First up is more from Mike Powell. He says it's, “another example of our state legislature trying to destroy the public education system in Indiana.” I know Mike feels that the Indiana Republicans are hell bent on eliminating coercive government schooling. But I would like to hear him explain why giving parents the ability to choose which school their children go to is detrimental to the existence of schools like the ones that he runs. The insinuation is that parents don't want to send their kids to his schools and that, if given a choice, they will go elsewhere. Perhaps Mr. Powell should take a long look in the mirror. Because if he is running a school that fails to satisfy parents, then it is he who is the destroyer of the "public education system" by incentivizing those parents to seek better education options for their children outside of the public school system. He then switches gears and goes on to suggest the possibility that vouchers could be a good thing, but we just haven't had them long enough to know for sure. “Once they put it in, at least give it a few years to see if it’s the right thing to do,” he said. “It just gets bigger and bigger.” Somehow, I don't think we would be hearing him complain if it was his budget that was getting "bigger and bigger".
Next up is a short and sweet offering from Madison-Grant's Superintendent. John Trout says, “I am not a supporter of the voucher program or of expanding it." If he gave a reason why, the newspaper didn't print it. I'll go ahead and assume that it's not because he feels that property owners should not be forced to subsidize any sort of government run schooling scheme and that we need to return all taxpayer dollars that are used for this end. No, I'm sure his reasons are quite similar to Mike Powell's. He is afraid students will choose to leave his lousy schools.
Superintendent of Marion Community Schools Steve Edwards has already had several students abandon his lousy schools. “We were 17th in the state in percentage loss of students,” he said. “We lost 83 to vouchers last year.” That's 83 students who were liberated from the notorious Marion public schools and allowed to seek education elsewhere. But let's pretend for a minute that the widely held beliefs (that Marion's school system is a terrible place for education while thriving in the areas of drug use and violence) of the community are wrong and that Marion really is a top notch place for your kids to go learn math. Shouldn't parents be able to make that decision for themselves? Steve Edwards doesn't think so. And unlike the superintendents of Mississinewa and Madison-Grant, a reason is given. "[Parents] don’t always make choices for the right reasons.” I see. I suppose that means Steve Edwards does make his decisions for the "right reasons". And I'm sure the fact that parents choosing to send their kids elsewhere means less revenue for Edwards, doesn't factor into his opinion at all. He cares more about the children of Marion than do their own parents. Wow. What a saint. He then begins to sound like an abusive husband begging his battered wife not to seek another man's arms. “Our schools have improved and we can provide more,” he said, and then immediately launched into the argument articulated by Powell that this is just all so sudden. “It’s too soon to make changes (to the voucher program). This has now exploded.” Yes. It's far too soon. But what if they had just as soon decided to eliminate vouchers? Once again, I'm betting we would hear a different tune. He continues: “Even though money goes to the child, it’s indirectly subsidizing private schools. Students have become commodities.” Better than it directly subsidizing Edwards' paycheck. It's a little difficult for me to take him seriously when he refers to the children as "commodities". I hardly think the parents are thinking of their children this way. It's more likely that he is the one thinking of them as commodities that he will now be losing to a rival business.
The Chronicle then goes on to quote a few other people who are in favor of the vouchers. One such person is Rep. Kevin Mahan who said it's a good policy but "it's too early". It's too early to institute a good policy? Actually, Mahan was afraid to vote for it because the people of his district are evidently against it. “I don’t get paid to do what I want to do, I get paid to do what I think is in the best interest of District 31,” he said. “I vote the will of my district.” It just so happens that I am a resident of District 31. And it was not my will that he vote against it. Hooray for democracy.
They close the article with a quote from Daniel Altman, who is the press secretary for the Indiana Department of Education. According to Altman, “It takes money away from public education, and it’s not the best use of resources.” As I stated previously, it can only take money away from public "education" if parents choose to spend it on private education. Which would mean that the parents have decided that it is, in fact, the best use of those resources.
All of the people who were quoted as being against the expansion of vouchers in the article have one thing in common. They all stand to lose out financially if people become free to choose the best school for their children. If it were up to them, no one would be permitted to escape from their government funded compulsory institution. These people are not used to having to compete for customers on this scale but they had better get used to it. Or, better yet, they can resign and stop trying to imprison the children of Grant County.
No comments:
Post a Comment