Deseret News | Voucher funds limited

Reader comments
Voucher funds limited

187 comments | Read story

Diana | 9:01 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I called Cedar Canyon Christian Academy in Cedar City. They ask $300/month for their K-2 program. A $3000 voucher will cover ALL my son's tuition. I'll need to buy some paper and markers, etc. Mrs. Hahn is the teacher, and she is wonderful. Dedicated, aware and concerned. My son couldn't ask for a better, more personalized place to grow. I sincerely hope vouchers pass. There's room for 12 more students at CCCA.

Jed | 9:03 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Any money is a benefit to our family. I do not agree that money from the government is government control. money is money!

Kudos | 9:08 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Kudos to the Deseret News for actually doing some investigating on this issue. Too often our papers fall into the trap of reporting what the pro-voucher side says, reporting what the anti-voucher side says and then calling it a day. It is very refreshing to see a paper actually do some leg work of its own and try to provide unfiltered information. (I say unfiltered because the Deseret News was smart enough to explain their numbers--which is more than the pro- and anti-voucher proponents have been willing to do (as evidenced by the PCE's admission that the numbers it's been throwing around did not include high school tuition). This article provides more information on the topic and clearly explains the limitations on the usefulness of the information. I sincerely hope that we'll see more articles like this in the days leading up to the election.

Comments continue below

Dave | 9:10 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Thanks Dallin and Control for the reminder, which is so easy to forget in this whole debate, that if the issue is freedom to educate as you please, vouchers must be rejected. As Bastiat said, "...the greatest single threat to liberty is government."

Having said that, vouchers could still serve a role in introducting an element of market competition that would be healthy for all. The rigor and quality of many private schools would make it relatively easy for them to meet the low standards of public school accountability if they choose the accept vouchers.

Laurie | 9:14 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I appreciate Tom's comment. That is exactly how I feel! I am 100% for the vouchers - no matter how much of the tuition it covers. Some is better than none, and choice is always better than conformity!

Lisa | 9:16 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

$31 million taken out of public school coffers just to handle the students already in private schools--Let alone the ongoing money for new applications, and the loss of the residual money after the 5 year phase in. Read your voter information packet for the UNBIASED summary. School choice is in the hands of the private schools- they choose if they will take the vouchers, they choose if they will take your student, they choose curriculum w/o accountability, they choose. This will harm more Utah students than it will ever help. I have volunteered in the schools an average of 3 hours a week for years. I am a part of the solution... You can be too... After you read the facts...Vote no.

MTN | 9:19 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The ones without choice are the poor, so to create a "choice" it needs to really create a choice. The voucher law would only be fair if it were for an amount equal to WPU - $7500 roughly. But $3000 when you make under $40000 (for a family of 5) is not enough to create choice - especially for people who don't live along the wasatch front. Laws should benefit all people.

Selfish | 9:23 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

To: Excellent 8:23 am

Please allow me to point out that to pass legislation that benefits only those at the top of the socioeconomic strata is bad public policy, if not downright unethical.

We are all part of this community known as Utah, and education is the key to improving a family's financial situation. I will not leave behind those who most need our help. I will be voting to strike down vouchers and their false hopes and promises.

Vote NO to vouchers and referendum 1.

600lbGorilla | 9:25 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The SOLE basis of the Voucher issue is about creating a MARKET for free-enterprise entrepreneurs to obtain a guaranteed source of capitalization into the BUSINESS of Private Schools.

Jason Jones | 9:29 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

If the voucher plan is approved every private school in the state will raise there tuition by the amount of the voucher. this will do nothing to help off set the cost of a private school.

John | 9:30 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Alan, So if it is immoral to tax someone at the same rate that is paying for their childs education as someone that is not. How about the taxes those of us with no children pay for education?

Ron | 9:34 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The real issue here is that public schools and their union are fearful of losing influence and control over our children's education. Unfortunately, they're also afraid that they may lose their grasp on their ability to shape and mold social and religious values. In Maine, they now want to give bith control pills to girls as young as 11 years old! They also want to provide abortions for these children without parental notification!! What does Maine's insanity have to do with Utah's Proposition 1? Consider the fact that the NEA is spending millions of dollars to fight against Utah's Proposition1! It's really not the money people!! A successful voucher program in Utah scares them to death! Vote for Prop 1!

This I know | 9:34 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Just to address some points from previous posts:

Almost none of the students currently enrolled in private schools would qualify for a voucher - only the lowest of the low income. The voucher is intended to provide a way for families to move children from the public schools to the private schools (and it is a "per child" thing). Valley Christian School on 4700 South & Bangerter has an average tuition of about $3100. Most parents commute past the school or carpool with one another so transportation is not a big deal. When something is important to you, you find a way to make it happen; that's what makes this country great!

