After anti-charter schools ruling, no more hemming and hawing over real school choice
The Georgia Supreme Court has struck down the law creating the state’s Charter Schools Commission, ruling that the Georgia Constitution permits only local school systems to operate public k-12 schools except under a very narrow set of circumstances.
The school administrators and board members giving one another high-fives this morning are no doubt educated enough to know what a Pyrrhic victory is. May they learn, very soon, exactly what such a victory looks like.
For some time now, charter schools have been the preferred instrument of school choice for those people — and particularly state lawmakers — conscious enough to recognize the failings of our public schools but too timid to support any game-changing reforms. The problem until 2008, when the Legislature passed the Georgia Charter Schools Commission Act, was that only local school systems had the authority to approve charter schools. Given the education establishment’s hostility to competition, many applications were rejected.
It was like asking any monopoly to approve and fund a new set of serious competitors. Fat chance.
The court’s ruling, released this morning, takes us back to pre-2008 conditions. The promising growth of new and innovative charter schools — many of them part of national chains with long track records of success in other states — is all but certain to evaporate.
And those legislators who have hidden behind charter schools when the topic of further school choice — such as vouchers or meaningful expansions of the tax-credit scholarship — have a lot less to hide behind now.
Their timidity led to the kind of embarrassment we saw during this past legislative session, when the sizable Republican majority in the Senate couldn’t bring itself to support vouchers even for the children of military families and foster kids.
Well, they have much less of an excuse for such cravenness in the future.
If a (4 to 3) majority of the Georgia Supreme Court believes the Legislature has no constitutional authority to approve charter schools, these justices have no grounds for denying the legislative prerogative for apportioning tax dollars to education.
Everything needs to be on the table — everything, that is, except the same old excuses. And let the King Pyrrhuses of the educational status quo, which fails too many students and, with them, society, decide how pleased they really are with today’s victory.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
100 comments Add your comment
Junior Samples
May 16th, 2011
3:53 pm
I have no problem with charter schools, as long as they require standardized testing since they’re accepting the public’s money.
Linda
May 16th, 2011
3:53 pm
Students can have a driver’s license as long as they stay in school & graduate or until they reach the age of 21, whichever comes first.
I just fixed the graduation rate & the quality of education.
itsmeagain
May 16th, 2011
4:02 pm
Hmm. Are you advocating a less conservative approach Kyle? Surely the school systems local control is much better than the states control. Or is it that it doesn’t really matter who’s in control, so long as it’s the person that you want. At any rate, i’m thoroughly confused.
jconservative
May 16th, 2011
4:13 pm
Road Scholar, Bart Abel & Kyle Wingfield – thanks for the help.
We, as a nation, decades ago decided that an educated population was a national defense priority. Nothing has changed. We cannot compete in the 21st century world economy with a population of dummies. We must educate our kids.
Is there a better way to do so than by “public schools”?
Is “public schools” and “public funding of education” the same thing?
Is it necessary for public schools to be managed by “local” elected officials, our school boards?
We run the University System of Georgia with “appointed” officials, not elected officials. Can we run pre -K through 12 schools with appointed officials?
Georgia has 180 school systems comprised of 159 county and 21 city systems. That is 180 local school boards, all elected. God help us!
Obviously we are doing something wrong. We are not turning out “well educated” high school graduates.
So, what do we do?
This is another can we have been kicking down the road for a few decades.
Pee Wee
May 16th, 2011
4:17 pm
I changed last year from Charter to U-Verse and am pleased with the switch. As for them running the schools, I’d say they have no business.
He Haw Hemming
May 16th, 2011
4:20 pm
Pee Wee, glad your happy with the T.V. set up but I think We’re dicussing another matter entirely here.
Pee Wee
May 16th, 2011
4:21 pm
Oh
Truth Squad
May 16th, 2011
4:29 pm
I believe we should try a real voucher system. Let’s give parents of kids in failing schools the choice to go to any school their kid can get into. If that means Woodward, or even Andover or Exeter, then so be it. If we aren’t prepared to offer that type of choice, then best to have a well-funded and staffed school in every community.
Joe Mama
May 16th, 2011
4:46 pm
Truth Squad — “I believe we should try a real voucher system. Let’s give parents of kids in failing schools the choice to go to any school their kid can get into.”
Um, if those kids could get into those schools based on their own skills and achievements, then why do the rest of us have to pay for it? The parents of such kids already *have* the choice to put their kids there, so it’s not “choice” you’re advocating — it’s *subsidized* choice, which amounts to nothing more than a pricey new entitlement.
If you want to make that choice with your kids, then by all means make it. But don’t look to the rest of us to foot the bill any more than you’d look to us to cover the cost of your kid’s Ivy League college education.
