Deseret News | Voucher funds limited

Reader comments
Voucher funds limited

187 comments | Read story

To JBean | 11:29 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I'm perplexed as to why there are so many parents wanting their students in Charter schools at least where I live. There are several neighbors of mine that send their kids to a Charter school because the feel they're "better". I asked them why they go there and they said because "Charter schools mean they're better right?" Well, our neighborhood school has test scores that are at leas 10% higher in all areas and 15% higher in math and 20% higher in science! But my neighbors believe they're students go to the better school. If vouchers pass you'll see the same disconnect between student performance and parent perception.

MadMax | 11:30 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

To see and hear the venom spouted against public education and thus against teachers by many of the pro-voucher crowd is discouraging! While every profession has some members with problems, to intimate that all Utah educators are sub-par and are minions of an evil NEA is grossly inaccurate. The vast majority of Utah teachers have the best interests in educating all their students! It is a fact that they are handicapped by the lowest funding per pupil in the USA. They are tasked with teaching all students who come to their classes regardless of thier background, language, skills, or parental support. Yet Utah stands above average in almost allcategories of educational success monitoring. This should be a tribute to our teachers. Does it not make sense to use more resources for the benefit of 97% of Utah students instead of funding private schools which benefit only a select few students? We all pay taxes and regardless of which 'pot' you place those funds, if they are spent on education they ought to be spent on the vast majority of students where all are accepted as a matter of law, not via some restrictive application process.

LB | 11:36 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

$3,000 is still a lot of money! It makes private school tuition that much more tangible for those of us who would like to give it a try. Besides, as more people enroll in private schools, the demand for them will increase, allowing tuition prices to become more competitive. As Americans, we love our system of supply and demand! Why not allow this basic principle of quality be applied to our educational system? Let's give it a try! VOTE YES!

Comments continue below

BAA HUM BUG | 11:41 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Vouchers are nothing more than the rich robbing from the poor.

Educator | 11:43 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

My gosh, a lot of in the middle of the night posters. I wonder if they are the same person?

I liked the article for FINALLY having someone in the media research this. I'd go and buy a regular copy of the paper if it had a chart or some sort of graphic that had all the compiled information on it. I tried getting the info. off the school websites but found mostly dead links.

Good job DNews.

Could we follow this one up with a graphic please? I am dying to know the information, and can't afford to call all the schools (long distance).

NCG | 11:51 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

With recent articles on public school teachers preying on children, horrible school violence, the poor performance of the public education system, it's high cost and people willing to make the sacrifice to pay the difference for their children to have a better education (good for all of us), why is anyone against this minimal move to privitization? My husband and I have studied the issue and we are voting for the vouchers.

lynn | 11:59 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

We live in rural Ut with NO private schools-we would rather keep our money home in our districts

Nail on the head | 12:03 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Right on target, kerrybishop54. You summed up the pro voucher side and hit the nail on the head. Two thumbs up!

Eric | 12:06 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Why they are a threat....vouchers are not a threat! All 62,000 students currently in the private school system DO NOT QUALIFY for a voucher. Therefore, your sky high dollar amount is absurd. Vouchers are only for kids not currently in the private school system. Get your facts straight. I can't believe how many teachers have allowed the UEA to cram them full of useless, wrong information. Just for the fact that the UEA is so scared of this it makes me vote yes. Fix your product UEA and people will not need the option.

Why Then | 12:07 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

If it is true that Huntsman did not know about the commercial then why hasnt HE put a stop to them? The whole thing just infuriates me!!

Boo to vouchers | 12:16 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

If you want your kids to go to a private school, then pay for them to go to a private school. I don't want to be the one paying for your kid to get a private education. Even with the possible vouchers I still couldn't afford to put my kids in a private school. Is that fair to me if I can't put my kid through a private school, but at the same time I am paying to put your kid through? If most people can't afford it, then it is only the ones who shouldn't be able to use the vouchers that will be using them. Real fair. Send them to public school.