And I can hardly wait to tell all the other parents that we are "wealthy" - most of us didn't know that!

S | 9:36 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

All of you who are for vouchers need to realize that you lose credibility when you have the richest people in the state going on about how wonderful the voucher system is and that they are voting for it. What about the poorest bracket. Get them out there endorsing your precious vouchers. Oh yeah they still cant afford it. And seriously of course Govt. Huntsman endorses them. Has he ever stepped into a public school in his life. Give me a break!!

Laurie | 9:36 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I agree whole-heartedly with Tom! I am 100% for vouchers! Some is better than none and choice is ALWAYS better than conformity!

The real Truth | 9:35 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I understand the this thinking, but just have everyone has stated this arguement is not this simple. The story was very misleading. I was a private school student and yes I come from an upper class family, but many of my classmates didn't. First the story does not look at the amount of subsidized tution at Judge was about 50%. Of that percentage most people paid less than $4,000 compared to tution rates of nearly $8,000. So yes the $3,000 does not cover the whole amount but it still leaves an option for people. This $1,000 difference might still be a lot to cover for low income families but that is a choice they would have to make if they feel it would give there children a better choice. And isn't that what the vochers are about, but now the issue should be the school need to be accredited though a national orginization because I don't want the option to be abused by people not using it for the correct purpose.

Bronwen | 9:38 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

It was so nice to read a well-thought out and researched article about the voucher debate. A big financial piece is still left out by pro-voucher folks. Private schools do not pay for transportation, lunches, after school programs, sometimes books, and sports programs. When you are calculating your ability to pay tuition, a parent needs to factor in those costs as well.

Brutus | 9:38 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The entire purpose of the article is to demonstrate that if the voucher is approved Utahns will begin to separate their children into social classes, even more than they already do. The parents who can not afford to send their children anywhere will remain in a public school setting, those that can afford a cheap private school will send their children their, and the richest will continue to send their children to a private school where the poor can not afford to attend. That is the best aspect of public schools creating a society were poor are able to socialize with wealthy and wealthy able to socialize with middle class, and poverty stricken children and all become friends irregardless of class.

Brutus | 9:41 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I will correct my own spelling THERE, not THEIR

Cookie hater | 9:42 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I am very much against vouchers!!! Rural communities will have no choice but to see the funds allocated to our schools diminished as it goes to support this voucher system. I love that commercial with the cookies. Riiiigggghhhhttt buddy lower student to teacher ratio's and then WHAM cut the teacher cause its to low...and the numbers in classes increases. Good idea! Oh wait thats right, funds for vouchers won't come out of public ed dollars...so where is it going to come from??? And if it can go to vouchers why not put it into our public ed fund? VOUCHERS NO!

Dave | 9:42 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I am a public school teacher at a great public school with great kids. But when I say "great" I mean teachers are dedicated, families care and support, community support is strong, etc. Having said that, the product is weak because the system, (which I have been immersed in for 15 years) is flawed. Many private schools are built on a much firmer educational foundation. They don't care or work harder than public educators, but they are more enlightened. I favor choice simply because it acknowledges all of this.

Vouchers don't threaten me as a public educator. We teachers have to look beyond defending our turf and catch up to the parents and private educators who have gotten beyond us in their understanding of what really builds an education and what doesn't.

I know first hand that what we use for accountability in schools does not teach or motivate or help struggling students. These students need to be inspired and encouraged and they need real time to get their feet under them. Many private and home educators do this better than public schools precisely because they are free to concentrate on the kid, not fulfilling meaningless mandates.

GlaringOmission | 9:42 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

How could an article like this be written without mentioning Children First Utah and other K-12 scholarship programs?

Sounds like the reporter has an agenda to maintain business as usual at the government schools.

Kendall | 9:44 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Have you seen my property tax? You see the amount going to public school from it? Why can't the gov. use funds that are NOT allocated to the schools already and help people that want the CHOICE. My daughters go to public and private schools,it is my CHOICE and I love it. So it can only pay for part of the tuition, better than nothing at all. The article makes it sound as if it doesn't pay for all of it may as well not do it, wrong. Anyone here walk the halls of a private school and see the dedicated hard working teachers and volunteers. These private schools consistently have better test scores than public schools and PARENTS hold them more accountable than the gov. run schools would ever dream of doing.
If the vouchers don't work after a few years, the legislature can always cancel it. I say give us choice. Competition and choice always make products better. Vote YES

Blatant misinformation | 9:49 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

There are many private schools that cost as little as $200 per month or about $2000 per year, plus books. This is just another misleading article by the socialistic, control-freaks on the left.

