Protest Congressmen who vote against vouchers but send their kids to private schools

[Henry Alden]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/06/protesters-blast-congress-axing-dc-vouchers-sending-kids-private-school

"Supporters of a celebrated school voucher program in Washington rallied near the mayor's office Wednesday to save the scholarships from being slashed by Congress -- nearly 40 percent of whose members send their own children to private schools.
An estimated 1,000 parents, children and community leaders attended the afternoon protest in Washington's Freedom Plaza, where they called on D.C. politicians to help preserve a federal school choice program that currently assists more than 1,700 students with scholarships worth up to $7,500.
"Several years ago many of us in this good city worked very hard to get a program going with the federal government so that children could go to the schools of their choice. This program has worked," said Kevin Chavous, a former D.C. councilman, but "right now some folks in Congress want to end this program."
The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program is slated to end next year because of a provision slipped into Congress' $410 billion omnibus spending bill by Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., whose children attend private school.
The amendment has angered parents who say the vouchers have raised performance and rescued students from one of the country's worst public school systems."

says it all...what hypocrites..

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

Who pays for their kids to go to private school?

[mama2tyler]

Who pays for their kids to go to private school?
Obviously they do, and they use their wealth against those who don't have it. What parents want is the option to be able to put their children in superior private schools rather than the crappy substandard public schools. It's funny, Liberals/Progressives beat the proverbial drum about making things fair and equal for all (code for socialism)but not when it comes to school choice and NOT when it comes to THEIR wealth. THAT will never be spread. Not that I want it, I dont want anyone else's money or pertinences. I DO want the ability to put my child in the school of my choice. Education is the most precious gift we can give to our children and I should be able to CHOOSE where he goes to provide that.

[BostonPatriot]

Obviously they do, and they use their wealth against those who don't have it. What parents want is the option to be able to put their children in superior private schools rather than the crappy substandard public schools. It's funny, Liberals/Progressives beat the proverbial drum about making things fair and equal for all (code for socialism)but not when it comes to school choice and NOT when it comes to THEIR wealth. THAT will never be spread. Not that I want it, I dont want anyone else's money or pertinences. I DO want the ability to put my child in the school of my choice. Education is the most precious gift we can give to our children and I should be able to CHOOSE where he goes to provide that.

Just another example of liberal hypocrisy. It sort of proves that the effort to keep the populace dumbed down is delibarate, doesn't it?

[Henry Alden]

Who pays for their kids to go to private school?


who pays to send ghetto kids to public schools that do not educate???

if they did .. Congressmen and Obama would send their own kids there..

[Henry Alden]

Just another example of liberal hypocrisy. It sort of proves that the effort to keep the populace dumbed down is delibarate, doesn't it?


kinda like Al Gore flying all over the world in a private jet while telling Bubba he is way out of line for driving that SUV he uses to take his son fishing on Sunday afternoons.... his day off from working at the factory...:wall:

[kkentucky]

The argument by liberals regarding more money going to public education is that inner city kids do not have the same chances as kids in more affluent areas. This is a program that works, uses less money has far better results and gives these kids a chance for a better future than maybe their parents had. As a parent I want my kids to have the most oppertunity possible for success. So why would this program stop? It will cost the goverment less. It will give us better educated children, giving them more of a chance for success. Its a win for all involved. It has already proven to be a success. What reason would there be to stop it?

[kkentucky]

Regarding who pays, the money for the vouchers comes from funds there were going to a public school. The shcools receive money based on the number of students. With the vouchers, the parents are able to choose which school to send their children to. With competition, maybe the public schools will get better, if not the funds going toward them can just as easily go toward private schools. Isn't the reason we keep throwing money at the education system to make it better, provide a better education? Yet with all the money we keep spending, our children are less educated and prepared than a generation ago. Why would we want to continue putting money where it doesnt work. I thought the whole point was to do what is best for the children

[mama2tyler]

Just another example of liberal hypocrisy. It sort of proves that the effort to keep the populace dumbed down is delibarate, doesn't it?
Absolutely deliberate. It sounds crazy, but it's true. My child, where he goes to school is MY business, not the government's.

[pubschteacher]

Obviously they do, and they use their wealth against those who don't have it. What parents want is the option to be able to put their children in superior private schools rather than the crappy substandard public schools. It's funny, Liberals/Progressives beat the proverbial drum about making things fair and equal for all (code for socialism)but not when it comes to school choice and NOT when it comes to THEIR wealth. THAT will never be spread. Not that I want it, I dont want anyone else's money or pertinences. I DO want the ability to put my child in the school of my choice. Education is the most precious gift we can give to our children and I should be able to CHOOSE where he goes to provide that.

They have chosen to make the economic sacrifice to send their kids to private school. You have the same choice. All 50 state Constitutions require the states to provide a public education system. If you want to change that, then get crackin. If you CHOOSE not to make the economic sacrifice, then you will have to use the public system your state government currently provides. Statewide voucher initiatives have gone no where in the last 20 years. You have an uphill battle.

