Reader comments
Voucher funds limited

If so few people can afford to use vouchers, why is it such a threat to the public schools? The fact is that public schools in Utah are very mediocre in spite of having so many families that really care about education. Don't we rank 23rd in the nation in skills of graduating seniors? Why can't our educators stop worrying about being in control and become more concerned with educating our children. Yes, even if that means vouchers for private schools and home education. Too many teachers want to be paid for seniority and not for teaching performance. Wake up people! We don't get quality education for our children. It is time to forget tenure and insist that teachers perform in a quality fashion. Or stop moaning when a plan comes for choices.

So 36 of the 62 schools had tuition fitting the range given by the pro voucher group, and they only counted K-8. Their figures therefore aren't as suspect as this article would suggest. But I do wish they'd been more up front about their not including high school tuition.

DesNews included Boarding Schools. Not exactly what most parents are looking for. That drives up the average. What is meaningful is the median cost, which is closer to the PCE number, not the weighted average, which puts emphasis on elite well-established schools, that are more expensive and have more students than small less expensive schools. What is important is what vouchers will do to the private school landscape: the less expensive smaller schools have room to grow and they will. And new schools will open up to meet demand.

Du???????????
If so few people can afford to use vouchers, why is it such a threat to the public schools? The fact is that public schools in Utah are very mediocre in spite of having so many families that really care about education

I'm tired of hearing the argument from the anti-voucher crowd that only the wealthy will benefit. The fact is that the wealthy will only get $500, so what do they care? With a large number of schools priced under $4500/year, this is truly a plan that will make private school an option for the average family. By the way, does anyone else see the irony in that public schools use $7500/student and are whining about not being able to make ends meet?

There are a large number of low income families that will indeed take advantage of this program and sacrifice in order to give their children a higher quality education. Don't believe me? There's an organization called Children First Utah that offers 50% scholarships to private schools for those that meet the free and reduced lunch guidelines. The families are responsible for the other 50%. Last I heard, they have hundreds of low income students on a 50% scholarship and 1000s on a waiting list.

It's about time we the people take a little control out of the hands of the UEA and put a little more pressure on the public school system to deliver a quality product.

I read this article three times and I still end up asking: �so what?� I grew up in a poor household. My parents made tremendous sacrifices to send me to a private school when the public school in our neighborhood was failing. My mom had to get a job. We made due with less than usual. We had one car and it was a clunker. Like the car, my clothes were also previously owned. I am certain, my parents would have been thrilled to get a voucher covering a third of the tuition.

message to Tom: You just said everything that I wanted too say. Thank you for your remarks. I totally agree with you.

I called Mount Vernon Academy and the monthly tuition for my three kids would be $1,100. That means $9,900 per year. With $9,000 coming from the vouchers that only leaves $900 for me to cover. My tax return will cover that.

If the 62,000 students already in private school utilized the vouchers (assuming they get the minimum amount of $500 per child) the cost to the public schoool system would be $31,000,000 annually and not one student would have left the public school.
Vote No on Vouchers

I'm not entirely faulting the article, since it is based on current factual information, but the quote from the rep for Utahns for Public School definitely gives it the feel that The Deseret News oppose vouchers (I don't know the paper's actual stance). To say that XYZ *would* happen is a little short-sighted. As much as some people want to make everyone believe it, we can't predict the future. As Tom said above, if the money's not "enough", then what's the harm? What it means is that the poor families that can't fill the gap between their voucher and the required tuition will continue sending their children to public schools. So who gets hurt? No one.

This seems like a non-story to me. Once vouchers are an option, the market will step up to meet the need. This is a simple concept that short-sight articles like this fail to mention. The facts are that those who oppose vouchers are either a) part of a small, self-interested group that aren't truly concerned about what's best for Utah's families, or b) don't really understand the issue.

My children went to private school--we are an average income family. The tuition payment procluded us from having big vacations or a boat. The reward was a QUALITY education. Believe me we could have used the vouchers. If so few families could aford private education, even with the vouchers, what is threat to the public school system? What not help the few families who will sacrifice "frills" for the sake of a better education have a break? The users will still be contributing more tax money to the public system that they take out.

I agree with Tom's comments. I would like to add, if the people against vouchers put 1/2 the amount of energy into assisting in public schools as they have fighting vouchers the children of UT would be better served. Like wise instead of paying for advertising donate that money to the public schools and really show UT children you care. I think it's safe to say if people donated the amount of money spent on advertising against vouchers this year's budget would probably have doubled- talk about wasted resources. If people truly want to help public schools go volunteer your precious time to a local school. This is a great way to lower teacher to pupil ratio without actually cutting class sizes. More one on one or small groups help teachers tremendously. Everyone- stop fighting battles and get into the schools and start helping our future. You don't need a degree to assist a teacher most teachers welcome someone Volunteers, you don't have to be a parent, just someone who cares to help our children succeed in life. GET IN THE SCHOOLS AND VOLUNTEER OR GIVE $$$ INSTEAD OF FIGHTING OVER WHAT WAS ALREADY DECIDED BY THE LEGISLATURE!!

