Deseret News | 'Tricks' flayed by voucher foes

Reader comments
'Tricks' flayed by voucher foes

105 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Brack | 2:29 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Methinks it would be extremely foolish to abolish a voucher program that allows us to take our children out of inferior schools that do not teach our own values to our children and the things we want them to learn and put them into a good private school of our own selection that does do those things for our children and us!

Jay, SLC | 5:47 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

The entire Voucher program is bad business. They way to improve the school system is NOT to turn & run away from it.

Here is an idea! You don't like your local school, try entering the walls & spending time there to make it a better place. If people directed more attention to repairing the concerns, instead of turning their backs, would it not get better?

A flood of Volunteers in is better than an Exodus out.

Dyc | 5:51 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Don't hesitate to take your child out, if that is what you want, but I don't want my tax dollars spent on a private school that doesn't offer all children services. Private schools usually don't offer their services to special needs children. Private schools expel students who get bad grades. I'm not saying they don't have the right to do that, but if that is what they choose to do, they shouldn't be able to get public money.

Comments continue below

Tim | 5:52 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

You don't need a voucher program to take your children out of 'inferior' schools. Charter schools are free. Magnet schools are free. Homeschooling is free. And you still have the option of private schools, even without vouchers.
Please stop pretending that without vouchers, you have no options. You've got plenty.

KMarkP | 6:05 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Brack,
Methinks it would be foolish not to recognize that you are allowed to do that already.

Re: Brack | 6:20 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Brack,

Hopefully the school you pick will teach a few language skills. Maybe you should go too.

Jessica | 6:38 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I think that supporting private schools of your own choice is the right thing to do. Vouchers will provide the way for parents to make that decision for their own children, it might even help lower the student to teacher ratio in the public schools.

Ken Nottingham | 6:49 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I was at a Student-Parent-Teacher conference yesterday at a Jordan District middle school and was pretty suprised to see an anti-voucher table set up but no representation from the pro-voucher side. Both sides should have an equal chance and equal representation since this is a public election. The district should step up and make sure this happens.

Walkon | 6:51 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Bracks comment is the #1 reason why we should NOT have vouchers. Let schools teach math,science, and english. Let PARENTS teach their own values at home, church or anyplace but government funded schools! I can see it now " Joseph Smith Elementary", "Warren Jeffs FLDS Intermediate School" or even " Saddams Taliban Middle School." If you want your children to go to a school that teaches your specific doctrinal beliefs then do it! Just not on my dime.

dcc | 7:24 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I already pay to educate you children. Why should I have to pay twice?

Teacher | 7:27 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Jordan District is prohibited by law from making any ï¿½expenditures from public fundsï¿½ or providing anything of value to influence the outcome of any election. U.C.A. ï¿½ï¿½ 20A-11-1203(1), -1202(3) (defining ï¿½expenditureï¿½), -1202(5)(a) (defining ï¿½influenceï¿½), and -1202(9)(a) (defining ï¿½public entityï¿½). In other words, it is not only morally wrong for school districts and their subunits to utilize taxpayer funds and taxpayer-provided resources to peddle their point of view, it is a crime. Id. ï¿½ 20A-11-1204.

arc | 7:27 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

All people need to do is read the voter info package. I would think anyone smart, after reading it, would vote for vouchers. The anti-voucher people are not encouraging people to read it. The voucher side is. Any wonder who is lying? The anti-voucher people are. Yes there are a few truths in their ads.. but the premise is wrong.

Dave | 7:29 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

It is interesting how the Unions are the ones that are pushing the fight against vouchers. My children attend a Charter school that limits classroom size to 25 students, and requires parents to volunteer at the school every week. They teache music, orchestra, 3 languages, it is great! It is amazing how the local elementary school teachers, administrators, and school district personell take ever chance to criticize and denegrate our school. My sons friend at the local elementary school has 43 students in his class, and they are worlds behind my kids. When you consider that Charter schools only receive a fraction of the funds that regular elementary schools receive, and they have to PAY for their own buildings (they are not funded by bonds like regular schools) why would teachers, and administrators care? It is because the UNIONS do not get their PAYDAY from the non-unionized teachers. This is not about education, but the RICH union slugs getting their pay day!!!

