Thursday, February 23, 2006

Wait, Was That A Threat?

Utah Conservative posted an email from Rep. David Cox. Rep. Cox opposes the "School Choice" reform including vouchers and tuition tax credits. In his email, Rep. Cox insists that vouchers are actually bad for private schools because they will open the door to government regulation and rob private schools of their independence. On the very same website, Rep. Cox insisted he was fighting for local control of public schools. So he'll fight tooth and nail for local control of public schools, but somehow is powerless to prevent the state control of private schools? Considering Rep. Cox is one of the legislators who has the power to force state regulation of private schools, it sounds to me like Rep. Cox is making a threat. It's kind of like being told: "God forbid you should meet an unfortunate accident".


Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is such a plague of selfishness that has devoured our republican party.

Public education should be so well funded and administrated that the need for private schools disapear.

This should be the focus of government, education. It's the MORAL path.

Hell, why not put the teachers in charge of the government.

2/24/2006 01:17:00 AM  
Anonymous JackJack said...

because there's too many real estate developers on hill. That much ego takes up space.

2/24/2006 01:37:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Would someone define "fully" or "well" funded for me. In early 21st century, a report came out that the education budget had increased by almost 100% with a student population growth of around 3%. What happened to all of that money? D.C. spends over $10,000 per student. Is that well-funded? Well, they have the worst record in the nation and have gone to vouchers. The funding argument is bogus. Whenever one entity controls everything and it is mandatory that everyone participate, it is not efficient, fair or equitable, and always results in waste.

By the way, when Granite District announced it was closing Granite High as a traditional high school, Skyline High refused to take those students. They didn't want them to mess up their test scores. So it continues. The rich white Mormons on the hill keep their "quality" school, while everyone else can go to, well someplace else.

In addition, government is never moral. It is incapable of making those judgments.

AND, we already have a bunch of teachers in charge of the government - they are called legislators (check out the list) and they are part of the overwhelming problem.

2/27/2006 12:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you are going to say 'Rich White Mormons' on the hill are responsible for Skyline school population and their scores. Then I am going to say 'Flaming Fags' are responsible for the AIDS epidemic.

Is it a ludicrous statement? Of course it is. Just like yours. Is it partially true? Of course it is. Just like yours.

2/27/2006 04:35:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting that of all the important questions and issues in the post about the meaing of "well-funded", anonymous chooses to take on the "rich, white Mormon" moniker? Please. Okay, let's just say "rich." Are you saying the demographics don't have anything to do with their test scores? Of course, it does. that's one of the things wrong with public ed. It segregates people in the worst possible way, by economics. So only those who can already afford to live in an area with good schools can get a quality education for their children. Utah has the worst minority gap in the country. why? Because we are good at educating kids from good homes (define that anyway you are comfortable) and do a miserable job with the rest. Those kids from those homes would do well no matter what. But they get the best schools and the kids who have everything against them get left in poor schools. Maybe some of you would be surprised to find that there are elementary schools in this valley who score 23 and 12!! on their SAT's. These kids need a chance and more money is not the answer, because the money doesn't make it there half the time. The other half of the time it isn't a matter of money at all. The largest percentage of the population screaming for voucher or tax credits or something to save their children are, 1st African/Americans and 2nd Hispanics. Because their children are at real risk. But their voices are drowned out by those with the wherewithal to have political clout, who live in areas with good schools. Once again we are determined to make sure our poor population stays poor and stupid so we can have someone to rule. (I know that that last comment is a potshot, but does someone have a better explanation for denying a decent education to those who so desperately need it, besides the worn out phrase "not adequately funded".?)

2/28/2006 12:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Logan said...

I think that more money might be an answer. The one thing is that the money needs to be used adequately.

Children First Utah is an organization with many Rich White Mormons and Non-Mormons that put up large sums of money to help under privileged children. The children don't get a free ride. They pick a good school, almost always private, and then have to come up with half the tuition while CFU takes care of the other half.

In this example more money is a good answer. More money from more people helps more poor children. Lessen the gap by finding the right programs. Public money from the government has never been the right answer when education is involved.

2/28/2006 01:16:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home