Deseret News | Becker, Buhler quiet on vouchers

Reader comments
Becker, Buhler quiet on vouchers

WC | 6:38 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

The title and content of this article seem contradictory. It says they are quiet and yet they have both spoken against it. Does the Des News expect Vouchers to be a main topic for the candidates? They agree on the measure. What else is to be said. I think the Des News must have had nothing to say about the Mayors, but had the space. Why do we care what their view on Vouchers is? They are the running for mayor of a city - not the god of the state. ...I can't even believe I wasted my time to not only read the article but comment on it. Fooled me, Des News.

SLC Voter | 6:41 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

We need someone with spine, like Rudy Giuliani, who supports vouchers and likes competition and isn't afraid of the teacher unions.

Bob? | 7:12 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

Vouchers have nothing to do with the mayoral race, I personally support vouchers, but the candidates view on vouchers is irrevelent. Thank you candidates for not making this a part of your campaign. The last thing we want is another Rocky dealing with issues far outside his role as a CITY mayor.

Comments continue below

MFM Utah County Resident | 7:31 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

It's the usual politics. Becker and Buhler are cowed by the UEA. Vote yes on the referendum. It's about the kids. I don't care what Dan Jones surveys say. UEA is an anti-teacher organization.

Lomez | 7:56 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

Unlike Buhler and Becker, Bob Bernick Jr. does not realize that the voucher issue has nothing to do with being the chief administrative officer of Salt Lake City. Bobby writing, and me reading, this column was about as useless as a screen door on a submarine. Come on Bob, how about a column on how the candidates are going to address aging infrastructure, airport expansion, downtown revitalization, inflating property tax assessments, or any other issue that has to do with the position of mayor. In fact Bob, how about reporting the news rather than trying to create (in this case a very weak effort)the news. If you choose not to take my advice perhaps your next column could be "Osama Bin Laden wants to address problems in the Salt Lake City school lunch program".

Anonymous | 8:07 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

Both are afraid o the Teachers Union. A very selfserving group.

1mom1voice | 9:04 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

The effects of the vote on November 6th will be far reaching. This is definitely an issue that will affect the citizens of SLC, the State, and the Nation. The mayoral candidates are just hoping not to have to take sides in a controversial debate ---positions they will have to live with after the election.

Some Utahns believe they should avoid conflict at any cost, but this issue is so important that everyone, including candidates need think it out and take a stand.

Vote AGAINST Referendum 1 on Nov. 6th.

Mike | 9:30 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

All unions are self serving. That is the whole point of organizing a union.
Ralph and Dave support public education as a cornerstone of democracy. This is not the same thing as being cowed by the UEA.
Maybe the next article can be on what Ralph and Dave think about USAID activities in Afganistan to eradicate poppy production and if Putin's attempt to hold onto power in Russia is a foreign policy threat.

Steven Jarvis | 9:44 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

The Voucher issue is expected to increase voter turnout, that is why the issue is expected to run a few individuals out of office. While neither candidate supports Vouchers, it is possible that the high turn out could change the election result.

saltlakealright | 9:55 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

The voucher referendum has nothing to do with the Salt Lake City mayor bot both candidates have opposed vouchers vocally. This article is ridiculous.

Mayor Rocky | 11:12 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

Hey...the next time you call these candidates why don't you ask them what they are going to do about Pioneer Park? My bet Becker nothing, Buhler more police!

Walkon | 11:46 a.m. Oct. 15, 2007

The pro voucher argument is soooo stale. Big band unions - fear of competition - Ted Kennedy will take over the world! It's about tax money being used to fund PRIVATE schools and at its core it is Wrong. This is why vouchers will fail. Fortunately most citizens have figured this out and haven't bought into the pro voucher nonsense.

Blaine | 12:45 p.m. Oct. 15, 2007

I was wondering why teachers don't support the voucher program. Don't teachers want the lower class sizes?

Local | 2:14 p.m. Oct. 15, 2007

A better headline would have read, "Becker, Buhler, Firmly Oppose Voucher Bill". That is the content of the story. It is refreshing to know their stand in the issue. It should be obvious by now, that the majority of Utah voters, who pay the taxes which fund the government, and the government leaders who are supposed to represent the consensus of the citizens (the ones who pay the bills) do not want to fund a private education voucher program. Cities, counties, and the State are all intertwined together in this issue, and it is good to know how the local mayoral candidates stand on this, because this issue involves everyone.