Dan
May 16th, 2011
4:54 pm
I fine many of the arguments against vouchers as footing the bill for someone else laughable, we are all footing the bill for the education anyway, why not foot the bill for a successful education instead of an unquestionable failing one? But I digress the real issue as many have pointed out is a lack of respect for school in general, private or public, it is of course worse in the public arena in large part because, people don’t respect what is given to them as much as what is earned, plain and simple human nature. What our education system is and should be sold as is an opportunity not a right, many immigrant children come here and excel despite language and culture barriers because they realize the opportunity, they haven’t been brainwashed by pols and do gooders into thinking theri education or their kids education is a right to be bestowed. Instead of schools and communities telling kids they “deserve” an education tell them there it is go earn it, or you have an opportunity don’t blow it. The whole perception needs to change.
Joe Mama
May 16th, 2011
5:04 pm
Dan — I fine many of the arguments against vouchers as footing the bill for someone else laughable, we are all footing the bill for the education anyway, why not foot the bill for a successful education instead of an unquestionable failing one?”
I’ll tell you why.
Because public assistance has NEVER meant ‘you can use it wherever and however you like.’
You can’t take food stamps or WIC and get a steak dinner at Ruth’s Chris.
You can’t pool your Section 8 housing vouchers with other people and rent a condo in Buckhead.
You can’t use old MARTA tokens and BREEZE cards as a down payment on a new Lexus.
So why should you be able to transfer your kids’ free public education to a ritzy private school like Pace or Westminster and expect the taxpayers to foot the bill for what you already can’t afford?
If you want the free housing, the free food, the free public transit or the free education, you have to take it in the form in which it comes. You don’t get to decide where and how you get it, and people who are trying to get that are quite simply after a new, free public entitlement.
That’s why.
Dan
May 16th, 2011
5:15 pm
Joe Mamma, those other items you mention are all based on need, they are intended as a safety net to help others get on their feet, and your examples are far from the mark, you may not be able to take your food stamps to Ruths Chris but you can take them to whole foods or fresh market and you can indeed use your housing vouchers for a much nicer unit than std public housing, to use your own examples the current state of public schools is more appropriately comparable to housing vouchers being availble only to pay for homeless shelters and food stamps only available for soup kitchens, public education is available to everyone, and the primary issue that is really not in dispute is the sorry state it is in. So the fact remains your argument is still laughable, even more so after you have provided such wonderfull examples of why that is
fair and imbalanced
May 16th, 2011
5:18 pm
Maybe kids can get a GED like Kyle.
G
May 16th, 2011
5:20 pm
There is no free public education. Check your property tax bill and you’ll see. Now, if you were paying thousands of dollars for any service, wouldn’t you follow the repairman around your house and have him explain what he’s doing? Wouldn’t you demand good service? People need to be involved in their public school programs, and more than that THEIR CHILDREN. Sometimes there’s nothing wrong with the school, there’s something wrong with THE KIDS IN IT. Better parents make better students, make better schools.
Common Sense
May 16th, 2011
5:27 pm
Bart,
You appear to be a bit confused
There are a lot of issues to consider:
1. When a child moves from a public school, how much does the public schools system save?
If given a choice, it’s likely thousands will chose private schools. The public schools could sell their buildings to private schools eliminating fixed costs.
2. What criteria do we use for using allowing kids to use public funds to attend private schools?
It’s not “public funds supporting private schools” It’s public funds going to parents (tax payers for the most part), and by the way the only reason there are any pubilc funds to begin with is the fact that there are school taxes that are collected. Are you afraid some parents would use their free will and chose a school that you wouldn’t chose? It’s called freedom.
3. We all have a stake in our education system.
Yes true we also have a stake in the fact that everyone gets enough to eat. Do you advocate a government takeover of all food?
I’d like to choose a school for my kids – high school taxes have virtually eliminated my choice.
At the very least, private school tuition should be tax deductible. Every private school pupil saves the government thousands, which is probably another reason the public schools are so bad.
JDW
May 16th, 2011
5:27 pm
O’Dear O’Dear, looks like our “vaunted” legislators will have to actually come up with real solutions to improve schools rather than tossing crumbs to the masses…any bets on the success of the current crop?
yuzeyurbrane
May 16th, 2011
5:29 pm
The court’s close decision was based on a narrow point of law. Legislators can start the process of legally backing charter schools by passing legislation that would allow a statewide referendum on a constitutional amendment. . . as they should have done in the first place. As to outright no bs vouchers (as current “tax direction” and disabled only programs are), let’s get it on and let Georgian’s also have a constitutional amendment to consider which dismantle our public education system. Kyle, you are showing your true colors, subsidies for the rich and their private schools while the rest remain a thrifty hardworking poorly paid subclass. Argentina here we come.
