Deseret News | Reader comments: Vouchers increase chasm between rich, poor

Reader comments
John Florez: Vouchers increase chasm between rich, poor

teacher | 12:40 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Well great, John Florez, as always, appreciates that we need a new education system. But the present public education system is INCAPABLE OF REFORMING ITSELF. Vouchers are certainly no cure-all for what ails education, but if we don't try vouchers, how else will the system be forced to change? That's the answer I'd like from Florez, not a bunch of flowery philosophy.

former-elitist | 6:06 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

John Florez, seeking better education, is correct: (elitist-promoted) HB-148 vouchers worsen our growing have/not divide.

A past Davis County science teacher, now of Eastern elites, calls our schools best. False pride costs far more. Inner-city Philly schools had worn her out; kids there fell asleep: many worked nights for their families to survive.

Vouchers' usual shortfall of $thousands will force many poor students to likewise work nights to pay.

Claimed "mitigation" offsets to public schools for five years if students leave are false: Voucherites rejoice that HB-174's redo of HB-148 "accidentally" deleted offsets needed to pass HB-148 by 1 vote. Reneging, they say mitigation reduces better ideas from competition.

HB-148 line 97 makes voucher-eligible all kids (worldwide) if "NOT a resident of Utah on Jan. 1, 2007". It's to entice all to come here; Utahns will pay -- including for already-private pupils from other states (NO public-private conversion): A black-hole unfunded deficit.

This will drive up home prices hugely (explaining why realtors and builders immediately favored vouchers), from huge crowds of newcomers causing shortages. Our insurance and home taxes will soar too, ironically also burning newcomers enticed here to vote for ever-more vouchers at our (and their) expense.

Jeremy P | 7:09 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

I am always bothered when I hear talk of "broken" public schools. What I find great about the article is the part where it mentions a sense of entitlement that is prevaltant in todays society. That is where a big piece of the problem lies, people want something for nothing. It is so much easier to complain about a problem than it is to get off their couch, put down their cell phone, and being part of the process of making things better. There are countless ways to get involved. I hear over and over that our system is broken. What evidence is there of that? Our public schools consistantly produce some of the highest scores in the nation on every kind of test. In a recent government survey of schools across the nation states were identifed that had schools that were labeled as drop out factories, and the only one in the nation that did not have a single one was UTAH! Our system is not broken, what is broken is the sense of entitlement, and "I deserve attitude." Try being the one to get out and make a difference for a change.

Comments continue below

bob | 8:20 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Vouchers is not a start or a solution. It is a hand out to parents who can already afford to send their kids to private schools. It is also a vehicle for cults or any organization to tap our taxes by calling themselves a private school and then begin teaching whatever crazy stuff they want on our dime. Parents get deductions. If parents get choice on where to send their kids I want choice to bail out of the payment becasue I have no kids in public schools.

Florez fan/foe | 9:05 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

I'm happy to see John stick his neck out and tell it like it is. Generalities don't work on this issue. Those that already have - and want more - support this and have put forth a lot of money to convince as many of those who don't have that they might be able to 'get it' if they help them that already have. The crux of of John's comments is that this issue further divides us all between the two camps. Thank you, John, for telling it like it is!

Julie | 10:09 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Very thoughtful article. Thank you, John.

TRK | 10:12 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Jeremy P - the problem is not that Utah rates well as compared with the rest of the nation. The problem is that our nation is only average (or below) when compared to our international competition (and yes we are in a competition). Comparing Utah's test scores with the rest of the nation gives one a false sense of security. It's not the rest of the nation that worries me. It's the rest of the world. If we want to be world class economically we must be world class educationally. We are not and the present system is not going to get us there. The people in charge of the present system are focused on maintaining the status quo. In fact watch and see the response from the "stay the course" crowd if vouchers are defeated. They will be saying the vote shows that we are on the right course in education - and that there is no reason to change (except for spending more money).

NCG | 10:30 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

You can do all the talking you want about improving the public schools, nothing will happen, too many are interested in the status quo. Whining about the haves and have-nots will not change reality. Yes, private school children are privileged and do better. (So you want them to sink to the public school level?) We'll all be disadvantaged together.

So how do you improve the public schools, Change the framework and motivation. There's nothing like a little competition to get the quality up.

Sam | 10:45 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

John's way off the mark if he thinks that the vouchers will not help the poor. The rich can already afford private school if they wish. So why not give them $500 to encourage them to take their kids out of our crowded public schools?

In the last few years all we have heard is that we need to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to make class sizes smaller. Now we have a way to make class sizes smaller for a lot less money. And the public schools are suddenly silent about class size.

