Posted on 02/16/2012 6:55:15 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Campaigning in Idaho on Tuesday, Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum suggested that he is opposed to a public school system overseen by the government.
"We didn't have government-run schools for a long time in this country, for the majority of the time in this country," he said. "We had private education. We had local education. Parents actually controlled the education of their children. What a great idea that is."
Santorum's campaign did not respond to multiple requests for an explanation of whether he was calling for an end to public schooling as it now exists. But the former Pennsylvania senator has previously made his antagonism known. Campaigning in March, Santorum took a shot at public schools.
"Just call them what they are," he said. "Public schools? That's a nice way of putting it. These are government-run schools."
Santorum makes a point of his support for home schooling. All of his children have been home schooled, and he has even suggested he would home school in the White House, a situation that he said "would certainly be a shock to the establishment."
The Hill newspaper mined Santorum's 2005 book It Takes a Family for his views on schooling. In that book, Santorum called "mass education" an "aberration."
"Never before and never again after their years of mass education will any person live and work in such a radically narrow, age-segregated environment," wrote Santorum. "It's amazing that so many kids turn out to be fairly normal, considering the weird socialization they get in public schools."
He added: "In a home school, by contrast, children interact in a rich and complex way with adults and children of other ages all the time. In general, they are better-adjusted, more at ease with adults, more capable of conversation, more able to notice when a younger child needs help or comfort, and in general a lot better socialized than their mass-schooled peers."
Santorum has not always home schooled his children, however. When Santorum was serving in the Senate, he decided to effectively move his family to Virginia - a situation that would cause political problems for the then-Pennsylvania senator.
Santorum did not enroll his kids in local Pennsylvania schools, and he did not home school them: Instead, he enrolled five of them in the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School. The "cyber" school is considered a public school, as Mother Jones notes, where students have to meet state requirements. It also provides free computers and other perks, and the Penn Hills school district ended up shelling out $38,000 per year for the Santorum children.
Santorum reportedly ended up withdrawing his children from the school. He did not repay the district, though the state ultimately paid the district $55,000 to cover the tuition fees.
It is certainly in the right direction. However....Nothing in the Constitution allows for the federal government to conduct education research, or develop “state of the art” upgrades.
You are absolutely right.
Actually, your idea would save the state far more than half because one of the biggest expenses for schooling comes with the pensions and benefits of retired teachers. Fewer government teachers would save the counties and state HUGE amounts of money if there are fewer teachers moving into the ranks of the retirees.
If states wanted to balance their budgets, it would be simple. Just give the parents $5,000 for each kid they remove from the government school. In our state the average private tuition is about $4,000 and this includes averaging in even the **most** expensive private schools that have country club grounds and facilities.
Another way to help balance state budgets without costing the taxpayers a dime would be to allow any child of any age to take the GED or a similar private exam. If they pass, give them an official high school diploma from the local government school. Many children are languishing in government school because they need a GED or high school diploma to qualify for scholarships and financial aid, or to join the military.
All government school classes from kindergarten through graduate school should be on the Internet. They should be available for free to any citizen of the state. Hey! They paid for it. Why the big secret in keeping it hidden? If the child passes a specific subject, ( for example addition facts), they should be immediately promoted to the next level in that topic.
By the way, I think all students should be required to take the GED to qualify for a government diploma. The teachers should be required to pass it every three years, or so. It is my guess that most would fail the math section.
Well, maybe you could visit Detroit, NYC, DC, or any large inner city housing project... that would probably speak to your head-wrapping dilemma...
I grew up in PA, and I was never a fan of Santorum... until recently. He seems like an honest man who isn’t afraid to speak the truth, and he gets it right on this topic. :-)
I didn’t mean to be derisive to you, I just feel the republican party has no understanding or awareness of some of the deep problems in this country, outside their base... and it is a shame because what they have to offer is the exact prescription the innercity child needs to hear, but they never deal with the nasty nitty gritty of the now and now, just principles and platitiudes - just a major problem I have with republicans and conservatives...
I think much of the outrage is directed at the trend of immorality and failure, and as you suggested, that trend hasn’t hit home for many, so the urgency is naturally deferred.
Many are also detached from the ugly, and in a way, I regret not being able to share the unwary impressions they hold. That said, I am optimistic about the Country’s future — but it will take time.
Government knows best? I can’t even think of how to describe the problem with this. Of course we think parents can’t be trusted, and we need government to care for the children. That’s why government inspectors take kids lunches and replace them, because the parents are incapable of choosing a proper lunch. That’s why we teach kids things in schools and don’t let parents opt them out, because parents just can’t be trusted to tell their children about sex and condom use. IT’s why the school gives out birth control, and why planned parenthood can give abortions without parental knowledge, because government knows better than parents.
When you concede that parents can’t be trusted, you’ve given government all the power the liberals have seized for it. It’s the thing we are fighting against — a government solution for every problem.