Vouchers are going down | 2:28 p.m. Oct. 15, 2007

Vouchers have nothing to do with smaller classes. Just less teachers at the school. Class size will actually go up at many schools if enough kids leave with a voucher.

jackhp | 4:29 p.m. Oct. 15, 2007

Blaine,
Please, do tell, how will vouchers reduce class sizes? And please, don't insult me with some stupid oreo analogy.

Higher Class Sizes | 5:09 p.m. Oct. 15, 2007

Blaine,

Morley, Ferrin, and Way (and many others) have gone around for years claiming that the Charter Schools they have a hand in building will reduce the class sizes in the local districts. Well, over the past few years, as three Charter Schools have opened nearby, my class size average has gone from 36 to 39. I just don't believe the hype and fuzzy math anymore!

In reference to the post about unions being "self serving" I can't even begin to think of a response. What is it about the word "union" that is unclear? I don't remember any assistance from the pilot union last time my luggage was lost and my flight was cancelled.

Steven Jarvis | 6:40 p.m. Oct. 15, 2007

Blaine is likely a paid poster and isn't from Utah. DNews boards have quite a lot of them.

I am not a paid poster--just an out-of-work laid-off teacher because I only had eleven students in my first grade class. I have been in on the debate for months over at a different message board, have worked in two Charter schools, one AZ district school, and extensively subbed in JSD.

Those Charter schools were built for less than what a Public school could be because Charters aren't required to have the same amount of land. Did they actually decrease classroom sizes. Certainly not in ASD, and for once I don't know why.

Passing Vouchers means many new private schools are going to be built to meet demand. That is where the big money is to be made in Vouchers, and why the push to get them in the door has come finally to the Utah. But like so many Private businesses do, many will fail. As they fail, we have only the safeguard that the remaining quarterly voucher payments will stop. But that will leave Public education with more children and no funds to educate them.

Buhler supporter | 11:16 p.m. Oct. 15, 2007

I haven't decided if I like vouchers or not, but you couldn't pick an issue that has less to do with the mayoral campaign. Which is why Ralph putting education as his top priority is odd considering the Mayor doesn't have much to do with education. If he wanted to do something on that front perhaps he should have ran for PTA president.

But I can't say I blame him, it is the number one issue for voters, and why not score some quick political points by making proposals for things that the job you want doesn't have much to do with? Once he is in office he can go back to blaming the GOP for him not getting things done. Sure it's easy to blame the GOP, but real leaders are effective even in the face of difficult roadblocks.

Howard Tayler | 12:50 a.m. Oct. 16, 2007

We don't let taxpayers with no children decide how their own education tax-dollars are spent, nor do we give them refunds, yet they are the ones who suffer MOST under the burden of education taxes. Their only benefit is the warm fuzzy they get knowing that they're helping the next generation of other people's kids.

Much as I love a good Charter school or Private school, giving vouchers to parents is a little bit like letting Congress vote on its own pay raises.

(Which is to say that just because it's a bad idea doesn't mean it can't happen.)

Tom Sakievich | 11:30 a.m. Oct. 19, 2007

My 6 children (now 20 to 29 in age) attend public schools, one attended private school for a year to catch up due to uninterested teachers impact. As now retired military we lived in number of states. Used many public elementry thru High School. Many GREAT teachers, many REALLY BAD ones as well. Some detailed oriented Principals, others didn't care.

Vouchers to choose public education, or private, is right way to go. Children's lives are affected when problem educators are in place - takes YEARS to overcome bad education. Vouchers allow choice - certainly doesn't hurt public education. It supports it. Vouchers strengthen parental educational options in the interests of children. Without vouchers a emotional brick wall is hard to avoid for children AND parents.

Public servants can easily become public educational dictators. Many do not have interests of children or parents in mind. Personal and organizational turf and Interests for control and comfort status que can be main focus. Otherwise, vote for it and live with heartbreak, loss of time on job or home as occasional or institutionalized rotten apple teachers and staff create misery for you and your children through their apathy.

Key: Vouchers provide Options.

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.