Tag: issues

State

Arguments Against Vouchers

Post author By David
Post date October 8, 2007
No Comments on Arguments Against Vouchers

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I enjoyed reading Dixie Huefner’s opinion in the Salt Lake tribune recently. It was one of the more well-considered arguments against vouchers. Despite avoiding the emotionally charged shouting-match feeling that seem to dominate divisive issues like this, she still managed to skew the data to fit her position rather than presenting more accurate facts along with her legitimate personal opinion. (Yes, my support for vouchers does not cause me to think that everyone who opposes vouchers is a mindless zombie big-government liberal.) So here are some thoughts to temper her arguments.

Siphoning off tax dollars to support private school enrollment . . . also siphons off support for the public schools by parents who obviously care deeply about their children’s education.

This is perhaps one of the strongest legitimate arguments against vouchers. What is not mentioned is that the availability of vouchers gives parents who care deeply about their children’s education a lever to demand more accountability from public schools when the schools are not serving their children well.

The subsidy, from $ 500 to $ 3,000, mostly helps families who can afford to pay a significant portion of the private school tuition. Many of the best private schools cost between $ 10,000-15,000 a year. If vouchers are meant to help those who cannot afford private schools, they significantly limit the private school choices available to low- and many middle-income families.

Many of the best private schools – this ignores the fact that the $ 10,000 to $ 15,000 private schools make up a tiny fraction of the private schools in the state. There are many others which cost significantly less (some even less than $ 3000) and still offer a greater range of choices to parents than public schools do. The vouchers are not limited to being spent at the “best” (read “most expensive”) private schools. I would bet that 50% of private schools charge less than $5000 and if vouchers are implemented new charter schools are likely to spring up catering to this within-reach-of-the-vouchers price range. For those who argue that $ 5000 is still a lot of money I argue that:

- A $2000 voucher brings the cost to $ 250 a month which is a good chunk, but if you are serious about your child’s education you’re likely to find a way (start by ditching your $ 60 cable bill).
- Voucher opponents do not suggest raising the level of vouchers – they prefer to limit parental choice to the rich.

The provision allocating money to public schools to partially offset the loss of tax dollars for children receiving education vouchers expires after five years.

Why should public schools be perpetually paid for students that they never educate? This argument directly conflicts with the argument that vouchers cost too much. If the public schools were paid for more than five years the vouchers would cost more. Besides, the provision itself does not expire after five years, the offset money expires for individual students who remain outside the public school system for more than 5 years. In other words, the schools quit receiving money after parents have determined that their student really is doing better outside the public school system.

Other parents may determine that their child’s instructional needs have not been met by the school. They may have a child who is harassed or bullied by other children, or they may prefer smaller class sizes.

Certainly, private schools have a role in educating children who are not well-served by their public school. But the selection of another public school is also an option for parents who are seeking a more effective school environment for a particular child.

Students are allowed to move between schools within their districts. Their choice of schools are limited to other schools that are directed by the same people who are directing the schools they are trying to get away from. That sounds like Henry Ford telling people that they could have their car in any color they chose – so long as it was black.

Another concern about the voucher legislation is that it will encourage private schools that lack a track record and will not be as instructionally effective as the public schools. Public schools are accountable to the public and must report such matters as drop-out and attendance rates and achievement scores.

The voucher legislation will not provide vouchers for schools that do not have a track record. The track record in private schools is that if they do not meet the demands of parents they lose their students and have to close. Public schools are insulated from that kind of accountability – they just have to report their numbers but there is no risk to their bottom line.

[Public schools] must comply with due process protections and equal protection mandates of the U.S. and state constitutions.

This is a nice scare tactic, but what “due process protections and equal protection mandates” are private schools going to violate?

If all the energy in time and money spent on supporting private school vouchers went to promoting ongoing professional development of educators; [etc.] . . . we might have an education system that better meets the needs of all our children.

If all the energy in time and money spent on oppopsing private school vouchers (that’s much more than has been spent supporting them) we might have an education system that was better, but one size still does not meet the needs of all our children.

As I have said before, there are valid arguments against vouchers. Most of them are based on personal beliefs about the way our children should be educated and what is in the best interest of society. Let’s quit pretending that this is a fight between good an evil. It’s largely a matter of personal preference and social vision. “What do you think is best?” That’s the real question behind this legislative fight.

Tags issues, media, position, State, vouchers

State

Put Ethics Before Politics

Post author By David
Post date October 6, 2007
2 Comments on Put Ethics Before Politics

As a voucher supporter I have to agree with Jesse:

As a voucher supporter, I have gone from embarrassed with to disgusted by PCE. This event, going from unethical and sleazy to potentially illegal, is absolutely inexcusable and I would encourage every Utahn to immediately stop donating to them and every candidate to refuse their filthy money and return whatever campaign contributions they’ve been given. Utah businesses should refuse to do business with them and Utahns should refuse to work for them. Astroturfing, phishing, push polling… these are not acceptable. PERIOD.