Now, you are absolutely correct that some parents can’t be trusted. And that’s the problem, isn’t it. Some people are stupid about taking risks, so government just decides nobody can do anything dangerous, everybody is required to wear helmets, have cars with air bags, not do dangerous things like base jumping; why the government decides when you can surf in the ocean, and whether it’s OK for you to climb a mountain.
And it’s why government tells you that you must buy health insurance — because you can’t be trusted to do what is right for yourself or your family. If we can implement a government education system because parents in Detroit can’t be trusted, we can implement a federal required health insurance because parents can’t be trusted to provide correct health care for their children.
Actually, what I ACCURATELY said was:"I just feel the republican party has no understanding or awareness of some of the deep problems in this country, outside their base..."
When you walk into those neighborhoods, you don't see storefronts sponsored by republicans helping, or republican activists addressing problems, interacting and educating the next generation, or trying to lift them up. All you see is dem this and dem that - dem program - dem handout...
Without helping or engaging, most republicans recite their mantra, govt is bad, bad, bad... and walk off... I am not talking about the govt - I never mentioned the govt except in terms of Newt's solutions. I am talking about republicans addressing and attracting, and offering solutions - and competing with the dems - to help those people in harm's way... they don't.
And the way you took my response is proof positive... if you want to remove the slavish immoral safety net, how's about a solution first? Because whether you want to understand, accept or realize it - lots of people in this world - need help to plant their flag on a new level of generational success and living.
With equally due respect, Santorum could cure cancer and you would find fault with it.
Read the bottom of my home page, last entry under “Tagline history.”
This is where you are stepping out of your level of competence. I praised RS in the very post you were responding too. You are a sick sweater vest groupie in a creepy way. I find him very off putting but will give him credit when he’s right, as in this case.
I am a Newt supporter and very disappointed in how he is running the campaign. I will vote for RS in the general if it comes to that, but I would not be OK with it. He will turn off the libertarian wing of the party and I think would be a total disaster as nominee.
We desperately need this election to be about reducing the size, scope, reach and power of the Fed Govt. A Santorum candidacy is not about that and never will be.
If elected, I fear he will be even more big government than GWB, meaning our best case with RS is another slow bleed for four years - at which time we will probably lose to an even more liberal Dim than Obama.
Typical Santorum. Claim to be some big social CONservative and take credit for the idea of home schooling and local school control, but managed to get out of paying for it himself, by forcing the taxpayers to fund his personal preference.
Too many years of being a big government, Washington insider, pork spending and earmark loving Senator. Let the taxpayers foot the bill. And then take credit for being something you are totally not.
(Now you know why I cannot stand this phony.)
Oh, gets even more ironic. He could have and should have been sunk on this and other big government tendencies of his - but Newt and Mitt were so obsessed with each other with a visceral hatred - that they have ignored him and allowed him to be “above the fray” (which is also BS) to boot.
Who knows? Maybe God is blinding everyone to his obvious and numerous short comings and hyporcisies.
You are correct. Santorum will do like he did as a Senator. The loud screaming from the Press and the radical Democrats in the Legislative Branch, will be at his throat and he will flow with the political current like he has done his entire career.
Santorums statments on social issues were used to paint him as a radical in 06, its WHY HE LOST BY 17 POINTS FOLKS!!! The same template will be used against him if he is the nominee... he didn’t have an answer for it 6 years ago, he doesn’t now.
I’ll vote for whoever the nominee is, but I only see 1 person in this race who has the cahones and intellect to not only stand up to the press, but make them look like fools in the process, and his name is not Santorum or Romney.
No school should be funded by tax revenues, be compulsory or be run by anyone not selected by the parents and only the parents.
Newt is a genius in that regard. He is a true leader and has the ability to engineer a solution in situations that have never been tried before. It was Newt's plan of attack that worked so well in ‘94, the Contract With America and later Welfare Reform.
This is the kind of leader we can not afford to lose at this most critical time in our history. To throw all of that away over minor, decades old Social issues, is purely stupid and insane.
I still fear that this mindless, Lemming stampede to nominate the “Perfect CONservative” will end up in disaster. Just like it did in 2008. Only in this case, the Washington insider us posing as a (phony) social conservative and is being sold to the electorate as a savior.
Oooo, you REALLY don’t like Santorum.
Hey, you’re welcome to your opinion. Have no problem voting for him, or Newt or even Mitt if need be.
ABO
I’m with you on ABO - and I mean A BO.
But no, Santorum is a guy who I liked when he first burst on the scene in the early 90s (I think) - but have grown to like less and less over the years. Actually had a chance to interview him one on one for 20 minutes in front of a big crowd in Daytona and the interview went very well and I liked most of his answers - but no, he does not strike me as all that talented or intelligent.
I just see a disaster of a candidacy (though I will vote for him for sure) and if he wins, the third term of GWB without the Texas charm. In other words, 5 years - BEST CASE SCENARIO with a Santorum nomination - we’ll be in worse shape and trying to defend a mediocre President WORST CASE SCENARIO: Santorum is disaster and 5 years from now America is over as we know it.
I just don’t see any good scenario from his nomination. Newt’s risky, but at least there’s a chance something great could happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.