The only way your opening sentence would be accurate is if parents with a $3,000 voucher were as likely to choose a school with $62,000 tuition as they were to choose a school with $3,000 tuition. The headline would have been much more honest had it said that over half of private schools are affordable. After all over half the schools you surveyed were $5,000 or less and a $3,000 voucher makes them very affordable. You have heard of objective journalism haven't you?

This article provides something of a "before" picture. The number of schools, number of seats, and average tuition costs reflect the current, non-voucher market. Even so, it still neglects other avenues, such as scholarships, private aid, and tiered tuition that can be used to make tuition less for those who can't afford full price.

Before there was a public school system, when all school were private, it was common for the wealthy to pay a bit more in tuition in order to subsidize the less affluent. It was also common for people to donate to schools.

If vouchers pass, the supply and demand curve changes. The market will adjust to the new demand. Innovative entreprenuers will find ways to fill the demand. There will be new schools and new business models. Private charity will fill in where public subsidy falls off.

This article highlights the main reason that I am not voting for vouchers...

Normal people like me are supposedly given a choice with the voucher option, but I couldn't possibly afford to send my kids to private school on my $50K Salary, even with the voucher option in place. It simply gives rich people a break on their choice. Normal people still don't have that option, even though this supposedly gives them that choice...

The Legislature and Governor keep trying to sell the voucher idea as giving lower income families a choice... As a person with a lower income, I'm telling you straight up, this would still not provide a choice. I flat out could not come up with an additional $5,000 per child per year to send them to a private school!!! Have you seen the price of housing, gas, food, etc?

The "choice reasoning" is flawed! I'm voting NO, and hope others do to...

They said that a $3000 voucher would only fully cover the tuition in 9 of the 62 schools providing data.
The point of the article is clear: vouchers are not likely to help lower income students - they can't pay the difference. The answer to the next question is important: Who cares? So what? Will that really cause a detrimental separation between upper and lower class in Utah? Is that so bad? What's the priority - providing solutions to education or keeping upper class students as role models for lower class students?
A second point is also well made in the article in the last paragraph:
If private schools are smart, they won't accept vouchers because they don't want any government control in their schools. That spoils the principle of being private.
Good article.

Tom, vouchers are not for home education - nor do any home educators want them. If they want help, they can use an online public school program that provides free curriculum and a teacher who oversees them, but most home schoolers are happily (some FIERCELY!) independent. Otherwise, I agree completely with your post. :-)

Hmmm... I think that the current private schools tend to cater to the wealthy, and that is the problem. I think that 4,000 is more the right number for a decent alternative education. Money does not equal better education. The school that I had my kids in befor I moved was 3000 per year, and it was a great experience, great school.

Thanks to the News for sticking in this subtly anti voucher article and calling it science. The numbers tell us nothing. Look at the number of parents who will jump at this chance. That will tell you something, at least.

The Challenger Schools have figured out what many other private schools will soon be faced with should vouchers become law. With government money ALWAYS comes government control. Ask any private business that currently does business with the government (roads, prisons, construction, etc.) and they will tell horror stories about navigating the layers of governmental mandates and regulations. The only way for a private school to remain completely private is by not accepting any government money. Pro-voucher supporters try many ways to hide this fact. They call them "tax credits" in some cases. In other cases they try to convince themselves that the money is "theirs" and that "they" are giving "their" money to the private school. Nice try but it won't fool the government regulators in the long run. Thank goodness the Challenger Schools have figured this out.

Even with these numbers, the vouchers plan cuts the tuition cost by almost half. That's something, and it's nothing to sneeze at. It is actually immoral for a government to tax a person who is footing the bill for his or her child's education at the same rate as a person who is contributing nothing. What people forget is that before tax revenue was tax revenue, it was earned by the taxpayers. It's THEIR money. Anti-voucher activists are behaving as if it was always their money. They need to show a whole lot more appreciation for the source of their funding. (And I am a teacher and union member.)

That said, referendum 1 is not good law because there is not enough accountability. Private schools are not held to the same standard as public schools as far as accreditation and teacher credentials (none). The state does have every right and reason to expect high standards of schools receiving voucher funds, so I'll have to vote NO until appropriate academic standards are set for all schools, public and private.