• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support school choice?

Do you support school choice?

  • Total voters
    88
SouthernDemocrat said:
Actually if private school parents send their kids to a Catholic School, most likely they tithe their tuition and thus its a deduction for them. Public schools are an investment society makes in the next generation. Just like you don't get to opt out of paying for infrastructure you don't use, you don't get to opt out of paying for paying for public schools because for whatever reason you choose to send your kids to a private school.
Click to expand...

Not true in the least. Not one dime of my childrens tuition is a deduction. Also, if public schools were an investment then we should demand much better performance of the investment.
 
mac said:
Not true in the least. Not one dime of my childrens tuition is a deduction. Also, if public schools were an investment then we should demand much better performance of the investment.
Click to expand...

I do demand performance out of local schools. All of my local schools are Distinguished. Every school in the district rates an 8 or higher (out of 10, 10 being the best), all of them rate in the top 800s or better in API (out of 1000, 1000 being the best). My local taxes go to support these schools and they are all doing quite well. Now when are the poor parents going to actually take an interest in making sure the schools in their areas are doing just as well?

Hint... they won't.
 
Cephus said:
I do demand performance out of local schools. All of my local schools are Distinguished. Every school in the district rates an 8 or higher (out of 10, 10 being the best), all of them rate in the top 800s or better in API (out of 1000, 1000 being the best). My local taxes go to support these schools and they are all doing quite well. Now when are the poor parents going to actually take an interest in making sure the schools in their areas are doing just as well?
Click to expand...

Good, how many schools is that?

Hint... they won't.
Click to expand...

Why won't they?
 
Yes, I support school choice. All families with school age children should receive an education stipened. The public schools should only be allowed to charge the cost of the stipend (essentially free public schooling for families) while private schools can charge what they want but have stipends used for education there. Homeschool families can use that money to educate their kids as well from home and to buy curricular materials.
 
digsbe said:
Yes, I support school choice. All families with school age children should receive an education stipened. The public schools should only be allowed to charge the cost of the stipend (essentially free public schooling for families) while private schools can charge what they want but have stipends used for education there. Homeschool families can use that money to educate their kids as well from home and to buy curricular materials.
Click to expand...

Why should private schools be subsidized by the government? Vouchers are nothing more than a ploy to allow government money to be used in primarily religious institutions.....something that is clearly not allowed under the Constitution. Vouchers are a creative ploy to try to circumvent the constitution.
 
disneydude said:
Why should private schools be subsidized by the government? Vouchers are nothing more than a ploy to allow government money to be used in primarily religious institutions.....something that is clearly not allowed under the Constitution. Vouchers are a creative ploy to try to circumvent the constitution.
Click to expand...

There is nothing in the constitution banning this. The state simply can not favor one religion over another. The voucher could be spent at any private school, not just one affiliated with a religion. And every private school, religious or not, must be certified by the states department of education. If the child is not attending public school, then the tax dollars his/her parents pay that would normally go to the child's education in a public school is just as justified paying for it in a private school.
 
mac said:
Good, how many schools is that?
Click to expand...

In my specific school district, the ones that my taxes support, ranging from elementary to high school, there are 12.

Why won't they?
Click to expand...

Because they don't care?
 
mac said:
There is nothing in the constitution banning this. The state simply can not favor one religion over another. The voucher could be spent at any private school, not just one affiliated with a religion. And every private school, religious or not, must be certified by the states department of education. If the child is not attending public school, then the tax dollars his/her parents pay that would normally go to the child's education in a public school is just as justified paying for it in a private school.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Public tax dollars cannot be provided to a religious institution. It violates First Amendment Church/State.
 
Cephus said:
In my specific school district, the ones that my taxes support, ranging from elementary to high school, there are 12.
Click to expand...

Pretty Good. The schools in my district are pretty good as well.

Because they don't care?
Click to expand...

Or because they have no expectation of being able to succeed at affecting any kind of change? Vouchers would give them an opportunity and resource they lack. The freedom to choose the school their children attend. It would inject some competition in the schools.
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
Wrong. Public tax dollars cannot be provided to a religious institution. It violates First Amendment Church/State.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't, which is exactly why the USG grants to Catholic Charities.

You're wrong. :shrug:
 
mac said:
Pretty Good. The schools in my district are pretty good as well.
Click to expand...

And they are good because the people in the community value education and attend school board meetings and the like.

Or because they have no expectation of being able to succeed at affecting any kind of change? Vouchers would give them an opportunity and resource they lack. The freedom to choose the school their children attend. It would inject some competition in the schools.
Click to expand...

How will they know if they don't try? Why are we supposed to think that they're going to magically get involved in the new schools when they couldn't be bothered to get involved in the old ones? At best, allowing school choice just lets lazy people put their kids into schools where they can benefit from the hard work of others. Education isn't a dick-waving contest, it's a commitment to success. Poor performing students in one school aren't going to go to another school and magically start performing better.
 
mac said:
No it doesn't, which is exactly why the USG grants to Catholic Charities.

You're wrong. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that simply isn't the case. Using public money to fund a religious institution is a clear violation of the First Amendment, which is exactly why they are trying to go the "Voucher" route. It is a not-so-clever ploy to circumvent the Constitution.
 
Cephus said:
And they are good because the people in the community value education and attend school board meetings and the like.



How will they know if they don't try? Why are we supposed to think that they're going to magically get involved in the new schools when they couldn't be bothered to get involved in the old ones? At best, allowing school choice just lets lazy people put their kids into schools where they can benefit from the hard work of others. Education isn't a dick-waving contest, it's a commitment to success. Poor performing students in one school aren't going to go to another school and magically start performing better.
Click to expand...