Kevin | 7:37 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I second Walkon.

James | 7:48 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Walkon, why so afraid of competing thoughts and values? Why should everything be so centralized when it comes to thoughts?

The voucher debate has mostly focused on economics though periodically people mention values. So all tax payers must support your values in school? That is what it boils down to. Why not decentralize and allow parents to choose what works best for them.

Just last night I became aware of a new charter school in the making that will have as its focus essentially extreme environmentalism. Everything about the school will be "green" to include integrating global warming, etc into all subjects. I personally think global warming is one of the great myths of our time; something that makes legislative votes for Jazz tickets look like going to church. And yet I support this school.

One of the greatest aspects of America has always been are diversity of thought. If I can support schools named Thomas Jefferson, Liberty, Reagan, etc based on independence of thought, why not an environmental school. I don't support their thoughts, but passionately their right to have them.

You force all of us to support your values, but fear others. For shame!

jwinkel | 8:10 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Yesterday at Cedar Ridge Elementary they were conducting SEP's. The PTA had anti-voucher materials being displayed. Two people from the district were consulted and determined it was ok. They did offer the pro-voucher person equal time.

She declined, believing it wasn't the right place to have a war.

Shame on ASD, the School and the PTA!

Good grief | 8:13 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

The law is crystal clear - both pro and anti-voucher groups have every right to advocate their cause inside a public school. Neither side is required to provide notice to their competition, nor must the school. All the school has to do is allow both sides to have access. Both sides have shared information in this way. Sorry - no conspiracy and no jail time on this one.

Anonymous | 8:21 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Unions thrive in a monopoly, they fail whenever there is competition. The public schools are held harmless with the voucher bill, why should they worry? Because public schools will be exposed, that's why. Exposed for being too expensive, inept, controlled by union values, controlled by federal dollars, controlled by everyone but the parents. This voucher bill is about giving parents control of their children's education--and the unions will never tolerate that!

Status quo | 8:34 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

One thing is for sure in this whole debate. If you are in favor of things remaining the same, vote against vouchers. If you are in favor of a change, vote for vouchers. It's that simple.

What about the real issue | 8:36 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

The real issue here is that someone is misrepresenting themselves. Not whether you are personally for or against vouchers. All public schools have received warning that both sides need to be offered table space. They don't have to be recruited, but if they ask it should be granted. Stop blaming the "union."

Anonymous #2 | 8:46 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Anonymous,

Is that all you've got? Evil unions, Ted Kennedy, MoveOn.org, Hillary...blah...blah...blah... You pro-voucher folks must be pretty desperate. What's next? Gays? Osama Bin Laden?

Your Kidding Me | 8:48 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

My child already attends parochial school, and I am firmly against the voucher law. I already pay more in taxes to support education due to my choice to only have a single child and not an enormous brood. I also made the choice to be on a waiting list and to pay more in private tuition for my daughter to go the the school of my choice.

My choices are just that, mine. My responsibilities are to my family and I make the choice to sacrifice to send my daughter to a school where she can be with others like her. I make other choices in my life and dont expect the state to subsidize it, why should I expect it for this one?

In short I pay for my childs tuition, I pay for public edution. I dont want to pay for someone else's choice to have their child to go to a private school who's agenda I do not agree with.