[mama2tyler]

They have chosen to make the economic sacrifice to send their kids to private school. You have the same choice. All 50 state Constitutions require the states to provide a public education system. If you want to change that, then get crackin. If you CHOOSE not to make the economic sacrifice, then you will have to use the public system your state government currently provides. Statewide voucher initiatives have gone no where in the last 20 years. You have an uphill battle.
Not every parent has the luxury or availability to put their child in a private school. Many parents don't CHOOSE to "not make the sacrifice" as you callously put it, they CAN'T make it, because they don't earn enough money to pay for the things they MUST pay for in order to live. Taking away the vouchers is taking away the CHOICE that those parents would have. I pray every day that the scholarships out there don't disappear too, otherwise my son doesn't have a prayer. I'd sooner homeschool him than put him in a public school.

[Henry Alden]

They have chosen to make the economic sacrifice to send their kids to private school. You have the same choice. All 50 state Constitutions require the states to provide a public education system. If you want to change that, then get crackin. If you CHOOSE not to make the economic sacrifice, then you will have to use the public system your state government currently provides. Statewide voucher initiatives have gone no where in the last 20 years. You have an uphill battle.


The question remains why are public school so inferior to voucher private schools. Otherwise Obama and these Congressmen would send them there. The answer is obvious. Lazy and incompetent teachers can get fired in private schools. Shame on those allowing ghetto kids to get the inferior education that rich folks kids avoid.

The failed public school system should be privatized.

[pubschteacher]

Not every parent has the luxury or availability to put their child in a private school. Many parents don't CHOOSE to "not make the sacrifice" as you callously put it, they CAN'T make it, because they don't earn enough money to pay for the things they MUST pay for in order to live. Taking away the vouchers is taking away the CHOICE that those parents would have. I pray every day that the scholarships out there don't disappear too, otherwise my son doesn't have a prayer. I'd sooner homeschool him than put him in a public school.

I always thought that Republicans were about self reliance. Perhaps you should have CHOSEN a career path that would have given you the luxury of a private school. Perhaps, if it is important enough to you, you can find a second job to finance this choice. The point is, state governments are required by state constitutions to provide a public education system. As a taxpayer, you can use that system. If you choose not to, you don't get your money back, just like someone that doesn't drive can't get their tax money that is used for roads.
If you want to change it, then you are going to have to convince the voters of your state to change the system, it's that simple.

[pubschteacher]

The question remains why are public school so inferior to voucher private schools. Otherwise Obama and these Congressmen would send them there. The answer is obvious. Lazy and incompetent teachers can get fired in private schools. Shame on those allowing ghetto kids to get the inferior education that rich folks kids avoid.

The failed public school system should be privatized.

First
a well-designed study released today by the Center on Education Policy that challenges decades of research on the advantages of private schools. "Contrary to popular belief, we can find no evidence that private schools actually increase student performance," said Jack Jennings, the center's president and a former staffer in the Democratic-controlled House, in a press release. "Instead, it appears that private schools simply have higher percentages of students who would perform well in any environment based on their previous performance and background."

Second
The Department of Education recently issued a three-year analysis of student achievement under the program that found limited gains in reading and no significant progress in math.

So inferior? Hardly

It's obvious the DC schools have problems, but what is needed is REAL reform in THOSE schools. Three years of vouchers in DC and we have...
"limited gains in reading and no significant progress in math".

[Henry Alden]

First
a well-designed study released today by the Center on Education Policy that challenges decades of research on the advantages of private schools. "Contrary to popular belief, we can find no evidence that private schools actually increase student performance," said Jack Jennings, the center's president and a former staffer in the Democratic-controlled House, in a press release. "Instead, it appears that private schools simply have higher percentages of students who would perform well in any environment based on their previous performance and background."

Second
The Department of Education recently issued a three-year analysis of student achievement under the program that found limited gains in reading and no significant progress in math.

So inferior? Hardly

It's obvious the DC schools have problems, but what is needed is REAL reform in THOSE schools. Three years of vouchers in DC and we have...
"limited gains in reading and no significant progress in math".

The teachers unions can choke on it for now. The people win..not even the great Obama could justify forcing inferior public school education on DC ghetto kids while his kids go to private school.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/07/obama-pushes-extend-dc-voucher-program/

"President Obama will agree to extend a voucher program that pays for low-income children to attend private school in the District of Columbia, but only until the current enrolled students graduate."

What he really means is that as long as my children are in school, underpriveleged kids will benefit.... so I don't look like a selfish hypocrite.

[pubschteacher]

What he really means is that as long as my children are in school, underpriveleged kids will benefit.... so I don't look like a selfish hypocrite.

Assumption and you know the old saying about assumptions. :-)

[CaffeineHat]

Maybe it's that private schools have much more flexibility. Don't have to use mandated standardized tests, don't have to worry about NCLB. Maybe private school students are the same students who would do extremely well in public schools as well. A lot of the arguments about public schools being inferior are classic examples of putting the cart before the horse. Perhaps you're arriving at the wrong conclusion. Maybe private schools have better track records because they get to hand select the students who will attend.

As to congresspersons and vouchers. If they can afford to pay for private school because they were duly elected and as a governing body have never refused to vote themselves hefty pay raises, more power to them. If you cannot afford private school, don't expect me to foot the bill for you in the form of vouchers. Everyone here throws around the hackneyed and incorrect "socialst/marxist" arguments about everying else. But when it comes to being able to use tax dollars to benefit them, well then it's okay. Vouchers are wrong because they rob an already underfunded system period. And before you say anything about my dog in this hunt, I teach in an at-risk public school in inner city Houston where the children need the most and receive the least.