What makes you think they are not involved? I volunteer at 3 inner city schools in Prince George county, and they have very active parents. Sure some of the parents are not involved, but, I'm sure you'll find the same to be true in any school.
 
disneydude said:
Sorry, but that simply isn't the case. Using public money to fund a religious institution is a clear violation of the First Amendment, which is exactly why they are trying to go the "Voucher" route. It is a not-so-clever ploy to circumvent the Constitution.
Click to expand...

No, it's not a clear violation, and a school associated with a religion is not a "religious institution", it's a school.
 
MaggieD said:
If people got to spend that money as a voucher, they wouldn't put their kids into schools that did that. As to the 16-and-up thugs not bothering? Are you saying that inner-city high schools only have kids 16 and younger? Thugs stay in school if you're counting their warm bodies in the seats.
Click to expand...

I have heard from urban school teachers that the worst behaved kids mostly dropout when they are old enough.
 
mac said:
No it doesn't, which is exactly why the USG grants to Catholic Charities.

You're wrong. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Catholic Charities is a separate organization from the church and when they get government funding they are prohibited from promoting their religion or illegal discriminating.
 
Hard Truth said:
I have heard from urban school teachers that the worst behaved kids mostly dropout when they are old enough.
Click to expand...

Which doesn't mean they aren't a pain in the ass while they're there. Those worst behaved kids who drop out are the ones that society will be handing a monthly government check to. I'd rather see them out in the cold where they belong, having done it to themselves.
 
Hard Truth said:
Catholic Charities is a separate organization from the church and when they get government funding they are prohibited from promoting their religion or illegal discriminating.
Click to expand...

Catholic schools are also separate organizations from the Church, and they are not prohibited from promoting their religion.
 
mac said:
No, it's not a clear violation, and a school associated with a religion is not a "religious institution", it's a school.
Click to expand...

Nope. The Supreme Court has said otherwise. Schools associated with religions are still "religious institutions" under the Constitution. That is just more attempted creativity to skirt the Constitution, but it has already been recognized as violative by the SCOTUS. Try again.
 
disneydude said:
Nope. The Supreme Court has said otherwise. Schools associated with religions are still "religious institutions" under the Constitution. That is just more attempted creativity to skirt the Constitution, but it has already been recognized as violative by the SCOTUS. Try again.
Click to expand...

Please show SCOTUS proclaiming such, and, why can the govt grant to Catholic Charities?
 
disneydude said:
Why should private schools be subsidized by the government? Vouchers are nothing more than a ploy to allow government money to be used in primarily religious institutions.....something that is clearly not allowed under the Constitution. Vouchers are a creative ploy to try to circumvent the constitution.
Click to expand...

Well look at it this way. If the government IS going to fund education from a central pool of money, what difference does it make where the parents choose to place the vouchers that replace direct funding to the school? It wouldn't be establishing or restricting religion so there would be no constitutional problem with the vouchers going to a parochial school.

But no voucher is going to cover all the cost to a parochial or private school, so the parents will have to pony up the money to cover what the voucher doesn't. But that voucher might allow the parent to get their kids out of a failing public school and into a parochial or private school that they could not otherwise afford.

If the public school loses so many of its students that it cannot open its doors, then it choses and we have eliminated one more failing school. How can that be a bad thing? It will certainly be a win for the kids.

But if the public school decides to improve its standards and effectiveness to compete with that parochial or private school, and the parents can put the vouchers with the public school and then pay nothing additional for their kids to be well educated, then won't most parents choose to do that? How can that be a bad thing? Win win for everybody.
 
disneydude said:
Why should private schools be subsidized by the government? Vouchers are nothing more than a ploy to allow government money to be used in primarily religious institutions.....something that is clearly not allowed under the Constitution. Vouchers are a creative ploy to try to circumvent the constitution.
Click to expand...

The alternative is to allow government to have an effective monopoly on education. We've seen well enough how this works out.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
The alternative is to allow government to have an effective monopoly on education. We've seen well enough how this works out.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. Public and private schools have existed for decades without government funding for religious private schools. Where is the monopoly today?
The idea that you can only avoid a government monopoly by violating the Constitutional prohibition on church/state is silly and contrary to historical fact.
 
disneydude said:
Wrong. Public tax dollars cannot be provided to a religious institution. It violates First Amendment Church/State.
Click to expand...

The dollars were being provided to the parent of the student.
 
brothern said:
You missed the point of my question. If a failing public school loses enrollment, and thus loses federal money & the ability to hire good teachers; what happens to the kids that CAN'T move?

I don't care about the teachers. I'm wondering what your solution is for the kids that can't afford private schools, or can't afford to move to another school?
Click to expand...

Maybe I wasn't clear about my answer. I'll try to explain further. Yes, teachers will be laid off. Unfortunately, in the unionized states, it will be done by seniority. The buildings are already there, so that's not an issue. Funding will fall, but so will enrollment, so costs go down as well. I believe that things will change very quickly at this point. Public school will retool, retrain and revamp into a smarter, more efficient and fiscally responsible format in order to compete. If done right and at the right time, I don't think there will be a lasting negative impact on the remaining students. Plus, I think that more local private schools will be started in order to try and claim the tax moneys that those students represent. There will be a place for them. The money is already there. What would help even more is to take school funding off the property tax and make it a new sales tax. That way everybody is paying into the system, rather than just the property owners. I don't even think it would take that much of a sales tax.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom