[JohnGalt]

Ron Paul bump.

[Support Free Republic]

Your Donation Helps Counter These Guys
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[John Jorsett]

Several private, Christian schools in my district have expressed concerns that vouchers would lead to increased government control of private education.

This makes no sense to me. If you're concerned about governmental interference, don't take the money. What's so hard about that?

[Tacis]

The secret to correcting the public school system is to get rid of the politicians, demagogs, and unions that corrupt core purposes to advance their own agendas. The same thing will eventually happen to any alternative system set up to regain direct control. Of course, one major but universally unacceptable change that should be made in the public school system, especially in high schools, is the abolition of interscholastic sports.

[moehoward]

"Even some supporters of vouchers recognize the threat that vouchers may lead to increased Federal regulation of private schools."

Of course there will be strings attached to voucher programs.

As a parent I battled government schools for years. One day I put my money where my mouth is and put my daughter in private/Christian school.

Nothing would destroy this incredible learning environment faster than government influence.

[jrhepfer]

This is a very tough issue since the lowest common denominator boils down to public interest. Were the public at large (taxpayers) interested in what was being done with the tax dollars earmarked for education, increased scruitiny would force public school systems to reform and produce results. Even if parents of enrolled children (a minority of taxpayers paying into public education) took an interest in the education dollars being spent, it would force the public school system to reform.

Sadly, many of us are left to fund superior education for our own children as well as public education.

The worst angle here is that, too often, schools operate for money and power and not the children. Take an example from the 1970s when my sister needed special education classes. Only one elementary schooled had offerings. During the 1980s, schools received extra funding for special education enrollments. Hence, almost all local elemntary schools began offering special eduaction classes.

Jump forward to the late 1990s. A shift has taken place where schools receive extra funding for children placed in college-prep advanced classes. Since these children must choose for themselves what classes to take, efforts to entice these children had to be made. Now we are facing vast offerings of advanced classes with very small class sizes, just to get extra funding.

Sure, these classes are great for the kids, but it puts schools into positions like a local high school here in PA. They will graduate fewer students than they did 20 years ago, but need more classrooms to accomodate all these advanced classes. Hence we are looking at proposals to expand the high school.

My point is, that the schools do less for the children than they do for their own power and income.

Please note, Pennsylvania spent an average of $8,673 per student in 2002. In 1997, the national average for private k-12 tuition was $3,100 and today could be closer to $3,500... still less than half of what Pennsylvania spends on students with much better results.

So I ask you, if I can educate my children for $3,500 why can't the state? The answer is that it is not in the best interest for school districts to do what is best for the children when they can generate this kind of revenue.

How do we change that? Remove the public school's ability to have a monopoly on the tax dollars.

How do we do that? I don't know yet. Hopefully we'll figure it out!

Regards,

Jim

[Congressman Billybob]

The problem with Ron Paul is this: When the facts conflict with his core ideology, the facts get left on the table.

Vouchers are no more than scholarships that are available to all who meet the criteria of need, and not based on grades. We have had federally-funded scholarships for all universities, including private and parochial ones, since the G.I. Bill revised in 1945 sent millions of veterans to hundreds of institutions including Notre Dame.

There is no doubt that the Left-Dems and their "edukashun" union allies WANT to use vouchers to extend their disastrous policies from the public system into the private and parochial schools. But as long as the voucher plans are written just like the G.I. Bill (the students/parents make a free choice of institution, and then the funds are paid into the student's account), this will not happen.

That is the central point that Ron Paul misses, because of his ideological blinders.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "Slime and Bigotry on the Campaign Trail," discussion thread on FR. IF YOU WANT A FREEPER IN CONGRESS, CLICK HERE.

[MissAmericanPie]

I don't agree with him on everything, but I agree with him on most things.

[yoswif]

This doesn't encourage real reform of the federal tax code, at least as big a problem as education. Most studies show that a system that imposes a parent/teacher relationship would be best for the vast majority of students. If a parent paid, from whatever source, a local education board licensed teacher $500/month to teach one of their children, it would be hard to avoid a parent/teacher relationship. Teacher's would make good money with low class sizes because all the administrator's would no longer be needed. A license fee would be used to hire a board certified teacher testing company and board certified inspectors.