Joe Mama
May 16th, 2011
5:41 pm
Dan — “Joe Mamma, those other items you mention are all based on need, they are intended as a safety net to help others get on their feet”
Irrelevant. Publicly funded programs have NEVER permitted uses such as you describe. To do so would open the door to fraud. Surely you are not advocating opening our educational system up to fraud, are you?
“and your examples are far from the mark”
They’re dead on the mark, your objections notwithstanding.
“you may not be able to take your food stamps to Ruths Chris but you can take them to whole foods or fresh market”
Whole Foods and Fresh Market are *grocery stores,* which is where you’re SUPPOSED to use WIC and food stamps. My citation of Ruth’s Chris stands.
“and you can indeed use your housing vouchers for a much nicer unit than std public housing”
You go right ahead and pool several Section 8 vouchers and go try to rent a Buckhead condo. Let me know how that works out for you.
“to use your own examples the current state of public schools is more appropriately comparable to housing vouchers being availble only to pay for homeless shelters and food stamps only available for soup kitchens, public education is available to everyone”
Fractured your syntax am. Clearer your argument could be. Try again, please.
“and the primary issue that is really not in dispute is the sorry state it is in.”
Nobody disputes that public education is in poor shape. What’s in dispute is how to resolve that state of affairs. Surely you agree with that?
“So the fact remains your argument is still laughable”
That may be your opinion, but it certainly isn’t *fact.*
“even more so after you have provided such wonderfull examples of why that is”
Your refutations fall short and do nothing to justify your advocacy of a pricey new entitlement for parents and children. And here I thought conservatives were *opposed* to entitlements.
Joe Mama
May 16th, 2011
5:44 pm
Common Sense — “Are you afraid some parents would use their free will and chose a school that you wouldn’t chose? It’s called freedom.”
If they want to exercise school choice so badly, there’s nothing stopping them from doing so right now. Today.
But what you’re actually talking about is *subsidized* school choice. You’ve *got* school choice today if you want it. What you don’t have is *subsidized* school choice.
Lil' Barry Bailout
May 16th, 2011
5:46 pm
Everyone please keep your kids in government schools…that will leave the job market wide open when my kids graduate from college.
Michael H. Smith
May 16th, 2011
5:49 pm
Seen the State Constitutional Amendment light, Kyle?
carlosgvv
May 16th, 2011
6:01 pm
I would love to comment on this but can’t because:
1. I don’t know exactly what a charter school is.
2. Precisely how does it differ from a regular school?
3. What sort of students go there?
4. Does it cost?
Bart Abel
May 16th, 2011
6:02 pm
Common Sense: “Are you afraid some parents would use their free will and chose a school that you wouldn’t chose? It’s called freedom.”
To me, freedom means allowing taxpayers to have a say, through our elected representatives, in how our tax money is spent. (On a related note, it’ worth remembering that the original Boston Tea Party wasn’t about taxation; it was about taxation without representation).
Toby
May 16th, 2011
6:10 pm
Nations with the best education do not have private (charter) schools; they have public schools. Charter schools result in the neglect of the poorer and the end result is a skewed education system in favor of the richer… that is not good enough, ergo public education should be a top priority.
Atlanta Man
May 16th, 2011
6:26 pm
If Blunt Realist is going to criticize the public schools, (s)he needs to learn to spell perennial correctly.
Atlanta Man
May 16th, 2011
6:26 pm
If Blunt Realist is going to criticize the public schools (s)he needs to learn to spell perennial correctly.
saywhat?
May 16th, 2011
6:55 pm
From what I understand, unconstitutional part of the current law is that it allows the state to dictate spending of locally raised tax money without the approval of said taxpayers. It would be as if Congress passed a law saying 10% of Georgia income tax revenue must be spent on promoting energy conservation. The Federal government has no right to do that to states, and State governments have no right to do that to its local governments.
Oh, and Beavis, you are so right. If Georgia just got rid of all its teachers’ unions, education problems here would be solved. I’m surprised it hasn’t been done already. You are obviously as brilliant as you are informed. Well said, man!
Michael H. Smith
May 16th, 2011
7:09 pm
John Stossel’s
Stupid in America
20-20 investigation by John Stossel entitled “Stupid in America” highlighting some of the flaws with the education system in the United States. The story started out when identical tests were given to high school students in New Jersey and in Belgium. The Belgian kids cleaned the American kids’ clocks. The Belgian kids called the American students “stupid”, which gave the piece its name.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9069323583494421392#
Michael H. Smith
May 16th, 2011
7:15 pm
Stupid in America
Why your kids are probably dumber than Belgians.
John Stossel ~ January 13, 2006
For “Stupid in America,” a special report ABC will air Friday, we gave identical tests to high school students in New Jersey and in Belgium. The Belgian kids cleaned the American kids’ clocks. The Belgian kids called the American students “stupid.”
We didn’t pick smart kids to test in Europe and dumb kids in the United States. The American students attend an above-average school in New Jersey, and New Jersey’s kids have test scores that are above average for America.
