Katrina=Vouchers?
I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were on Bush's voucher plan?
For background see here (basically Bush is asking for one-year vouchers for hurricane victims to go to private or parochial schools)
Here's what i think...It's a brilliant move by Bush and the Republicans to get their voucher policies passed. The Democrats are going to have a hard time figuring out how to oppose it. (How do you say no to children who are victims of a natural disaster without looking evil). Proponents of the vouchers say it's only a one year thing. I, however, think that they are laying a foundation which can then be a spring board for a widespread voucher policy, thus ingraining the choice movement in federal legislation.
Regardless of your opinon on vouchers, does anyone else think this is totally shady? or not?
And, if you have a good strategy for the Democrats, eduwonk is looking for one where you can email your response to eduwonk@educationsector.org
7 Comments:
-
The GOP plan appears, at least, to be legal. The Dems counter plan appears to violate the Establishment clause.
By
http://drcookie.blogspot.com/2005/09/hurricane-vouchers.html
Jenny D., at September 26, 2005 2:39 PM
-
Guys, it is against the First Amendment for the feds to send money to a parochial school directly. This has been contested in courts and congress for decades. Regardless of how nice the Dems might be, it is illegal.
By Jenny D., at September 26, 2005 6:30 PM
-
(note: edited a typo at the end of this paragraph) I'm fine with vouchers for the Katrina kids it if it's truly a temporary solution, since already overburdened public schools can't easily handle all the evacuees... I think federal dollars would be more efficiently spent going to Catholic schools than buying portable classrooms.
By
That said, here's hoping they put some money in the budget to study the outcomes... I see the potential for, a year from now, this turning into a "parents like it" decision by fiat rather than fact, with vouchers here to stay. What have we learned about policy implementation? Build an early constituency, and it buys you time your program may not deserve... NMD, at September 26, 2005 8:43 PM
-
Just to clarify, when I said "sent to Catholic schools," I meant in the form of vouchers.
By NMD, at September 26, 2005 8:44 PM
-
You guys ought to look more closely at the Constitutional problem of what you support. Really. Unfortunately, the US Constitution doesn't allow you to say, oh it would be nice if the public schools are full to send federal tax dollars to that swell Christian fundamentalist school where all the hurricane kids are going.
By
I know that sounds harsh, but you don't sound educated about this. Jenny D., at September 27, 2005 5:27 PM
-
jenny d., I'm confused... the people who have posted since your second comment haven't argued in favor of the probably-unconstitutional Democratic plan. On your own blog, you seem to say that vouchers are okay, as did John and I (to differing degrees). So I'm not quite sure why the "uneducated" comment fits here.
By
Further, I wouldn't say that there's enough agreement amongst the posts to say that we as a group "are supporting" anything... maybe this isn't what you meant, and I'm confused by the "you guys." NMD, at September 27, 2005 10:03 PM
-
You're right, no one has argued distinctly for sending money to Catholic schools.
By
Let me just offer this:
Several states have Blaine amendments that prohibit the transfer of any state funds in any form or mechanism from going to parochial schools.
The US Constitution prohibits money going from government to parochial schools unless it transfers vis a vis a categorical aid program that offers education in addition to the regularly scheduled program.
The US Supreme Court allows vouchers to parents and then parochial schools as long as a series of conditions are met (see Zelman v. Simmons-Harris). It has nothing to do with the enrollment capacity of public schools.
I think it's admirable that the feds are willing to compensate schools when funding and administering education is a state responsibility. I think whatever the feds do should be a yearlong, limited program. Kids need to take all the tests mandated by the feds (no testing, no money).
Or, be prepared to have a blurring of the lines between local and federal, parochial, private, and public become blurred. Which is exactly what the GOP wants, and the Dems are stupidly walking into. Jenny D., at September 28, 2005 6:56 AM
<< Home
from: :: permalink