If you truly support vouchers like I do, you will run as far away from PCE as possible and give them the stern and harsh punishment they now deserve. Starve them for dollars and make them wither and die in this state. They have done more to damage the concept of vouchers than any anti-voucher group could ever dream of. Their loud and visible bad example makes everyone else look bad by association. Thanks to PCE, anyone who supports vouchers, no matter how honest, sincere and open they are, will be tainted with the labels of dishonesty, trickery and ulterior motives.

Besides starving PCE of cash, voucher supporters should refrain from any further reference to PCE – they don’t deserve any further publicity for any of their arguments. Perhaps if the reaction against this is strong enough people will recognize that PCE is not representative of the entire voucher support base. As Jesse said, some of us are honest and sincere and staunchly opposed to gutter politics.

Tags connections, issues, State, vouchers

State

Despicable

I’ve come out in support of vouchers, but not very supportive of the often weak efforts of the pro-voucher groups. Not supportive and downright disgusted are two different things. This makes me downright disgusted. So far the misleading email has not been conclusively tied to any official pro-voucher group but I don’t trust them enough to abandon that possibility. I would like to think that this is the work of a weasel who thought he’d do his part to help the cause – if so then someone needs to track him down and shout “Hey, you’re not helping!!”

At the risk of having someone throw eggs at my house I just have to consider the slim chance of reverse-psychology logic leading voucher supporters to pull this trick to manufacture yet another black eye for their inept opponents.

Isn’t politics lovely?

Tags Education, issues, State, vouchers

National

Fiscal Realism

I keep returning to the sentiments of Reality Check – that we need to realize that on tough issues we will not be able to satisfy everyone and that the decisions we make must be based on what is best and not merely based on what offends the fewest people. This comes up again as I read the platform for Divided We Fail. This is an initiative of the AARP. I do not wish to accuse the AARP of not caring for the future, but I think it is fair to note that when push comes to shove the best solution for the next 5 years is going to be more favorable to the AARP than the best solution for 30 years from now.

Their platform consists of 6 points – 3 on social security and 3 on health care:

All Americans should have access to affordable health care, including prescription drugs, and these costs should not burden future generations.
- This sounds like a noble and universal sentiment.
- We can deduce from their other points that the path they envision is one of government backed health care which is not possible without being a burden on future generations so this goal is unattainable in its fullness – one part has to give.
- For more insights here go read No Free Lunch.
Wellness and prevention efforts, including changes in personal behavior such as diet and exercise, should be top national priorities.
- Absolutely. This is the one undeniable truth, and the single most influential factor in the rising costs of our current health care system. How do we go about doing this?
Americans should have choices when it comes to long-term care – allowing them to maintain their independence at home or in their communities with expanded and affordable financing options.
- Agreed. Only, what “affordable financing options” do they have in mind?
Our children and grandchildren should have an adequate quality of life when they retire. Social Security must be strengthened without burdening future generations.
- Everyone (the AARP as well as their children and grandchildren) deserves an adequate quality of life when they retire. We might need to define “adequate quality of life” because what that seems to be today may well be unsustainable.
- On the other hand, there is no possible way to strengthen social security without increasing the burden on future generations. Some generation is going to have to take the fall on this one. The program needs to receive its sunset – Sadly, I feel compelled to volunteer my generation. I don’t expect to receive social security benefits. Even if social security benefits are still available I hope not to avail myself of that benefit. (Why should I be a burden to my posterity?)
Workers should be provided with financial incentives to save, should have access to effective retirement plans, and should be able to keep working and contributing to society regardless of age.
- I agree.
Americans of all ages should have access to tools to help manage their finances, and save for the future and better, easy to understand information to help them increase their financial literacy and manage their money wisely.
- This is another point that sounds good but the pessimist in me is skeptical that we will ever really educate the majority of our population on money matters.
- I also believe that managing money more wisely requires more than financial literacy – it requires a new attitude about the value and nature of wealth. So long as we are driven to keep up with the Joneses financial literacy won’t make us wise managers of our money.

Tags economics, health care, issues, social security

National

An American DREAM

When I first heard about the DREAM Act it seemed reasonable to me. When I saw it called Backdoor Amnesty I was not really surprised, but I thought that I should look into it more closely. That meant going to see the actual text of the bill. The last time I talked about immigration I said that we needed to decide what we believe on the issue before we run around legislating a position. My own position, the more I consider it, would have us be much more open for immigration than we are now (on the books).

As I look at the text of this bill I believe that it is fundamentally sound. The purpose is to allow a path to citizenship for those who came to the US as children (under 16) and who have lived lives in the U.S. that are worthy of citizens (no run-ins with the law, no orders for deportation, completing their educations) and contributed or prepared to make positive contributions to our country (complete degrees at institutions of higher education without federal grants or served two years in the armed services without an other than honorable discharge). Not only that but they must have lived as residents for at least 5 years – no hopping back and forth across the border (limitations against 90 days at one time or an aggregate of 180 days outside the US in the last five years).

The one potential problem that we should guard against is having this used as a back door for children to get legal status and then use that as a lever to gain legal status for their parents. This law should only be applied to those who came as minors and have since completed their secondary education and followed the path to continued contribution to this country. Those who have done so should not be held liable for being brought here illegally. They should not have any special opportunity to help parents (who are accountable for coming here illegally) gain priority access to legal residence. Those parents should be required to seek legal status through existing means. Children who have not yet completed their secondary education should be returning to their country of origin with their parents and if they choose to return to America legally we should welcome them.

Tags government, immigration, issues

National

Suggestions on Health Care

Post author By David
Post date September 20, 2007
3 Comments on Suggestions on Health Care

I have noticed a pattern lately in the articles that I have been linking to (and displaying in my sidebar) – many of them (4 out of 10 currently) deal with the issue of health care. I would like to post on all four eventually but for now I would like to discuss my thoughts on some of the general principles that I am seeing in the health care discussion.

The idea of a single payer system spells economic disaster to me.

The idea of forcing everyone to purchase insurance seems fine on the surface with the typical caveats that we subsidize that cost for low income people. On the other hand, I think that people should be able to choose to not purchase insurance if they have enough personal wealth – with the understanding that they will be fully financially liable for any care they receive. This may sound backwards since the wealthy would be the most able to purchase insurance, but imagine that I am a very healthy millionaire (I am healthy, but I do not have even a fraction of a million dollars in net worth) – there is no reason to force me to purchase an insurance policy if I am willing and able to assume the costs of my health care. Perhaps I have to sign away any right to declare bankruptcy in the face of medical bills.

There are two major things that any attempt to fix our health care system must address if they are to have any hope of success.

The first is to make people sensitive to the costs of health care. Right now most of us are only sensitive to the costs of health insurance. Once we have insurance (whether our own, through an employer, or Medicaid/Medicare) we cease to be cost-conscious because most of the cost is already paid. (High deductible plans have the advantage of keeping the consumer cost conscious.)

The second crucial change that must be made is to find ways to encourage healthy lifestyles and preventive care.

If we address these two changes the entire problem would become more manageable because we would have better health and less being spent on elective procedures. We might even hope to have fewer lawsuits driving up the cost of health care as people become more involved in making their decisions of what procedures they undergo.

Tags economics, government, health care, issues

State

Vouchers vs Credits For School Choice

Post author By David
Post date September 19, 2007
2 Comments on Vouchers vs Credits For School Choice

I enjoyed reading Scott’s thoughts on Funding School Choice. (The series that lead to his post can be found at the National Review Online – parts 1, 2, 3, 4) I am wondering if we have much to gain right now by discussing a new funding option for school choice. I would like to have seen this discussed earlier, or it might be good to open discussions again after the November vote.

The idea of tax credits to fund parental choice in education seems to have some positive attributes – like not having the money go to the government and then get redistributed. On the other hand, as Scott notes, this does not help those who pay little in taxes which is where vouchers have more merit. I would love to hear some perspective from other people (especially from some voucher opponents) on the relative merits of tax credits for education.

Tags connections, Education, issues, State, vouchers

General

My Position on Vouchers

I have stated that vouchers have potential benefits to our education system and also that they do not address the core issue that is leading our education system down the path of crisis. So here is my position on vouchers.

The bills that we are going to vote on are flawed – most bills are. That being said, I will support vouchers at the ballot box and then I will work to improve the public education system. The virtual monopoly of our public schools in the arena of primary education is not beneficial to our society. That monopoly must be challenged. Only as it is challenged will we give our educational administrators the incentive to root out the inefficiency and manipulation that are pervasive in the current system.

Despite any claims to the contrary, the public education system is not designed to educate. It is designed to measure. It measures things like how many hours a child sits in the classroom – which is not related to how much they learn. I have a friend who has chosen home school because she was told that her son was in danger of not advancing to the next grade because of the number of absences he had that year. This was without regard to the fact that this child was at or near the top of his class in every academic measure of performance. Those measures meant nothing next to the butt-in-seat time where he was flirting with the legislatively imposed rules of what constituted acceptable attendance. The public education system also spends large amounts of money on academically unnecessary things like upgrading high-school athletic facilities while complaining about lack of funds. (That is just one example of spending that is completely unrelated to academics.)

Our standardized tests are more academic in nature, but the emphasis on such testing encourages the employment of every intellectual pump-and-dump scheme that can be found. Teachers do not want to lose their jobs so they teach to the test without regard to any retention after the test is administered. This is because teachers are graded (formally or informally) on a bell curve. The result is that some percentage of teachers are going to fail and some percentage are going to pass regardless of whether the entire system is getting better or getting worse. Such a norm-referenced mindset works well in the media because people understand it, but it does not work well in improving the system. I honestly believe that most teachers are interested in improving the minds of their students, but if they lose their jobs they can’t do that. Their jobs are not based on how much their students learn, but on how much their students remember on the day of the test as compared to other students. That kind of environment will eventually wear out most well intentioned people so that they either leave, become complacent, or resign themselves to the flaws in the system.

My assertion that a quality education can be had only based on parental involvement suggests one of the risks of vouchers, or any other escape from the public school system. When provided with an easy alternative, most involved parents are likely to abandon the public school system because other options (home, private, charter) do not carry all the baggage that weighs down the public education system. This leave the public schools worse off than before because it will be left to care only for those students who come from homes where parents are not involved and where there is no culture of learning. (Voucher opponents use this fact to accuse supporters of engaging in class warfare because the culture of learning is less prevalent among the poor – who’s parents are not generally as well educated as the rich.) Because of that risk, I will actively encourage people, including myself, to avoid using vouchers to leave the public schools unless it is absolutely necessary.

The educational bureaucrats must know that we have the option to leave, and that we are interested enough to vote for change. Once we have made that known we must show them that we are willing to work with them, for the good of everyone, to improve the public schools. (Utah Rattler stakes out a similar position.) We must demonstrate that leaving them to deal with those who have the least support is not our objective, just as living off our taxes and raising their own paychecks should not be their objective. (Admittedly I do not think that is the objective of most administrators, but who can resist the chance to give themselves a pay raise when their colleagues keep reminding them about how hard they work.)

Tags Education, issues, position, State, vouchers

culture

Growing Discomfort

I said before that I was becoming increasingly uncomfortable with my favorite major candidates over one issue. That issue is the issue of health care reform. Obama seems firmly in the camp of having the federal government provide health insurance for many or all Americans. I think this is a very bad idea. It looks easy on the surface, but I think it is a step towards making our government financially insolvent.

On the other hand, Mitt Romney has experience implementing health care reform as governor. On the surface his approach sounds more like the kind of thing that I could accept. That means I am more comfortable with Romney than Obama on this issue.

What this country really needs is for the federal government to scale back in many areas where it was not meant to be. We are working towards a homogeneous society where there are no substantive differences between Idaho and Florida. The strength of this country is our freedom to make choices. Unfortunately we are working to create a society where there are no meaningful choices that have not already been made for us through our laws. This is not a recipe for stability. We need the challenge of meaningful choices if we are to hope to build the kind of strong character in our citizens which drives us to do the things that make this country great.

Tags citizenship, government, health care, issues, Romney

culture National

Glancing at Immigration

I picked up my car from the shop and happened to catch part of RadioWest. Doug was talking to a writer about immigration and the contradictions in our human nature, wanting to help people in need and trying to secure our borders. I didn’t catch the whole show so I don’t know if that perspective is representative of the entire hour, but it got me thinking about my views on immigration which eventually boil down to this – I think we’re asking the wrong question.

Our political discussion of the issue is how to deal with illegal immigrants. I don’t think we can approach that question until we have taken the time to ask – how did we get in our current position? That includes the role of immigration in our history and the history of our immigration laws. It also includes the reasons that people cross our borders illegally. Until we have that background I think that any grand compromise (which seems to be the only kind of laws we have been getting lately) is like trying to catch a fish for dinner by shooting a slingshot into a stream in the dark.

As a start, our legal limits on immigration basically stem from the Immigration Act of 1924. Though some adjustments have been made in the 83 years since, nothing has fundamentally changed in our law. Prior to 1924 we never had a comprehensive immigration restriction except that we tried to prevent people with significant criminal records or contagious disease enter the country. Now I ask the question – are we better off since we decided to stem the flow of immigration? I don’t think we are. Not only that, but I am a bit suspicious of why we chose to enact that law in 1924. None of the great advances of the past century can be even remotely tied to limiting the flow of immigrants. If we were to open our borders completely (except for cases of contagious disease or criminal record) would we be any worse off than we are now? I doubt it since we have a tidal wave of people coming in despite our laws.

I’m not arguing for amnesty, I am arguing that we need to start making an informed decision on where we stand on the issue of immigration. If we decide that it is necessary to limit immigration then we need to close the door. Until we decide what we believe about immigration there’s really no point in discussing amnesty (or lack of amnesty).

Tags elevate, government, immigration, issues, NPR