The American boy who got the highest score told me: “I’m shocked, ’cause it just shows how advanced they are compared to us.”
The Belgians did better because their schools are better. At age ten, American students take an international test and score well above the international average. But by age fifteen, when students from forty countries are tested, the Americans place twenty-fifth. The longer kids stay in American schools, the worse they do in international competition. They do worse than kids from countries that spend much less money on education….
….If people got to choose their kids’ school, education options would be endless. There could soon be technology schools, cheap Wal-Mart-like schools, virtual schools where you learn at home on your computer, sports schools, music schools, schools that go all year, schools with uniforms, schools that open early and keep kids later, and, who knows? If there were competition, all kinds of new ideas would bloom.
This already happens overseas. In Belgium, for example, the government funds education—at any school—but if the school can’t attract students, it goes out of business. Belgian school principal Kaat Vandensavel told us she works hard to impress parents. “If we don’t offer them what they want for their child, they won’t come to our school.” She constantly improves the teaching, “You can’t afford ten teachers out of 160 that don’t do their work, because the clients will know, and won’t come to you again.”
“That’s normal in Western Europe,” Harvard economist Caroline Hoxby told me. “If schools don’t perform well, a parent would never be trapped in that school in the same way you could be trapped in the U.S.”
http://reason.com/archives/2006/01/13/stupid-in-america
I hope these links and the information they contain that I’ve posted helps you out Toby @ 6:10 pm and others like you that probably could use just a wee bit more information.
Common Sense
May 16th, 2011
8:15 pm
Joe Mama
What we have is 100% subsidy for public school and no subsidy for private school. Makes about as much sense as providing a 100% subsidy for Kroger shoppers and no subsidy for Publix shoppers. At the very least, parents shouldn’t be forced to pay school taxes if they are already paying school tuition. Realistically, all I want is my children’s fair share of school funding (which the government has only becuase I’ve paid my taxes) that I’ll use to fund their education without government interference. Or should I submit to the whims of bureaucrats?
Lil' Barry Bailout
May 16th, 2011
8:30 pm
Libbtards will demand that taxpayers fund abortions for folks who don’t work for a living, but fight tooth and nail to prevent tax dollars to follow students to the public school of their choice.
Libbtards: If they can’t abort the kids, at least they can deprive them of a decent education.
I disagree
May 16th, 2011
8:39 pm
If a person disagrees with their local school board’s list of approved charters, vote them out. Why is Atlanta (APS) the school system with the most approved charter schools? Probably because they are willing to test innovations. However, even with they haven’t seen real innovation. The rare charter success stories are usually based on using under handed methods to select the best students and force the others to return to their neighborhood schools. Let public schools kick out the non-achievers and watch everyone scream. Don’t believe it? Look at the screaming in Forsyth.
Truth Squad
May 16th, 2011
9:50 pm
@ Joe Mama, the argument from Republicans and some Democrats is vouchers. Vouchers=choice. So why not be able to attend the best schools like the rich kids?
I know it may come as shock to you, but there are many kids who are very bright, but are stuck in environments that do not reward doing the right thing. If we are really about offering choice and not about the “soft bigotry of low expectations”, then no student should not be able to attend a school due to cost.
If you are really concerned only about the cost, then you should be upset about paying Andover money to house many dropouts over a period of decades. It’s much cheaper to spend the money on tuition upfront.
But are you really a “soft bigot”?
Philosopher
May 17th, 2011
8:05 am
@tar and feathers party: You’re TIRED OF PAYING for the education of my children??? REALLY?? How brilliant! I pay taxes and all the extras to educate my children and others’….whatever paltry taxes you might pay for someone else’s children is an investment into the people who will care for you when you or your family members become old and sick, need a lawyer, someone to fix your car (not just anybody can fix cars now), repair your computers and TV, your home, etc, etc, etc. The kids we are educating today are going to be the ones YOU DEPEND ON very shortly! ..or perhaps you can move to an island and live all alone….
Joe Mama
May 17th, 2011
10:05 am
Common Sense — “What we have is 100% subsidy for public school and no subsidy for private school.”
Wrong. What you have a a free public service (public school) provided to all who care to avail themselves of it. If you don’t *want* to use it, you don’t get to take it elsewhere and use the value of it there.
All publicly-funded programs work that way.
“Makes about as much sense as providing a 100% subsidy for Kroger shoppers and no subsidy for Publix shoppers.”
Except that there’s no comparison between public and private schools, and public schools don’t make a profit (like Publix and Kroger do). Your analogy is faulty.
“At the very least, parents shouldn’t be forced to pay school taxes if they are already paying school tuition.”