Vouchers solve nothing | 9:53 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Who really believes private school will improve public schools due to "competition"? Who really believes private schools won't INCREASE their cost rather than decrease in response to voucher money? (that is supply/demand market adjustment people) Who really thinks poor families will utilize vouchers and get their kids to these "excellent" $6,000 a year schools? (no quality private school I have ever heard of is less the $5,000 and that is without food and transportation) Why would any private school want the State's tax money? Isn't the point to be PRIVATE? This debate is an exercise in stupidity, all in the name of a tax break.

Children First Utah | 9:56 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Anyone who doesn't believe low income families will use vouchers please visit Children First Utah.

Private companies have set up a voucher program in Utah. They currently have 400 scholarships and 1500 people on their waiting list.

Oh yeah and to qualify for the scholarship you must also qualify for reduced lunch at public schools. Average family salary is below $25,000. Average scholarship is less than $2000. So tell the 1500 families on the waiting list low income families won't use vouchers.

swrl | 9:58 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

When one looks at what our position in national spending per child it works out to be about $3,600. Why wouldnt the State consider this a good deal for 3k, besides how many matching funds are avaliable to the state? Nothing is free in Utah.

Dale | 10:03 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The families that would benefit from vouchers are those that have children who are not old enough to enroll, yet have every intention to enroll once they are old enough - even without vouchers. These kids will not reduce class sizes and will not leave any "Oreos". Oh, and sorry, they won't be doing it to "punish" the UEA either!

There probably are very few families that will be able to "take advantage" of the vouchers and move their children from public to private schools.

As many posters have said; if you find "value" in private school, you'll find a way to pay for it yourself. We all make sacrifices and trade-offs in order to have what we value.

We Already Have Choice! | 10:05 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

We already have a choice in education. If you don't like the school your child attends, enroll them in another. Any student in a public school can attend any public school as long as they are accepting permits--and most do.

One more note. Step into an elementary school. There are a slew of volunteers to help out in classrooms. Then go into a high school. You may find one or two. Miracles are performed every day in our schools. Let's see you take 35 generally disinterested teenagers, most of whom have no parental support, and try to get them to care about ANYTHING but their music, video games, car, drugs, job, or the other gender.

Face it, a majority of parents don't really care enough to force real change. We have a glorified day care system. Most parents know where their kids are from 7:30 to 3:30 each day. They know they are safe and can eat. It's really just a little icing on the cake if they happen to learn something while they are in school. Call your school and ask them the percentage of parents who went to parent/teacher conferences.

Watch...voter turn out will be less than 40%

Ada | 10:16 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

What the article fails to address is the additional expense parents would incur to provide transportation to and from school. This would affect low income parents the most. Many parents work and would not be able to provide transportation.

I find it shameful that politicians can suddenly find funds to subsidize private schools when public schools have such great need. Why not put that money where it rightfully belongs? The stateï¿½s primary responsibility is to public education. Until that obligation is fulfilled, vouchers are simply wrong. Vote against Referendum 1.

dcruff | 10:17 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The sub-title in the lead article shows why we might need better education ï¿½ particularly math! It states that ï¿½$3000 could cover less than half of typical tuitionï¿½ giving the impression that vouchers will not be very useful. Then the data table shows that 56% of the schools surveyed have tuition of less than $5000. $3000 is more than ï¿½ of $5000. And then it goes on to state that you havenï¿½t accounted for discounts at private schools for such things as multiple students from the same family or other subsidies. Cï¿½mon, vouchers are a good thing. Vouchers increase spending per pupil in the public schools while giving parents choice and financial aid.

If public school teachers ask for more money in the future, I say, "You already had your vote, and you voted 'NO'" Stop holding the children back for political and petty purposes.

RE: Adam Smith | 10:17 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

$600 for classroom supplies for 25 kids? You are planning on supplying a school on $24 per kid? That would pay for about half of one book per kid.

Accountability | 10:23 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Transportation, uniforms, books, sports, lunches, a voucher will not cover any of these. Will students need to take an admissions test to be accepted in these schools? Will they pass? Where did the article say most of these private schools are located? Choice? Looking through a list of the state wide private schools I don't seem to see any that are less than 200 miles from our home!! So just whom are we helping here? What overall percentage of Utah students will actually be served.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs (wants) of a few!