Anonymous | 8:50 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I admire our Governor for is comments about letting the people decide in the coming election on school vouchers. I feel the anti voucher group has been misleading with wrong information in ther commercials. Please read both sides to make an appropriate decision.
LP Santa Clara

Instereo | 8:52 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

So now the pro-voucher movement has come to be an anti-union movement. What is this big powerful union in Utah. It's 30,000 teachers who work with children everyday. They don't sit in offices counting money or dictate directives to their flunkies. They teach. When they do get together to make their wishes known, it's to make our public schools better. They advocate for smaller class sizes and increased funding (you have to pay for more teachers to get smaller class sizes). Sometimes they have to work to protect themselves from the mindless anti-union attacks coming for some people, who seem to like to write in this forum but they have a right to do that too. They also work hard to protect our public schools and the children in them from groups that want to destroy or denegrate those public schools. They do work to protect the constitutional rights of their own but I think you can see from the comments in this forum, they need to because there are some who don't seem to care about rights. I just know I'm voting NO on Referendum 1. I believe in public schools and who are in teacher unions.

Save Your local Charter School | 8:56 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Dave,

If vouchers pass expect your Charter to turn private and some out of pocket expense beyond what the voucher provides for to be paid by you. Charters are all part of the plan because they provide the buildings for the private schools that will suddenly be needed, kids who want to be there, faculty and curriculum.

It makes sense to convert Charters to Private after they have been in operation for three years, because that is when the additional start-up funds end and only the weighted pupil unit of around 2.5K to work with.

Walkon | 8:58 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I don't understand what you mean when you write "why so afraid of competing thoughts and values", I'm all for teaching basic values of honesty, respect, charity etc . . . What I don't want to see is specific religious dogma being taught. That's not the job of a school that recieves govt. money.

The pro - voucher crowd repeats the same anti - union rhetoric that has been around for years. They bring up Ted Kennedy and evil liberals to scare voters into voting for vouchers. Unfortunately, voters aren't buying it and the polling numbers back that up. We need to call vouchers what they are - money for the wealthy. Are these private schools going to meet the guidelines of the federal school lunch program so the poor can recieve free school lunch? Are they going to transport those students who can't afford a car so they can go to school? What about those who still can't afford the costly tuition? sure, it's a nice little perk for the wealthy, and the big money is trying to convince voters that it will help the poor. Nonsense.

Try New Ideas | 8:59 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I never had a strong opinion either way on vouchers, but when I look at who is backing the anti voucher move - UEA and NEA - it makes me wonder, what are they so afraid of?

It seems they are merely protecting their members (unionized teachers - not ALL teachers) but don't really care about the "net result"... do the kids come out better. I have NEVER heard a solid argument why we should give the program a try. For the people that support this and call themselves ï¿½Progressivesï¿½ (new term for Liberal Unionist) they are sure protecting the old way of thought!

BTW ï¿½ all involved in education (including teachers) know that hiding behind the money argument is simply a rouse

Anonymous | 8:59 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

At least with the Voucher backers more children know the name Nancy Pelowski.

Guaglione | 9:00 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

The real issue is that the liberals have decided their best bet for the future is indoctrinating young children with their lies and propaganda. With the brainwashing only sticking in 50% of the cases if they don't get a chance to indoctrinate everyone they'll eventually lose their majority.

BH | 9:03 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

This article is not about pro this or anti that, but rather about using outright deception as a tactic. Everyone is going to say that deception has always been part of modern politics. But not to the point of trying to disguise onself as the opponent. This is just wrong.

The pro voucher people need to quickly make it clear that they have no association with this tactic, or they deserve to lose if they support such tactics.

Instereo | 9:04 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I think it's sad that deception has to be used to advocate a position on this voucher debate. I mean all you have to do is choose a set of facts that you want to believe. I realize that each side has their own facts and there's not much common ground. Just choose your side and talk if that's what you have to do to support your views. For me, I believe in public schools. I think most private schools are also good places to learn, some are outstanding. I think what makes these private schools good alternatives is their independence from the public system. They are true alternatives. But I believe it's fundamentally wrong for the government to pay for someone to attend a private school when I can't afford to send my children or can most people. I don't believe a tax credit/entitlement is a solution either. There are many choices in Utah including other schools in the district, out of the district, charter schools or home schools, which are all free and offer alternative educational settings. I shouldn't have to pay for a persons choice to go to private schools. Vote No on Referenudum 1.