Wrong again. Property taxes are how public schools are funded. If you don’t want those taxes funding public schools, then get the General Assembly or your county/school board to change things. And don’t give me the dodge of ‘I don’t have kids in public school so I shouldn’t have to pay property taxes’ — I don’t have kids in public school either — and neither does my 71-year old neighbor, but both of us pay property taxes because that’s the right thing to do.
Don’t make your choice of sending your kids to private school something that the rest of us have to pay for. Either pay for it yourself or send them to public school. And if you don’t like public schools, then quit bellyaching and do something to help make them better.
“Realistically, all I want is my children’s fair share of school funding (which the government has only becuase I’ve paid my taxes)”
Your children can use the public school system to their hearts’ content, and that’s their “fair share of school funding.” Anything else, you have to pay for.
“that I’ll use to fund their education without government interference.”
You can do that TODAY simply by PAYING FOR IT YOURSELF. If you want the government out of your kids’ education, then man up and pay for it.
“Or should I submit to the whims of bureaucrats?”
Why should the rest of us have to pay for your personal choices? Why should I be on the hook for the cost when you want to send your kids to private school?
Pay for it yourself if you want it so badly.
Joe Mama
May 17th, 2011
10:06 am
LBB — “Libbtards will demand that taxpayers fund abortions for folks who don’t work for a living”
It is illegal for tax dollars to be used to fund abortions. Maybe you didn’t know that.
“but fight tooth and nail to prevent tax dollars to follow students to the public school of their choice.”
Why should the rest of us pay for your lifestyle choices? If you want your kids to go to private school, then man up and pay for it yourself.
“Libbtards: If they can’t abort the kids, at least they can deprive them of a decent education.”
I see. You don’t want to pay for it yourself, but it’s OUR fault they’re not getting the private-school education. Whatever happened to personal responsibility there, pal? Did it jump out a window when it started to cost you money?
Joe Mama
May 17th, 2011
10:18 am
Truth Squad — “@ Joe Mama, the argument from Republicans and some Democrats is vouchers. Vouchers=choice. So why not be able to attend the best schools like the rich kids?”
Vouchers do not equal choice.
If you want school choice, you have it TODAY. Go enroll your kids in the private school of your choice. So long as your kids meet the admission standards, there’s nothing preventing you from doing that NOW.
What you do not have is SUBSIDIZED school choice, and that’s what this is really about — an expensive new entitlement from the party that rails against entitlements.
“I know it may come as shock to you, but there are many kids who are very bright, but are stuck in environments that do not reward doing the right thing.”
It’s no shock to me.
“If we are really about offering choice”
Choice *already exists.* If you choose not to avail yourself of the choices that are available to you, that is not the taxpayers’ collective fault. What you’re after is having your choice SUBSIDIZED by the taxpayers, and that’s what I oppose.
“and not about the “soft bigotry of low expectations”
I’ve said nothing about expectations, and you muddy the waters by bringing it up. I simply point out that school choice already exists, but that’s not what’s being sought — it is SUBSIDIZED school choice that advocates are after.
“then no student should not be able to attend a school due to cost.”
Then no WIC or food stamp recipient should not be able to eat steak because of the cost.
Then no Section 8 recipient should not be able to live in Buckhead because of the cost.
Then no cancer patient should not be able to receive the latest and most advanced medical treatment due to cost.
Ridiculous. There are limits to what we as a society can afford; you should learn that lesson.
“If you are really concerned only about the cost, then you should be upset about paying Andover money to house many dropouts over a period of decades.”
What makes you think I’m *not* upset about that?
“It’s much cheaper to spend the money on tuition upfront.
“But are you really a “soft bigot”?
Nope. I’m a taxpayer who is against subsidizing the lifestyle choices of others. What are you — some sort of money-confiscating spendthrift? We can’t afford to let people like you run our government; you’ll just spend us into bankruptcy.
Veteran Observer
May 17th, 2011
12:14 pm
This act was clearly a violation of the state constitution. Local control of education by elected officials is mandated by the constitution and the legislature tried to change that instead of dealing with the budget and taxes! The biggest impediment to education is all the mandates that come down from the federal and state government and a lack of funding in some of the rural counties! The first can be fixed by defunding the department of education at both levels and the second by creating an education fund that can cover shortfalls in property taxes (with proper valuations of land) so that every student gets the same funding statewide! If the local community wants to fund at a higher level, so be it, but they should get only their fair portion from the fund! If everyone has adequate funds to educate the students then the local communities can hold the board members responsible for results at the ballot box! Forget vouchers except in cases of severve disability where the local system cannot provide the education needed! Not one dime of my tax money should go to the for profit private and religious schools!
Self_Made
May 17th, 2011
1:06 pm
End compulsory attendance at age 14 and have families pay for high school at a uniform rate with combined need/merit based scholarships available for poorer kids who earn the grades/scores. The rest can get work permits that allow them to work for a rate lower that could fall below minimum wage (market prices) until they turn 18.