It is also time for Utah schools to become accountable for the reputation of "lowest" in the country. Who is responsible and why. Then fix it from the "top" : DOE to Superintendents, to Principals, to Teachers, to Parents! Remember that trickle down theory...stop trickling on our children!

Questions... | 10:24 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

So, if I choose to not use a different public service, could I please get a voucher for that? I mean, I won't be using the service, so why should I pay taxes for it. I'll just use bottled water, or take my own garbage to the landfill. So I'd like a voucher to help me pay for my own private choice since I won't be using the public service. Nevermind that I would still benefit from my neighbor's garbage being picked up.

JBean | 10:24 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Also, let's quit moaning about $3,000 not being enough and LET THE PARENTS MAKE THAT DECISION FOR THEMSELVES.

If it's not enough, then
a) why should the establishment worry?
b) it's so small it can't do the huge damage they predict.

It can't be too small and too big at the same time.

And as for "only 3%" choosing private right now, let's recall that 30,000 kids are in Charter schools with another 30,000 on the waiting lists. Charters are the closest thing to a private school in the public (free) system.
60,000 students there (or headed there) is over 10% of the student population in the state. A lot of people want a chance for something different.

Children First Utah has 2,000 on thier waiting list for a private tuition scholarship (they award a 1/2 tuition scholarship on a random draw basis.)

Kim Burningham has 4,000 voucher applications currently on his desk that were submitted days after the bill was signed.

These numbers add up to one thing: PARENTS WANT OPTIONS

If we as a state mandate that kids go to school, we should also support choice so they can get the best fit possible.

Everyone wins. VOTE YES

Cynical | 10:32 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Just how many years do you think it will take before the private schools adjust their tuitition rates to include any new voucher money?

Vouchers are a bad idea. No matter how you do the accounting, in the end it costs more money. That in and of itself makes it an unpleasant choice.

Additionally, any new expense (which vouchers are) takes money away from money that could be spent to improve public education. Whether you support it or not, we all benefit from a strong public education system. Doing anything to weaken it is foolish.

Vouchers don't make sense financially, but there are additional penalties. Consider the loss to public education that occurs when a higher performing student with involved parents leave for a private school. Let's be honest, that's the core of the population that would be using vouchers. Offering them further incentive to leave the public schools is unwise.

jtm | 10:33 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Private schools are private buisnesses, all they want is the citizens of Utah to subsidize those buisneses with vouhers. My kids go to very expensive private colleges, they chose to go there. They could have gone to cheaper state colleges. Should I have the right to ask for vouchers to help pay for that. After all that's what parents of kids that go to private high schools are asking. The idea that less money for public school will turn into more money for public schools is a joke. If you want your kid to go to private school pay for it!. It's not about going to private school it's about wanting someone else to pay for it. How bout this, all the people going to public school vote against the vouvhers and all going to privaate school vote for it. You lose!.

Quincy | 10:38 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

"The Family Tree that Doesn't Fork FLDS School" LOL!
Voting for Referendum 1

Jeff | 10:38 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

This article does not talk about any of the money that is already subsidized by the schools. Most private high school already offer dicounts for religous affiliation but take a look at Judge where most the kids recieve help. Most only pay between 3,000 and 6,000. This vocher would allow families to make the choice if they want control over there kids education.

Rich School District | 10:42 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I agree with Tom's comments. I am for vouchers. I wish I had the choice of sending my children to private schools (but there aren't any available where I live.) I am so tired of mediocre teachers that keep their jobs just because of tenure. Why is teaching different than any other job? If I quite performing my job I'll loose it....but not teachers.....they get to keep theirs because of tenure. Let us have choices for the education of our children! Vote yes for vouchers!!!!

kerrybishop54 | 10:42 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

BJ, let's face it: a vocal MINORITY of parents are not satisfied by public schools. May I remind you that polls show the MAJORITY of Utahns oppose vouchers. What type of curricular control should parents have? Current studies actually recommend a more state/national curriculum to allow US students to compete in a global marketplace. As far as societal atmosphere is concerned, volunteer as a hall monitor at your local school. They would love to have you. Bottom line, BJ, it sounds like you want tax dollars to support children at religious schools where they can be taught a religious curriculum. Personally, I will teach my kids my religious beliefs at home and let the public schools teach them secular facts at school. That to me is the idea of separation of church and state. Vote no to vouchers.