Volunteer! | 9:04 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Vouchers aren't the answer. Service is the answer. Volunteer. I do, once a week, even though most of my children are no longer in the public school system, having graduated and gone on to wonderful educational opportunities. Let's make the public schools a reflection of us--an extension of those who care enough to help instill a life-long love of learning. Volunteering is a snap. Get some books from home or the library and read to the 1st graders. Do science with the 4th graders, or multiplcation-tables with the 3rd graders. The kids and teacher will love you. Take treats for holidays and donate books to the school library. Whatever. Doesn't matter. Anyone can do it. Your presence is all that matters. If we could harness just half of the "energy" being spent on "voucher-debate" and focus it instead on improving public schools we could see a miraculous result this very school year!

Try it! | 9:08 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

BTW - Beware of people that refer to all tax money as "their money", as in "I don't want MY MONEY going to private schools." They know that it is also "my money" which I am not happy about going to the UEA and huge bloated school distrct administrations.

Re: Arc's post | 9:09 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I was shocked by Arc's comment that the anti-voucher people don't want anyone to read the voter information pamphlet. From my vantage point, regardless of the merits of the actual debate, the anti-voucher side has conducted itself in a much more constructive and classy manner than the pro-voucher group (which uses purposefully misleading tactics--see today's story on Utahns for Public Schools--and unapologetically attempts to "poison the well" by using the names of Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy). If any side is dodging intelligent discusion about the voucher issue, it's the pro-voucher folks.

I am not enthused about the idea of subsidizing (with my tax dollars) someone's decision to pull their kids from the public education system. It is expensive enough to provide support to one system of education. I can't believe that it is sound policy to start financially supporting two separate systems. Judging from the manner in which the pro-voucher side is conducting itself, I doubt they'll even give themselves a chance to change my mind.

Anti-Voucher SCARE tactics | 9:15 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

When you don't have an argument, attack the messenger.

Run ads claiming that the NEA is part of some subversive organization tied to Ted Kennedy and moveon.org (oooooh, scary). Swiftboat, anyone?

Convince your backers that Nancy Pelowski [sic] is in on this somehow.

Get a bunch of near-illiterates to back you online, writing posts that are long run-on sentences full of misspellings and bad grammar. That'll work!

Anonymous | 9:16 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

These people that say they don't want their taxes to go to a private school are missing the point. The vouchers plan is that some of my tax money will go to pay for my child's private education.

Jim | 9:16 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

So many people have been confused on this issue. This in not about choice, we have always had a choice, as Tim said earlier. It is about whether parents get a tax refund by sending their children to a private school. And if you read the bill, there is money set aside as a buffer to offset any money could be leave the district. Both sides are playing with the choice word. It is not, has not, nor will ever be about choice.

Big Government Utah | 9:19 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Having moved back to Utah after living in Colorado for 7 years, I'm astounded at the Big Government mentality in Utah. We love our public schools, we love our public programs here. There's a huge fear here that the voucher program might lesson our Big Government approach to everything. What is it about Utahns and Big Government?? Private competition is a good thing. Big Government mentality is holding this state back from its potential!

Try It! | 9:21 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

So, Instereo why wouldn't teachers (and their unions)- who are supposedly and supposed to be open minded and excited about NEW developments in science, technology, environment, excited about different and diverse cultures, artists, and forms of literature not open to examining a new and possibly significant development in education?

What can they possibly be so afraid of? And don't give me "it's the kids" because it isn't.
They and we all know that private schools that take vouchers have standards and will have even more standards they must hit. If they falter or donï¿½t deliver ï¿½ they close because there are better options (public and/or private).