Give parents the option of paying or allowing their kids to work. I’ll bet you see improvement in parental support and overall school environment. I believe in public provision of basic education. College preparatory education should be a parental choice, but subsidized for those who prove themselves capable and dedicated to scholarly success. Too much dead weight in the system…deadbeat teachers, administrators, and students. Thin the herd.
Common Sense
May 17th, 2011
1:19 pm
Joe Mama states,
“Go enroll your kids in the private school of your choice.”
Ok great, with what money? How about with the money I just spent paying my school taxes? Oh yeah. I can’t use that money twice.
The crux of the matter is that you seem glad to pay to place my kids into a failing public school, but refuse to pay for any other another option (even one that would cost the same as the govt. option). With friends like you, my kids will do great.
Joe Mama
May 17th, 2011
5:57 pm
Common Sense — “Ok great, with what money? How about with the money I just spent paying my school taxes? Oh yeah. I can’t use that money twice.”
You pay taxes to support public schools. You can then send your children for an education, at public expense, at those selfsame schools. If you don’t want that free public school education for your kids, fine, but don’t come back to the taxpayers with your hand out, looking for us to subsidize your family’s lifestyle choices. If you want your kids to have a private school education and you can’t afford it, then you need to make some sacrifices and hard choices to do so.
If you can only afford chicken and you want a steak, then you need to make some sacrifices and hard choices in order to get that steak. Same thing with the pricey private school education.
“The crux of the matter is that you seem glad to pay to place my kids into a failing public school”
I have no direct knowledge of where you live or how the schools are doing there. I think it is very unfair and unreasonable of you to claim that I want your kids in a “failing public school” when I have no idea where you are, how the schools are doing there or even if you have any kids at all.
“but refuse to pay for any other another option”
I already pay property taxes to support public schools in my area, and if you live there, you can send your kids there free. I fail to understand why I should pay to send your kids to a private school when there are FREE public schools in your area. I suspect you simply have your hand out because you expect the rest of us to pay for your lifestyle choices.
“(even one that would cost the same as the govt. option)”
If you want the free public education, then take it. If you don’t want it, then don’t complain that you didn’t get a better offer. That’s how life works.
“With friends like you, my kids will do great.”
I suggest you either get an additional job and make some sacrifices in order to get your kids that pricey public education you’re sniffing around my wallet for — or else get off your duff and expend some effort to work with your kids and their schools so they can get the best FREE TO YOU education they can possibly get. My parents worked their butts off to see that I got a good PUBLIC SCHOOL education, and I earned one of the five best college scholarships in my high school graduating class many years ago.
Public school is what you make it, and if you’re not willing to expend the personal effort to improve it or to foot the bill for the pricey public education yourself, then I don’t see why it’s my responsibility to pay your kids’ way.
Joe Mama
May 17th, 2011
5:59 pm
Self-Made, those are some really interesting and novel ideas. I would like to hear more, and I hope you will comment further.
Ed
May 18th, 2011
10:59 am
This is a list of the Georgia Supreme Court Justices (who appointed them) and how they ruled on the Charter School Commission:
Carol Hunstein (Zell Miller) – Against Charter School Commission
Robert Benham (Joe Frank Harris) – Against Charter School Commission
Hugh Thompson (Zell Miller) – Against Charter School Commission
Harris Hines ((Zell Miller) – Against Charter School Commission
George Carley (Zell Miller) – For Charter School Commission
Harold Melton (Sonny Perdue) – For Charter School Commission
David Nahmias (Sonny Perdue) – For Charter School Commission
Common Sense
May 18th, 2011
5:25 pm
Joe Mama
How long do you propose that I keep my kids in failiing schools? At no increased cost, I could take them out. The failing school system will/should then lose the funding for my kids – and I could find a better option for them with the money that is saved at no incrased cost to anyone. Sounds fair to me. But I guess you think some government official should still control my children’s education despite continued failure.
Why exactly do you have a stronger faith in government than in individual freedom?
Joe Mama
May 19th, 2011
9:35 am
Common Sense — “How long do you propose that I keep my kids in failiing schools?”
As long as YOU personally choose to leave them there. YOU can make the choice TODAY to take them out, but you won’t because you apparently want someone ELSE to pay for your personal choices.
“At no increased cost, I could take them out.”
You’d just take funding away from the public schools that ALL property owners fund. Why should YOU get a pass on paying property taxes to support the same public schools that everyone else pays to support?
If you want the private school education for your kids so badly, then man up and make some sacrifices so they can have it.