BIRDIE | 12:21 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

TOO 00FTEN THESE PROGRAMS ONLY SERVE TO WIDDEN THE AP BETWEEN THE HAVES AND HAVE NOTS. I AM FOR VOUCHERS, IF I THOUGHT THAT THE SYSTEM WOULD CARE ABOUT THOSE LEFT0 BEHIND IN THE OLD SYSTEM, BUT LIFE HAS SHOWN ME THAT THE ONLY REASON THE SYSTEM SOMEWHAT WORKS IS BECAUSE THE HAVES ACCESS IT STILL. JUST LOOK AT NEW ORLEAN'S KATRINA VERSES FLORIDA'S STORM AND YOU'LL 0THAT J0USTICE MEANS JUST-US!

REGRETABLE STUCK,

BIRDIE

All things being equal... | 12:21 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I would very much be in favor of the Voucher if and only if public school teachers were allowed to hand them out. Perhaps at parent teacher conferences... where, after a long debate on the why's and wherefore's about the issues like "johnny can't read", the teacher would simply hand them a check for $3,000 and say "PLEASE go find a private school! I am sick and tired of having to tell Johnny to sit down, Johnny pay attention, Johnny stop playing, Johnny do your own work, Johnny stop talking, Johnny, Johnny Johnny, etc." Oh, that's right the only kids who do that kind of stuff, don't have parents who go to conferences. NOT!

Concerned Parent | 12:27 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I'm all for students going to private schools but why should my tax dollars pay for their education? Tax dollars belong in public schools, that's what makes them public schools. Also, most people don't understand that on the whole, private schools have very few requirements for their teachers. A lot of "teachers" at private schools have no training or education in the area of pedagogy(teaching). I'm also concerned about areas that have a high population of polygamist families who already know the in's and out's of avoiding paying taxes but benefitting from my tax dollars. Vouchers provide another route for non-law abiding citizens to benefit from Utah tax dollars. I encourage all to vote "NO" on vouchers!

Nick | 12:36 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Vouchers won't reduce public school class sizes. If enrollment in a public school shrinks, they'll have to reduce their staff.

Vouchers don't provide any more "choice" for parents than they already have. Those who have the means and the desire to send their kids to private schools already do and will continue. Most parents without the means but with the desire to use private schools won't get enough from their voucher to make private school tuition affordable.

Vouchers would funnel public funds into religious organizations. That's not only unconstitutional, it's also just plain bad public policy.

Vouchers will encourage fly-by-night schools to set up shop in strip malls that will tailor their "school" to the parents' voucher money, not the quality education of children. There's no accountability required of private schools.

This whole voucher issue has been an embarrassing debacle from the start. It's time to drive a stake through the heart of this abomination on voting day.

Thomas Jefferson | 12:42 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Kerrybishop..see, your lack of education is exactly why vouchers are needed. News Flash, the Constitution of the U.S. does not separate church from state, that was a flawed interpretation of the US Supreme Court, otherwise known as the Establishment Clause. The Founders including Thomas Jefferson never wanted the church to run the state, yet he supported church groups in the public square. In fact, in this case, vouchers go to the parents, not the church. So, the voucher law is not for religion. Plus, your position to "keep religion at home" is actually a violation of the First Amendment that protects our right of freedom of religion. Hence, if we choose to pray in public, it is our Constitutional right to do so. In conclusion, the only violation of the Establishment Clause is taking place right now with public money supporting secular humanism in our public schools.

Another Thought | 12:43 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this before, but private schools can discriminate, either by those who can't afford it, or by the schools will not want to comply with offering special facilities to the handicapped or learning disabled. So, who's left behind at the public schools, those who can't speak english, disabled, or who get kicked out of private school for bad behavior, and how is right that they get to participate in public school sports but have no accountibility. Public school has to accept everyone. Public school has enough to deal with without cutting their last in the nation funding.

ramble | 12:49 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

some have made a great observation in the difference between public and private schools.Public have to follow government guidelines and give all the tests and make sure no student is left behind and do this with all who walk through the door and at a cost that is one of the lowest in the nation. Public schools offer a wide variety of subjects(our school has a nationaly ranked FFA and FBLA program as well as TV broadcasting) that most private schools cannot offer. private schools do a nice job of teaching the things they are interested in and they do not have to follow every whim of the next parent thats not happy with the way you do your job. in the private school if little Johnny does not follow the rules he is out of there and back in public school where we just keep nurturing him along hoping some day he will figure it out. public schools can't screen the students or their parent they just do the best they can with what little resourse they get and now you want to take some of that away. most pro-voucher $ is from out of state.

Michele | 12:52 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

It is an issue of supply and demand--as the demand for private school goes up, the supply of lower cost private schooling will become available.

Todd | 12:53 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The audcity of our legislature to give tax payers the choice of public or private schools using our own tax money.

What were they thinking?

The very idea of competition has the public schools and teacher unions in a full blown panic.

If more people have access to private schools with a voucher then more will appear where none were before. And they will serve those needs within the $3000 they will have to use.

The very idea of competition has the teachers unions running in full blown hysteria.

JR | 12:58 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I am 25 and I went to public K-12 school and had fantastic teachers. The government paid for my entire college education at a state school through scholarships and now I have a great job with absolutely zero debt. Public schools are not the problem! It is LAZY PARENTS who coddle their children and think their children can do no wrong. These parents think that it is the teacher's fault that their children don't, or won't, learn.

Economics 101 | 12:59 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

A. Education cost at private school= X

B. Supply limited.

C. $500-$3000 voucher support for students to get said education.

D. Outcome? Cost is now X + A LARGE AMOUNT!

You think vouchers will make private schools more accessible to the masses?

Where did you learn economics?
(Probably a $1000 a year private school)

Jon | 1:00 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

How is it equitable that current private school students don't qualify for the vouchers? Parents of students who attend private schools have made sacrifices and worked hard for their children to attend those particular schools. It doesn't seem right that families who haven't made the same sacrifices can suddenly get a free (or nearly free) ride.

As far as free-market competition; if the money that goes toward the vouchers isn't taken from the public school budget, teachers at the public school will simply sigh in relief that they have less students to deal with and more money to go around. They will have zero incentive to improve. The market will only force public schools to improve if they stand to gain something by improving.

Modeerf | 1:06 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

To all those that advocate how a private school can operate on less then a public school: Your right they can. They can also pick and choose who to educate not being forced to educate those who cost more (i.e disabled, ESL, Special Education, etc). So of course they can operate on less per student average.

How about the fact that there is no provision if a student leaves a private school to come back to public, that the private school refunds the voucher, they don't. What happens when a public school goes out of business and a couple hundred students flood back into the public system? Voucher Proponents say that's a public school problem not theirs.

And I especially love the fact that the use the Wisconsin voucher program as a model of success. Yeah a 110,000,00 in tax increases since it was implemented success.

I'm not against vouchers, I'm against Utah's voucher law. Pass a law with proper controls, accountability, logical funding measure's, and one that will actually help people afford school, and I'll be the first to stand up and vote for it. Pass this and it's an open door to a Wal-mart education.

To MadMax | 1:11 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

STOP IT, you're making sense! That has no place in this debate!

Eric | 1:22 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Make Private and Public Truly Competitive
Vouchers will work if Private Schools play on the same level playing field as Public.

Private Public
Accept all students NO YES
Must be accredited NO YES
Can discriminate YES NO
Teachers must bd
Certified NO YES
Must teach disabled,
disadvantaged kids NO YES
Must provide trans-
portation to sch NO YES

Let's put Private and Public on a Level Playing field and then pass vouchers - until then, there is real no competition.

NOTE NOT on REF 1

You're Right | 1:22 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Jon,
Excluding current private school students from the vouchers was a compromise because the up-front cost to include EVERYONE would have been too great.

As a private school administrator I would do right by my loyal, existing families and not gouge them by raising tuition either. If a school has capacity for more students and is able to fill up, economies of scale will help provide more for all students, voucher or not. A rising tide lifts all boats.

P.S. All things being equal...You may be on to something! We, too, however, have our share of "Johnnys". Over the years, I have seen practically no truly "bad" kids, but I have seen A LOT of questionable parenting!

Phil | 1:24 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I went K-8 at a private school, and 9-12 at public. My private school education cost a lot less than my public. Anyway, Utah has the hishest tax burden. Utah has the fewest percentage of kids going to private school. Get rid of socialized education. It is not the job of the government to babysit.

Steve | 1:37 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Give the rich another break. Take more pot shots at our crappy public school system. Shout out that vouchers will give "choice" (you already have a choice). And as always, ignore Utah's graduation rate, scores well above the national average on standardized testing, and the high number of our students who go on to higher education. Keep spelling out all of the gloom and doom associated with the terrible public school system, while educators in Utah continue to teach the UNWILLING in overcrowded,underfunded classrooms. If our schools are so awful, then send your children to a private school WITHOUT EXPECTING A HANDOUT FROM THE GOVERNMENT! If you cannot afford the tuition, please take a second job (teaching maybe?) and then send your children to a private school.

wondering why | 1:42 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Why don't private companies offer scholarships or sponsor children who want to attend a private school? That student would held accountable for the scholarship by getting good grades or the money would have to be returned, or the scholarship cancelled just like in college? Why do we need to use public funds for parents who don't want to support public schools?

Ed | 1:45 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I feel very bad for those people who are so anti-UEA and who automatically lump everything that is bad with NEA with UEA. It is almost as if the stereotype factor is kicking in...So let's just say that all Catholics are bad, all Mormons are bad, all Baptists are bad, all BYU fans are bad, all Ute fans are bad (hold it, can't go there!)....All UEA has done is to ask for more funding for schools to be able to keep quality teachers and to reduce class sizes. And that is a BAD thing??? One last thing: The gentleman from Parents for Choice who said that the vouchers were a thank you for rich people taking their kids out of public schools? Now THAT's arrogance at its' finest!

What Lisa Johnson didn't say... | 1:51 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

What is the average taxpayer cost to educate each student in today's public schools. Isn't it $7000. And wouldn't you agree that that is a lot of money as well for the average taxpayer. If so, then why do you say that "When you consider the income level you have to be at to get a $3,000 voucher, that's a lot of money to come up with to make the difference ... and if you have more than one child to come up with that money is a real barrier for Utah families."

Exactly. That's precisely why we do need vouchers, so we have increased competition, lower costs per student (whether that is in a public school or private school), and better overall quality education.

Guy | 1:51 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I think this article needs to spend some more time discussing the merits of the Parents for Choice info.

"We feel that there aren't a lot of private high schools in Utah... and it's most important for children to get a solid foundation and that is going to happen in the beginning years," she said. "We use the K-8 formula because that is where this is going to matter the most ... then (students) could transition to any number of programs in a public high school and their needs would be met just fine."

UEA Sheep | 2:07 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

When asked will Vouchers create more competition in Public schools, provide easy access to private schools for the poor, solve the lack of funding in Public schools, decrease the overall classroom size, solve world hunger and make superheroes no longer needed in today's world, this sheep answered.

Baaah!!!!!!

Baaah!!!!!!

If the program sounds as far-fetched to the general populace as my last two made up points, that is how Proponents are making it sound.

dcc | 2:08 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I should not be expected to pay more taxes so you can send your kids to private school. All you pro-voucher people think you're entitled to my money. You're NOT. Pay for your own kids.

Childless - What about Me? | 2:30 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I do not have any children and I pay property tax. I'm wondering if I can get a $3000 voucher or tax break since I'm not utilizing the public school system?

No? Why not? Shouldn't I get to choose where my tax dollars go?

No! Every property owner pays taxes that contribute to public schools for the good of the community. This is not about choice. Parents already have the option to choose private schools for their children. Some just want someone else to pay for their choice.

Vote "NO" on Vouchers!

Com Pete | 2:31 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Why can't Private schools compete without a government subsidy?

We keep hearing from PCE that Private schools can't compete with an educational monopoly and they want the government to step in and break it up. If the Private schools are that close to fail financially it would be better to allow free market principles close them down and out of business. It would be irresponsible for taxpayers to bail out these failing businesses with Voucher subsidies.

no vouchers | 2:38 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

After 5 years the money received expires that public schools save as students leave for private schools. Then the funding for public schools decrease to a lower level than what they are receiving right now. If I'm not mistaken the funding that each student in public schools is lower than most states. If the funding drops after 5 years why would anyone want to worsen the already short funded public school situation. Only self centered people that want their own kids to benefit and not the public as a whole.

tired of it all | 2:38 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I'm just not gonna vote on this issue... too many conflicting reports..... too many issues.

bob | 2:49 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Well Said--I agree with dcc completely.

Adam Smith | 3:06 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

dcc...why should I pay my taxes to send your kids to a public school, a system that produces, at best, mediocrity? A system that is run by educrats and a teachers' union? A system that graduates kids who have no clue as what the founding documents are, other than their best guess being something found on Easter. Why should I pay for illegal aliens who attend a public school? Why should I pay for dumbed down education? Why should I pay for the instituted school-to-work, skills driven system that doesn't produce an educated citizenry? Why should I pay to tolerate gangs, drugs, and unruly behavior in public schools? And, finally, why should I pay for a school district system that is ALL OVERHEAD!!!

dcc-what??? | 3:08 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I don't understand. Are you saying your taxes will go up if vouchers are approved? I don't believe I have ever heard that argument. How does giving parents some of the money they paid in taxes back so they can choose the best educational setting for their children affect your tax bill?????

Agree with Childless-comment | 3:10 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I agree with your comment. But to those who want vouchers and think it is okay for 9-12 grade students to re-enter the public system, why? You just commented on how bad the system is? You contradict most of your reasoning. Who funds these children then? Won't class sizes go up if they return to public school?

Nate | 3:13 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The point of vouchers is to not get our kids into Waterford and Oakley. Take out Waterford and Oakley's tuition numbers and this article would report completely different numbers that make private schools more realistic for my little family on a budget. This article simply manipulates the statistics by including outliers like Oakley to deceive people into taking their side.

DCC | 3:21 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I have paid for all of your kids to go to public school. Why is it that you have an "entitlement" attitude? That happens to be my tax money too, and I pay a lot of it. That said, you folks need to check the facts. The money for vouchers comes out of the general fund which currently has a great surplus, not the public school fund. Since many of you believe that the $ value of the vouchers will not help most, then there probably won't be a lot of takers. Plus, if people are unhappy with the education their child is getting, it hardly makes sense to think they would run right out and sing them up with some off the wall private school that is not accredited and hires "unqualified" teachers. Stop with the scare tactics already. Just put the facts out there and let the parents decide.

Pittakos | 3:26 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Incredible, some of the comments that I read here. Those of you who question why you should have to pay for someone else's education just don't make sense. FACT: Every child has to be educated. So those of you who are against vouchers would rather pay the entire $7,500 to educate a child than $500 to $3000 to educate a child. Stop and think for a moment. Government contracts out for all kinds of services because they can get a better deal. Vouchers are just a way of providing for education to be contracted out at a lower cost.

Do the sensible thing. Vote YES for vouchers. I'm all for cheaper government.

Pittakos | 3:30 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Why do some of you worry about whether a school has to teach a certain curriculum or not? Why do you worry about the credentials of the teacher? You don't have to send your child to a school that doesn't meet your approval. No one will force you to do so. Parents are smart enough to choose quality where they see it. If the quality isn't there, the school will go belly-up. Give parents a little credit here.

Adam Smith | 3:31 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Your comments are right on!!

Pittakos | 3:33 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Oh my! Public money might be spent at a private school that has religious leanings. Quel horreur! I wonder how so many hospitals owned by religious organizations get away with taking in federal medicare dollars. Perhaps we need an investigation. Again, it is a contracted out service which benefits everyone in one way or another.

Vote YES on 1!

catagories | 3:34 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

It appears from the ads and the reader comments that voucher supporters fall primarily into two main catagories. One, the wealthy elite such as Gov Huntsman and the Oreo cookie Eyres. The second group would be the religious zealots who feel that public schools teach heresies. There is a third, very small group. That is those who are sincerely shouting "help! My child is failing and needs more." My answer each is: One, if you are wealthy then neither you or your wealthy friends don't need vouchers (and cut the bogus line that you care for the low income). To the zealots, teach your kids your own brand of religion at home. That's what the rest of us do. We don't expect school teachers to teach religion. That's the parents responsibility. Third, if your child is struggling, you won't accomplish anything until you stop blaming everyone and everything. The first step to healing is to accept the responsibility for yourself. Of course it hurts to do that but how do think everyelse (including your kids) feel accepting the weight you should be carrying? No private school on the planet will help change your situation until you change yourself first.

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.