The union and teachers that believe what the UEA says are very much like the buggy builders that were around when the automobile was coming of age. Instead of adapting their business and skills, they simply lobbied for legislation to stop the car makerï¿½s developments. We know how that eventually worked out for themï¿½

Buy a horse and buggy lately?

YES!!! | 9:25 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

"ARE YOU KIDDING ME" said it best up above...go up and read it!!! There is choice for SOME people. Don't hurt the ones who will never have a choice whether or not the voucher law gets passed or not.

You want different...go there!!! Just don't ask me to pay.

AND, you don't like your public school??? Go spend your energy, time and money there. Talk to the principal, teachers and secrataries....just don;t whine that your gene pool isn't at the top of the class....It may be just that. YOUR gene pool!!!

educated shopper | 9:28 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Hey teachers and school districts, provide a good product (education) and consumers (parents and students) will stay in your schools. Provide a poor product and consumers will shop elsewhere (private schools). But let me remind you, those tax dollars are not god-given to you and your organization, they are, in part, mine and I want them back so I can go buy a better product than you and the UEA offer. If you were providing a product that the public thought was worth the price we would not even be having this voucher issue.
Lastly, when businesses get in financial trouble they cut overhead. Utah schools need to cut administrative overhead and transfer the funds to the people doing the work (teachers). They need to run their busses a couple more years before replacing them. In other words, they need to develop and execute a financial strategy. Nice thought, but I have never seen a government entity capable of fiscal management and logical decision making. Vote for vouchers!

JotaB | 9:28 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Who really believes this big myth that unions control the schools in Utah? The truth is that the Republican controlled legislature controls schools much, much more than any union. The UEA is made up of teachers. It is not a group of "union bosses" raking in large sums of money and plotting to overthrow the "values" of Utah. Many UEA members are in church with you every Sunday. They are not what Parents for Choice portray them to be in the TV ads. They are hard-working teachers who stand up for what is right with public education. If you support teachers and public education in Utah, vote no on Referendum 1.

Anonymous | 9:29 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

PTA's are allowed by law to have a table set up at a school and have anti-voucher information available. If at any time a pro-voucher group wants a table ask and you will receive. If there is a PTA function there will be a table and most SEP's, including Cedar Ridge Elementary's SEP, have PTA-sponsored Book Fairs happening.

Concerned | 9:49 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

My children will go to public schools; however, I want the freedom to punish any school (private or public) if they are unwilling or incapable of providing for the educational needs of my children. Vouchers are not anti-public school. It is hard to give up the monopoly because that means competition. Administrators will have to get rid of teachers and administrators that do not perform i.e. bad teachers go away. I think our public schools will become even better. In my opinion and I beleive many others feel this way but we have many outstanding teachers in the public school system. You have done a thankless job for so long. Hopefully now those who excel will be compensated in a market of ideas. We seem to be loosing our well placed beliefs in markets and capitalism. Even Europe, China, and Russia have figured or are figuring out that socialism and communism don't work.

Scare Tactics, Give me a Break | 9:59 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I would say that the anti voucher team uses a much bigger scare tactic than anyone. "They'll take all the money out of our public schools and give it to private schools with no standards." Not even close to the truth (and they KNOW IT), but it sounds good in a 10 o'clock news and NPR sound bite.

It may be SCARY to most Utahns, but the teams behind trying to beat the vouchers (here and other places) ARE liberal groups (i.e. NEA and Moveon.org). It is not a scare tactic, it is a mention of fact. Mentioning it simply lets voters know who supports and who opposes the concept (and makes you think "why would moveon.org oppose this new idea?" ï¿½Are my values like moveon.orgï¿½s?ï¿½). If the anti voucher team is ashamed or trying to hide from their affiliations with liberal groups, then don't take the money and don't be associated.

James | 10:15 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

Walkon, reread your first post and my response was pretty onto that. You use some extreme rhetoric to go after so called religious views, throw in the red herring about Joseph Smith Academy, etc and now you are talking about defending the Union and money.