“The failing school system will/should then lose the funding for my kids”
Why should YOU get out of funding public schools? No other property owners are getting out of funding public schools, but here you come with your hand out, expecting others to pay your way.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. We ALL pay property taxes to fund public schools. If you want to avail your kids of that free public education, then go ahead and do it. If you don’t want to for whatever reason, then take your kids out of public schools and put them in private school TODAY. But don’t look to the rest of us to pay for your family’s lifestyle choices. If you can’t pay for it, then you need to make some personal sacrifices, take an additional job or take on some debt in order to fund that private education you want so badly for your kids. But don’t look to the rest of us for a handout.
“and I could find a better option for them with the money that is saved at no incrased cost to anyone.”
No money is saved. In fact, you clearly want to take money OUT of the public schools that we ALL have to fund. You apparently feel that you’re special and shouldn’t have to fund public schools just because you don’t like them.
Well, I’ve got news for you. ALL property owners pay to support public schools in their district, and you’re no better than anyone else. You should pay to support public schools just like everyone else does, and if you don’t want your kids to have that free public education, then man up and pay for the alternative yourself instead of begging for a handout.
“Sounds fair to me.”
Of course you would; people who have their hands out for government assistance ALWAYS think it’s fair that they should get something for free.
“But I guess you think some government official should still control my children’s education despite continued failure.”
Can you not READ? Are you STUPID? I have REPEATEDLY told you to take your kids out of public school TODAY if you don’t like and don’t want a public school education for them. I don’t know how much more clear I can be about this. If YOU leave YOUR kids in public school, that is not MY fault, nor is it the fault of WE the TAXPAYERS.
You make your own choices and you foot the bill for them, Cowboy. Stop looking to the rest of us for a handout.
“Why exactly do you have a stronger faith in government than in individual freedom?”
You have the freedom to take your kids out of public school TODAY and put them in private school if you want to. There is NOTHING stopping you from doing that, and if that’s what you want to do, THEN GO DO IT. The fact that you have NOT done that is not MY fault. YOUR failure is not MY fault.
Grow up and stop blaming others for your own bad decisions. If you don’t want your kids in public school, then man up and take them out instead of making stuff up and bellyaching about it.
Common Sense
May 20th, 2011
2:38 pm
Joe Mama,
Thanks for your concern. Yes, I can read and no I’m not stupid (Precisely because I was educated mainly in private schools). You ought to think outside the box a little bit. You continue to repeat the mantra that we have public schools, and we fund public schools, and people have the option to use public schools or not use them. All true. Is there a better idea? Yes, it’s called competition and paying for performance. We don’t tax people to raise money for state newspapers, bus companies, power companies, clothing manufactures, or grocery stores and then direct people to use these state operations at no additional charge. Doing so seems a bit like North Korea, and we all know how well that’s going.
If it makes sense to tax me to provide an education for my neighbor’s children, I would be thrilled if they had the right to choose a quality private option. Just like if I had to provide them with food stamps, I’d be glad if they had variety of quality stores in which to shop. Not sure why you would want to have it any other way.
Obviously, a voucher’s value should be limited to the cost of providing public education on a per pupil basis.
Joe Mama
May 20th, 2011
6:04 pm
Common Sense — “Joe Mama, Thanks for your concern. Yes, I can read and no I’m not stupid (Precisely because I was educated mainly in private schools).”
I asked because you keep making this ridiculous presumption that I want government bureaucrats to control your child’s education when I have neither said nor suggested anything of the sort. Quite the contrary, I have told you to MAN UP and make the sacrifices and hard choices necessary to give your children the kind of education you want them to have — utilizing the power of school choice that YOU ALREADY HAVE TODAY.
“You ought to think outside the box a little bit.”
So should you. To begin with, perhaps you could think about getting another job, and maybe making some personal and financial sacrifices and perhaps other methods to pay for that private school education you want for your kids. You know, instead of coming and begging to the taxpayers to foot the bill for you.
“You continue to repeat the mantra that we have public schools, and we fund public schools, and people have the option to use public schools or not use them. All true.”
Your concession is noted and appreciated.
“Is there a better idea? Yes, it’s called competition and paying for performance.”
That’s right. YOU pay for the performance YOU want. Don’t come sniffing around MY wallet for it. If you want something different than the free public education that the taxpayers provide, fine. Go make the hard choices and sacrifices YOURSELF and get it for your kids.
You are starting to strike me as someone who wants others to support them and bankroll their lifestyle. If you don’t have a job, then you should go get one. And if you already have one, then maybe you should consider moonlighting. I’ve done it, and it certainly wouldn’t hurt you to do it.
“We don’t tax people to raise money for state newspapers, bus companies, power companies, clothing manufactures, or grocery stores and then direct people to use these state operations at no additional charge.”
Ludicrous. All of those are private ventures and bear no financial resemblance whatsoever to schools. What you’re suggesting is like suggesting that we should be able to opt out of city/county police protection and get a voucher that we could use for private security to protect us in our homes and workplaces. Or that we could opt out of city/county fire and emergency services and get a voucher that we could use for a privately-run fire department or an independent EMT/ambulance service. All of those are city/county services that we, the taxpayers provide for all citizens.