If we can give the poor an option of $3000 toward private school, how can you say that will not help them? A lot of poor kids already get $5000 scholarships to pay for private schooling. How many more can now be helped now that they only need another $2000?

And our public schools get their goal of smaller class sizes to boot. Or did they really just want more teachers and more union dues?

jeremykidd | 1:29 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Florez misses the best quote in the Jefferson Memorial, and it is "I swear on the altar of Almighty God eternal emnity against every form of tyrrany over the mind of man." The real problem with the current system has nothing to do with whether or not the schools are "broken" or not, but rather the fact that the system is inherently coercive, and therefore a form of tyrrany over the mind of man (or in this case, children). Vouchers aren't a perfect solution, but they lessen the coercion and tyrrany, and let people have a little bit of liberty. I personally find that very appealing.

Avispex | 2:37 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

One day left and the misrepresentations keep coming at an alarming rate. If you want to look at vouchers as a solution to poverty, it is a horribly ineffective legislation. By what logic do the richest Utahns deserve 1/6th of the tax relief of the poorest Utahns? It makes no sense financially and is inconsistent with every other bit of financial logic in the state. If you look at it as education reform, it is ever worse public policy. If we want to address parent rights or public education issues, do we really support a policy that inequitably benefits less than 1% of the students involved. It is idiotic. The only thing this legislation does is give an extra $500 per student to wealthy Utah families. The "choice" argument is nonsense. The reduced class size argument is utter garbage. Can anybody on either side of this issue point to any study that illustrates the educational benefit of reducing class size by 0.5%. That is one student less per six full classes of 30 students each.

Pro voucher advocates keep claiming that vouchers help everybody. Right. The few thousand who get vouchers get to go to private school. Everyone else watches.

NCG | 3:08 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Dear Avispex:

Let's all just sit around and be mediocre together and hate the privileged. Vouchers will give the public school systems a bit of heartburn, they need it.

May | 3:25 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Utah legislators need to face their responsibility for their legal obligation to finance public schools adequately without some hare-brained scheme. The voucher bill only passed with one vote and I hear there was a lot of arm twisting to get that. Those who promoted the idea so strongly got most of their campaign money from the parents for choice millionnaires who want to privatize education so they can run business on the backs of the children in our state. It isn't about choice. It's about making money. The legislators should have taken the polls seriously before they passed the law. They did not follow the desires of the public they were supposed to represent. Instead they are catering to big money and private interests.I was pleased to sign the petition for a public referendum and I am equally pleased to vote against vouchers. Although I am a registered republican, I may not vote for Huntsman, Bishop, and my senator who have promoted this ill-thought out voucher idea.

Jose | 4:11 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Private school tuition - $7500
x 3 children = $22,500
I get $9,000 in voucher $, leaving me a $13,500 bill to pay. I make $40,000/yr. How does a voucher help my family again?

Anonymous | 4:54 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

> NCG

Private schools do better because they get to pick only the best students... and kick those out who won't/can't/don't measure up. On the other hand, public schools must take all comers... even the academically and socially challenged.

Instereo | 5:21 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Let just imagine together a system where we use government tax credits and build an educational system that is run for profit. Will the bottom line be our children's education or how much money the school is saving so more profit can be generated? Will the best schools be the ones with the best test scores on a test of the schools choosing or will the choosing of the test just be another way to increase profit for the owner, whoever that may be? Will the school only except "good" students because it cost more to educate the "bad" students which would then cut into the school's profit margin? Will schools be able to hold the costs down for extra programs or will they just not offer them because again it will cut into the profit margin? Will the motto of the school be "Educating the whole child" or will it be something like "Giving children the education they need and nothing more?" The whole idea of educating our children in a school for profit is just the last reason I'm voting against Referendum 1. I believe schools for profit is morally wrong. Our children deserve better.

wrz | 7:13 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

> Jose

You don't qualify, Jose. You need to be rich to participate.

DonM | 7:53 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Mr. Florez assumes that poor people won't make the sacrifice to find a better match for their children. The Children First Utah organization has helped hundreds of low income families find private schools. They pay 50%. There are thousands of other families on the waiting list for this help. They can pay the difference, because it is important to them. Vouchers would help these families get their struggling children into a school that works for them. Sadly, Mr. Florez is okay letting these kids fail, all in the name of protecting the school system. Support the children that need help and vote for vouchers.