Mightyhunterhaha | 10:45 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

To Tom and others who think that the vouchers are a threat. Vouchers is not a threat, it is called bad legislation. This article shows that the voucher idea will mainly help those who can afford private schools and once again are attempting to find loop holes for taxes. Those who sacrifice and send their kids to private schools their is better legislation out their waiting for you. Don't jump on the first bus that won't take you to the destination you desire.

Correction | 10:51 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

For those who claim that students already enrolled in private schools wouldn't be eligible for vouchers, you are mistaken. HB148 (53A-1a-804) reads: "the student was enrolled as a full-time student in a Utah public school on January 1, 2007." This is just one of many flaws and another loop-hole. First of all, that date is from the previous school year. Secondly, if this were taken literally, then all children who hadn't been enrolled in public schools on 1/1/07 (that includes preschool age children and younger) wouldn't be eligible. Thus, if they make exceptions for students who hadn't started school, then they can make exceptions for students already enrolled. There is nothing preventing existing private school students from qualifying for a voucher. Another flaw: 53A-1a-804 reads "the individual was NOT a Utah resident on January 1, 2007..."(emphasis added). What's that about? More flaws: Disability regulations are waived (53A-1a-804-line 126). Voucher schools don't have to be accredited (line 159). Voucher school teachers only have to have "special skills, knowledge or expertise..." (line 156). No income ceiling for voucher households (line 266). Annual increases in voucher amounts based on the amount of students in public schools (line 270). Too many flaws!

Mahershalalhashbaz | 10:55 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

First of all, The unions are not interested in teacher jobs or pay. If they were, we wouldn't be bringing Mexicans to teach in our schools. Second of all, they are not concerned about teacher pay (isn't that obvious). There is one thing on their mind, control. Democrat politicians help the Unions, and the Unions help the liberal politicians (liberals are in both parties to if you haven't figured that out yet). Who gets to decide what is written in the history books about President Clinton, or Al Gore? That is what this is about. Who gets to decide sex ed, if Homosexuality is ok in the schools? Liberals. Why do you think the Utah Democrat Party has strongly opposed vouchers, why the ACLU & NAACP so opposed? Yep, that's why we want vouchers. To teach these people with a grip on our schools we aren't interested in your perverse ideas about history or anything else. The Republican platform clearly backs vouchers. My only gripe about them is you should be able to take your &7500 with you, whether rich or poor. Nevertheless, I'll still vote for them. It's a step in the right direction.

Mahershalalhashbaz | 11:05 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

To you who say this is a way to get government hands into the priivate system. The government can get into the private schools just as easily without money if they want. This just makes the system more like the college system in the US. It's the envy of the world. People send their kids to the US from all over the world because it's the best.

kcatch9 | 11:06 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I love these arguments that this voucher system will suddenly make a childs education cost smaller for someone wanting to create a new school. Schooling costs money, and there is no way that giving someone a voucher is going to drive down costs..

In fact, economics shows us that in a "competetive" system if there is a high demand and a low supply, cost will actually rise. It will also never get back down to the lower level until the market is saturated. The only way to saturate a market is for people who are unskilled and unqualified to begin producing in the market.

The bill is even flawed from an economic perspective.

bob | 11:08 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I heard on the news last night (channel two) that the commercials that are running with Gov Huntsman were made without his athority or permission using clips of an old news conference. It astounds me that after not being able to convince Huntsman to take a strong stand on vouchers that they would stoop to using edited clips to make people believe that he was coming out for them. The people pushing this thing will do anything to jam this down our throats even if it is deceptive. Go Utah-Vote Down Vouchers and lets show them our representatives can be bought but we cant!!!

JJ | 11:08 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I don't have kids but if I do or WHEN I do I still will be against vouchers. Why does everyone that is pro-voucher think that they will be able to choose if they want to use the voucher or not? They won't be able to choose. Class size is limited in private schools. All kids will not be able to attend private schools no matter how bad you want them too. You do not have a choice, the school has the choice.

Also, many people are unhappy with public school teachers-will you be more happy with private school teachers that do not even need a degree? I know private schools hire teachers with no degree. I personally know teachers at private schools who have never attended a day of college. Vouchers are not the answer.

Kudos to JR | 11:22 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I challenge anyone to disprove JR's post. Voucher proponents are not being truthfull about vouchers providing smaller class sizes and more money to public schools.

Voucher Good | 11:28 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Vouchers Good
Nazi Teachers Unions Bad

Isn't this the same old fight we had for home schooling. Parents are not competant teachers etc.

If the schools are not working for your kids what do you do, just push them through and hope they catch fire at a community college.

If we are supposed to be having 150 million surplus why don't we dump it into education.

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.