Taxpayers get schools, roads, fire and police services as tax-funded services. If you don’t need them or choose not to use them for whatever reason, you don’t get a check from the city or county for it. You don’t get an annual check if you never have to call the police or 911. You don’t get a check if your house never catches on fire (so you don’t have to call the fire department). And you don’t get a check or a voucher because your kid isn’t going to the free, publicly-funded school.
If you want them to go to private school, then MAN UP and pay for it yourself.
“Doing so seems a bit like North Korea, and we all know how well that’s going.”
What a patently stupid comparison. If you think that taxpayer-funded schools, police and fire departments, sewer & water services and roads are some sort of unconscionable Communist plot, then I encourage you to sell all your stuff and move to an igloo in rural Alaska, where you can do whatever the heck you please.
“If it makes sense to tax me to provide an education for my neighbor’s children, I would be thrilled if they had the right to choose a quality private option. Just like if I had to provide them with food stamps, I’d be glad if they had variety of quality stores in which to shop. Not sure why you would want to have it any other way.”
Don’t ask the taxpayers to subsidize your lifestyle choices. There’s a free public education for your kids if you want it. If you don’t want it, then do the responsible thing and go pay for the alternative yourself instead of bellyaching about it and trying to stick your hand in everyone’s pocket. MAN UP and do something about it yourself.
“Obviously, a voucher’s value should be limited to the cost of providing public education on a per pupil basis.”
Obviously, there should be no vouchers whatsoever. If you don’t want the free public education, then MAN UP and pay the freight for private education yourself.
Seems to me like the only school choice you want to make is the choice to raid the taxpayers’ wallets in order to fund your lifestyle choices. My parents and I worked our butts off to get me a quality education in public school (we couldn’t afford private school either) and it earned me a FAT college scholarship to a major southern university. And when I graduated from college and couldn’t afford to go to graduate school without taking out student loans, I did what a MAN does. I took my degree and ENLISTED IN THE ARMY so I could earn money to go on to graduate school. I could have gone to Officer Candidate School, but officers don’t get tuition assistance or funding for college after leaving the service. So I *CHOSE* to go enlisted so I could serve my country and EARN MY WAY through the education I wanted.
YOU COULD STAND TO DO THE SAME THING, COWBOY.
I don’t know how old you are, but the last time I checked, the Army was still offering the GI Bill and College Fund, and they were accepting accessions from prospective enlistees up to age 45. Maybe you need to look into that. You’re no better than I am, and I frankly resent you trying to stick your hand in my pocket after all I and my family sacrificed to get me the education I have.
Don’t mix tax, education bills with redistricting session | Kyle Wingfield
May 20th, 2011
7:18 pm
[...] became a candidate for the special session agenda after Georgia’s Supreme Court this past week struck down the state’s Charter Schools Commission Act. Thousands of kids at state-approved charter schools [...]
Common Sense
May 21st, 2011
11:15 am
Joe Mama,
I’m glad you enjoyed the benefits of the GI Bill
“The rate paid by the new GI Bill is equal to Georgia’s resident tuition plus any mandatory fees. In Georgia, the maximum tuition rate payable by the new GI Bill is $15,440. Don’t forget that if you’re attending full-time, you may qualify for a housing allowance, too. You can attend any school in Georgia, either public or private, and you can also attend school through an online degree program.”
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Joe Mama
May 23rd, 2011
9:28 am
Common Sense — “I’m glad you enjoyed the benefits of the GI Bill”
So am I. I *worked* for them. You appear to want the benefits of a private school education for your kids without actually doing anything to EARN it. There’s nothing keeping you from getting whatever private education for your kids that you want them to have — except for the fact that you seem to not want to have to actually pay for it yourself.
“The rate paid by the new GI Bill is equal to Georgia’s resident tuition plus any mandatory fees. In Georgia, the maximum tuition rate payable by the new GI Bill is $15,440.”
I wasn’t *covered* by the New GI Bill. I was covered by the *older* program, and I was out of grad school before the New program even *existed.* (laughing)
“Don’t forget that if you’re attending full-time, you may qualify for a housing allowance, too. You can attend any school in Georgia, either public or private, and you can also attend school through an online degree program.”
The old program didn’t work that way. You know, your attempt at getting a dig in on me would work better if you had any idea what you were talking about and if you knew *which* program I actually used to go to grad school. But keep up the guesswork; I suppose you think it deflects from your petty demands that the taxpayers foot the bill for something you don’t want to pay for yourself.
“What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.”
It certainly is. Now YOU man up and make some sacrifices in exchange for education, cowboy. If not enlisting the military, then go find a second job and quit trying to stick your hand in the taxpayers’ collective pockets.