ACLU Attacks School Vouchers

I wanted a link to the DP article.

Here you go: http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_18327035

TY.

navycpo7 wrote: my question is

why should taxpayers pay for others children to go to private schools.

The taxpayers can pay $5000 dollars per kid for a grade A education, but if you prefer that the taxpayers pay 12K for a "C" education at a public school, maybe you need to rethink this.

I have been paying the school tax for decades and went to private school and don't have kids. I would much prefer my money go to vouchers so kids can get a better education.

PrintSmith wrote:

navycpo7 wrote: my question is

why should taxpayers pay for others children to go to private schools.

You are not paying for the child to go to a private school Chief, you are paying taxes so that the child has the opportunity to become educated even if their parents are unable to afford to pay for them to become educated. That education is so important that the Supreme Court of this nation has ruled that you and I and every other property owner and taxpayer must even assist the children of other nations who are residing here in violation of the national immigration laws in receiving that education. Where the parents choose to spend the money that the county and state raise through taxes for this purpose is not relevant since it is the necessary education of the child that the money funds regardless of which school the money is spent in.

I know most private schools can give a better education, alot has to do with student to teacher ratio. The taxpayer money collected was not collected to pay for students to go to a private school. It was collected to pay for the public system, which has its problems. So my take on this, students who are given the vouchers get to go to private school, the rest have to stay in public. There is no fairness in this. Those parents that want their kids to go to private schools but did not get the vouchers then have to pay out of pocket for the whole deal (which I personally believe should be the way anyway) and those selected by this so called lottery system for the vouchers get it for alot less. I am sure there will still be out of pockets expenses regardless.

And when I was in private school, my classes usually averaged 30-35 students. While smaller classes should help public schools educate kids better, class sizes have been declining in the past 20 years, but so have education levels. And it is costing a lot more per student.
If you go from one teacher per 30 students to one teacher per 20 students, you raise your teacher budget by 50%.

navycpo7 wrote: I know most private schools can give a better education, alot has to do with student to teacher ratio. The taxpayer money collected was not collected to pay for students to go to a private school. It was collected to pay for the public system, which has its problems. So my take on this, students who are given the vouchers get to go to private school, the rest have to stay in public. There is no fairness in this. Those parents that want their kids to go to private schools but did not get the vouchers then have to pay out of pocket for the whole deal (which I personally believe should be the way anyway) and those selected by this so called lottery system for the vouchers get it for alot less. I am sure there will still be out of pockets expenses regardless.

Which is why you fund every child with a voucher and let them choose whether to spend it at a private school or stay within the public school system instead of holding lotteries that only allow some children to escape and force others to stay. The public system is getting to keep the additional 25% of the money that represents the amount currently being spent per student above and beyond the value of the voucher for every student that chooses a private school over the public schools. If the competition is being won by the private schools regarding quality of education, why not spend less money for a better outcome? I know the regressive pattern has been to throw more money at the problem of poor results, but isn't it time to change that pattern and try spending less and achieving a better outcome? The worst that can happen is that the attempt will not result in a better outcome, which is the current state of affairs in the public schools, so what is lost by trying a new approach to solving the problem instead of continuing along a path which has proven to be unable to solve the problem?

The purpose of the taxation is to make sure that children receive an education regardless of their parent's ability to pay for that education. We all contribute to that effort and our only interest should be to make certain that the children are receiving the best education possible with the money that is collected for that purpose. If we can impart a better education and spend less money doing so at the same time, that appears on its face to be a win/win situation for both the children and the taxpayers. It might not be a win for public union employees and the unions that represent them, but the tax is not levied and collected for that purpose, it is levied and collected for the education of children.

Are the vouchers enough to cover the cost of a private school? It's been too long since I've had kids in school, but I would think that private schools would cost more than what the public system can afford for a voucher. If that is the case wouldn't vouchers only be useful for kids whose parents can afford the extra it will cost on top of the voucher to send a kid to private school?

archer wrote: Are the vouchers enough to cover the cost of a private school? It's been too long since I've had kids in school, but I would think that private schools would cost more than what the public system can afford for a voucher. If that is the case wouldn't vouchers only be useful for kids whose parents can afford the extra it will cost on top of the voucher to send a kid to private school?

No. As I understand it the ps looses the entire expense of teaching the student who leaves, but retains part of the $ they were collecting to teach him. So, the $/per student remaining in ps will increase.

I don't think you understood my question (I may be guilty of not being clear this time of night) is the voucher provided to the student enough to cover the tuition at a private school?