 22nd119
- No 'backlash' for pioneers, gays analogy105
- S.L. vote pending on gay protections104
- Utes pound winless Lobos89
Applebee's Neighborhood Grill & Bar restaurants nationwide will honor...
Meghan McCain, the daughter of former presidential candidate John...
Advertisement
Latest comments
answer a simple question from an inquisitve reporter indicates either...
I think green power is great!! With that said for those who think all power...
I can actually feel my IQ drop whenever I listen to Beck or Hannity. ...
I don't get it. For some who comment, it seems to me that you have a bone to...
Gorbachev was and is a political hack. Smarter than some, no doubt, but a...
I did not create myself, but He in Whose image I am gave me life and free...
Is a great defender. Jazz game vs. the Sonics a few years back, he worked...
I have never seen this show, but I think I will tune in and catch it while it...
Of course this has nothing to do with the Catholic priest in the new abc show...
I was at the playoff game against Golden State a couple of years ago when...
Advertisements
We continue to fall behind the rest of the world in both the quality of our educational output and the quantity.
Tanya Clay House of the ultra-liberal People for the American Way recently declared, "We've never seen a shred of credible evidence that shows school vouchers actually help students learn. While all public schools must demonstrate success under No Child Left Behind, private schools are not held to the same level of accountability for their performance."
But lets ask the question another way, speaking of those same shreds of evidence, we've not seen many that point to those now in charge of that public school system having the ability to turn that around. In fact, there seems to be more evidence than not that they're incapable of doing so.
So the question becomes how competition could be any worse than monopoly? How could allowing the consumer of the education product to choose that which they find to best fill their own children�s needs be any worse than the arbitrary standards and needs of the monopoly?