ACLU Attacks School Vouchers

archer wrote: 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?

Don't know. My guess is, yes for some, no for others.

right you are....in Douglas county they get $4575 in a voucher (75% of the state amount designated per student, the county keeps the 25% left)...and a "few" schools cost that or less, but one of only 4 non-religious schools in the program costs over $11,000......I should have read the entire article sooner. I guess I would be OK with the voucher system, since it doesn't cost taxpayers any more than they already pay, but not the way Douglas county has it set up where only 500 students can get vouchers. Either make it available to every student who wants it, or to none. But then what would the school do if every student left for private school?

archer wrote: But then what would the school do if every student left for private school?

In a fair world they would close but what would actually happen is a lot of teachers would be laid off and we would pay administrators to take long lunches and shuffle papers.

I think that DougCo is just testing the program right now to see what to set as voucher levels and determine voter interest, but would expand the program quickly if people want it.
It would be interesting to compare the results after 4 years on graduation and college acceptance rates since DougCo traditionally has some high rated public schools.

archer wrote: right you are....in Douglas county they get $4575 in a voucher (75% of the state amount designated per student, the county keeps the 25% left)...and a "few" schools cost that or less, but one of only 4 non-religious schools in the program costs over $11,000......I should have read the entire article sooner. I guess I would be OK with the voucher system, since it doesn't cost taxpayers any more than they already pay, but not the way Douglas county has it set up where only 500 students can get vouchers. Either make it available to every student who wants it, or to none. But then what would the school do if every student left for private school?

I think this is a first step for Douglas County to evaluate the possibility of doing exactly that - extending the opportunity to all of the students in the district. If the pilot returns results that show the program is beneficial to the education that the students receive, the program would likely be expanded so that more students could receive a better education at no additional (and perhaps even at less) cost to the taxpayers of Douglas County.

Having a county wide voucher program open to every student would be a powerful attraction for locating families within the district, which could increase their overall tax base and serve to help mitigate the budget problems they are currently facing. More families also mean that more businesses would be attracted to the county, which could decrease the amount of vacant commercial locations in the county and add even more tax revenues to the county coffers.

If the enrollment in the public schools decline, then that would also help the fiscal situation in Douglas County as their school system would need to maintain fewer schools, require fewer employees and decrease the transportation demands of the county's school bus fleet. And while the voucher may not cover the entire cost of an $11K a year private school, it lessens the burden on the parent and would perhaps put that institution within their reach. The school could also match the county "scholarship" voucher with one of its own depending upon financial need and allow a parent to send their child to the school at little or no additional cost to the parents. A single mother making minimum wage might then be able to send their gifted child to one of the most prestigious institutions around, greatly increasing the likelihood of being able to attend a higher institution of learning on a scholarship and providing a much brighter future for the child than the mother would otherwise be able to provide.

Given that the purpose of levying and collecting the taxes is to provide the best possible education for the children of the county, I fail to see why the program should find any opposition.

This could also hurt the school district.....from what I read this voucher will not cover the cost of tuition at any private school, many cost more than the voucher amount. That would limit the kids who take advantage of the system to the more affluent students. What students would be left in the public school system? those from low income families and those who have no interest in private schools. Could that lower the overall student scores in the public schools making Douglas county LESS attractive to prospective homeowners? As you chip away at the student base and less money goes into the school district.....I would think that the administration costs and building loans still have to be paid even if schools are closed and teachers let go. A high school still has to provide all the necessary courses for graduation whether they have 2000 students or 300.

You are forgetting that the district will have more dollars to spend per student under your scenario archer. The value of the voucher is only 75% of the current per student funding currently allocated by Douglas County.

Let's say there are 1000 students currently enrolled in a school. Say 10% of them leave to attend a private school, so there are 900 remaining students. Each student currently receives roughly $6K in funding. Without the vouchers, the school would receive $6 Million for the school year. With the vouchers, it would receive $5.55 million, or $6,167 per student - which means the school would receive an additional $167 per student. Presuming that the argument that more money being spent per student championed by the progressives has any merit, the public school students receive an increased amount of funding per student without the taxpayers having to pay higher taxes. The more students that choose to attend a private school, the more funding each student remaining in the public schools receives. The rich folks are paying more for their child to attend school, since as you mentioned the voucher doesn't cover the whole cost of their tuition, and the poor children receive more funding for theirs, which is the secret to providing them a better education according to the progressive premise. Again a win/win - right?

Doing a bit more math, it appears that the more students that choose a private school, the better the funding becomes for the remaining students. Say the voucher causes 40% of the students to leave for private schools, the remaining public school students would receive $7500 each in funding as opposed to $6000. Given the math, you would almost have to believe the progressives would be hoping the vouchers resulted in a large percentage of the students electing to go to a private school. Except, or course, for the fact that a 40% drop in students would cause the loss of a lot of public union employee jobs. Could it be that this is the major reason they oppose vouchers? Could it be that it isn't the education of the children they are worried about? Could the preservation of union jobs be the primary motivation for opposing vouchers?

navycpo7 wrote:

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.

I think the real plus of private over public is parental involvement. Students of parents, who are involved with their student’s education, make sure the home work is done, visit the schools, attend parent/teacher conferences etc are the ones most likely to succeed. I am not a teacher but I count many teachers among my friends and family.

LadyJazzer wrote: Sounds unfair to take taxpayer funds from taxpayers that don't want their taxes used to fund religious schools <snip>

Interesting that LJ quoted this on the first page of the thread, but it seems to have been largely ignored.

From todays Editorial section of the Denver, Post, Ed Quillen writes about the Douglas County voucher program. In my opinion, he quickly brings it into focus.

Now note that the board of the Douglas County School District, based in Castle Rock, has approved a voucher program to use public money to support religious schools.

And then consider Article 9, Section 7 of our state constitution: "Neither the general assembly, nor any county, city, town, township, school district or other public corporation, shall ever make any appropriation, or pay from any public fund or moneys whatever, anything in aid of any church or sectarian society, or for any sectarian purpose, or to help support or sustain any school, academy, seminary, college, university or other literary or scientific institution, controlled by any church or sectarian denomination whatsoever."

This side of a thundering "Thou shalt not" from a mountaintop, it's hard to imagine how our state constitution could be more clear. Then again, Mark Twain once observed that "God created idiots. That was for practice. Then he made school boards."

http://www.denverpost.com/quillen/ci_18341760

I was not aware that there was this restriction in the Colorado Constitution. I'm fairly sure this is the reason the ACLU is fighting this voucher plan.