You worry about the voucher being used to start church schools, won't happen. The voucher is limited by Supreme Court rulings so end of that subject.

Let's talk about values, those are all throughout our public school system.

So parents want their children to learn about geography, the current PC is to teach them the evils of man, global warming, etc. Parents want their children taught about the War of Independence, the current PC is to try and skip over the subject, get into greedy land barons, etc.

Are those not values? Why should we get just your flavor of instruction? Are you afraid that parents will use the voucher to give their child a more value oriented instruction, besides what you consider acceptable.

That is most of what this is about. Public education has taken a turn to the left. Many parents want their tax dollars to get to the basics.

DBG | 10:16 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

It is clear that many of the anti-voucher posters are living up to the rhetoric that the anti-voucher camp is feeding them.

FACT: Anti-vouchers focus on HB148. People should be focusing on the amended bill HB174 whidh addresses ALL of the problems in HB148. It's like focusing on the tax code of the 1920's instead of today's tax code. Focus on the right bill to understand what vouchers are. That's all the pro-vouchers want yout o do. See the whole picture and not "cherry-pick" at HB148.

If it was truly HB148 that stood alone, I would be very against it. However, the legislature picked up on the problems and passed the amended bill by a MAJORITY that sealed that law. Since it is an Amended form, that bill cannot stand alone.

So read HB174 if you want to understand the Voucher law and how it works.

educated shopper | 10:27 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

JotaB,

I have asked several legislators what the strongest, most feared lobbying group is. Their answer was unanimous -- the UEA. I've seen some really stupid decision making by legislators based on lobbying pressure from the UEA. As a law maker, crossing the UEA is a very bad idea. Generally, elected officials simply kowtow to its overwhelming influence. I was shocked that the voucher program even made it to a vote in the last session; even more so that it passed. If the UEA would police itself by cutting administrative overhead in schools, allow true performance-based pay, and allow an effective annual performance review process it would go a long way in improving our schools and education. These are basic practices that the rest of the working world undergoes. Why not educators?

Re: JotaB | 10:29 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I believe the UEA controls the schools and teachers(well, you asked). That isn't to say that teachers are bad people (the typical claim people make if you ever question the mighty UEA). They are great hard working people that simply want the job security a union offers. But they are like the old buggy whip manufacturers - just looking for something to keep their jobs status quo in a quickly changing world.

Now I must say that I don't believe the UEA controls the politicians in Utah, yet (aligned with the Dems) and that is why vouchers passed the normal legislation process.

BTW - If the UEA was REALLY concerned about the money for the schools and kids, then they would have been better off taking the MILLIONS of dollars they accepted from NEA and Moveon.org to petition and now influence vote and give to their members and schools (not just take the dues and cash). Charter schools are already showing that non-unionized schools with public money WORK and the UEA sees obsolescence coming.

Try something new teachers! In the long run it will benefit you and give you MORE choices!

Freethoughttoday | 10:38 a.m. Oct. 4, 2007

I'm not someone who subscribes to conspiracy theories, but I believe there to be something highly dubious with this push for vouchers. The funding behind these "pro voucher" bills are coming largely from conservative groups, usually tied to evangelical Christians. These folks have one idea in mind, and that is to further divide this country of the debate of creationism being taught in schools. They know the likelihood of having their supernatural beliefs taught in a public school are slim-to-none, and now believe that the best way to perpetuate the dumbing down of America with when it comes to the sciences is to make sure more kids are in private (and usually religious) schools are more likely to shy away from teaching the theory of evolution. As crazy as these sounds, I wouldn't discount my theory. These fundamentalist have been trying for the better part of a decade to get their agenda pushed, and in fact there is a manual put together which is available on the internet, that details their plans for this dubious approach. These people have financial backing from fellow evangelicals and "ubber" (so-called) Christians whose goal is to make public education much less secular.

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

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.