Amazed | 8:08 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

May, you are absolutely right. Isn't it nice that the Utah county legislators in favor of vouchers sent me a letter today with all of their names listed on it so I'll know who to vote against next time around. I'm going to save that letter. It's too bad that the people who would be best qualified to serve this great state as legislators are smart enough not to run. It seems that the majority that are willing are the self-serving, I-know-better-than-my-constituents types. It's time for some changes in Utah government. This is a battle we shouldn't have had to fight.

Avispex | 9:01 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

NCG, If you think that having less than half of 1% of public school students get vouchers would provide some kind of beneficial "heartburn" then you are truly a sucker. Also, if you think arbitrarily giving a golden ticket to some kids while leaving other kids in a faulty system is good social policy then you really need to rethink some basic concepts like fairness and social policy. I'm not arguing for mediocrity, but I certainly am not naive enough to think that a program that pays rich people $500 per student to send their kids to elitist private schools is win-win. Kids who get vouchers get $500-$3,000 to go to private schools. The kids left behind in the public school get an average of 46 cents in additional per capita funding. That isn't win-win, that's exploit-endure.

JBean | 9:38 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

We expect and demand choice in every other aspect of our lives--why not education?

We have mandated that kids must go to school. Then we say they can't choose which one. (And don't start with the open enrollment thing--a choice between the Layton Walmart or the Centerville Walmart is not really a choice).

What if we were all required by law to have telephone service, but also told we had no choice but to get it from Company X. Then Company X has a sweet deal: no real competition, no reason to streamline or provide extras or options, no reason to invest in innovation, no reason to take any risks in finding new frontiers, no reason to provide top-notch service. A nice, captive customer base.

Except for a few wealthy folks, who can afford a nice service plan with TMobile, or ATT, or whoever is out there doing those things that competition does best: raising quality and lowering costs.

If we mandate education, we should also enable choices. Saying it's a "handout to the rich" is disingenuous--the law prohibits creating an educational opportunity that is not open to all citizens.

But how about a 100% voucher for poor families then?

KJaussi | 10:13 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

I am in agreement with Mr. Flores' concerns about vouchers and will probably vote against them. However, I am torn. Mr. Flores says that our schools need reform. If he hasn't learned by now, he never will, that the government schools cannot and will not be reformed. "A Nation at Risk" was published in 1982. It has gotten worse, not better.

Maybe Mr. Flores could give some ideas about how education could be reformed in the present government school environment.

Avispex | 7:22 a.m. Nov. 6, 2007

JBean,

I think I would support a voucher program for 100% tuition for only poor families, paid for by tax increases for the richest Utahns.

In all seriousness, my biggest complaint about the voucher program is the dishonesty with which the issue is presented. "Good for Utah's Children" and "Win-Win" are so dishonest they make me sick. Obviously, vouchers are good for the kids that get them. But, this is another big problem in my opinion. How do we determine who actually gets these things? Certainly there are not enough vouchers for it to be an educational opportunity available to everyone, as you say.

It seems to me that the ability to send students to private school is disproportionately distributed towards the wealthier Utahns, and not just for tuition reasons.

But voucher programs aside, there are two issues to this. Choice and funding. Choice may be great, but do we automatically fund private choices with public funds? How is this possibly fair? To those who don't even have children, to those who don't get one of the precious rare vouchers, etc. Just because a citizen wants to choose a private option does not mean the public must fund it.

Alberta | 11:16 a.m. Nov. 6, 2007

You hit it right on the mark! Fantastic article!

Ouiza | 12:27 p.m. Nov. 6, 2007

I have a dream. I dream that I take 30 "at-risk students" (handicapped, resource, ADHD, etc.), pay for their private tuition to a private school, and challenge the private school to teach them. If the private school can't or chooses not to take the challenge, they can turn them away - no explanation necessary. That's why I don't like vouchers. If you don't fit the mold, you can be rejected.

Aspen | 10:19 a.m. Nov. 7, 2007

Mr. Florez- I appreciate your article. I, with my family, fit well in the description you wrote of our day to day struggles to put food on the table and the anxiety of repairing our old car and somehow get medical care for my little one who needs it. Still I would rather be put in a situation where if one of more of my children could receive even a 'partial scholarship' to a better school. I'd want to at least have that chance. I do agree with you immensely that we can't afford a 3 million dollar name-calling on both sides when we'd do better to work as a team to improve things. And I agree with Thomas J., who was like our public and private schools, great in spite of his flaws. I don't want to move from our wonderfully founded USA, but I'd sure love it if America's children were at least in the race again with their peers around the world in some subjects. While the parents are fighting, it seems the children are missing out. Let's all show better confict resolutions skills.

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.