No More D.C. Voucher Money

cawacko

Well-known member
It looks like they are going to kill voucher funding for students in Washington D.C. including two classmates and friends of Sasha and Malia who the USA Today profiled a little while back who receive voucher money to attend Sidwell Friends School. It still amazes me that so many of these politicians send their kids to these high profile or expensive private schools while denying other children the same opportunity.


Spending plan kills funding for Washington school vouchers
Barring renewal, 1,700 students could be back in the D.C. public education system in the near future.


Reporting from Washington -- Congress is poised to do away with one of President Bush's signature initiatives in education: the taxpayer-funded vouchers that enable students from low-income families in the District of Columbia to attend private schools.

About 1,700 children in kindergarten through 12th grade receive the $7,500 annual scholarships. Four times as many apply.

But a provision in the $410-billion spending bill that passed the Senate on Tuesday says that no funds will be appropriated for the program after the 2009-2010 school year unless Congress reauthorizes it and the District of Columbia Council approves it. With the Senate's action Tuesday, the funding bill goes to President Obama for his signature.

If the voucher program is allowed to expire, the students would probably be back in the public system within two years.

"It would be really shocking to see 1,700 kids removed from the best schools they have ever known," said Andrew Campanella, a spokesman for the Alliance for School Choice, a pro-voucher group.

The drama is being watched by advocates of the so-called "school choice movement" across the country.

The Washington program, the only voucher system in the country that uses federal funds, was enacted in 2004 by the Republican-controlled Congress, with some Democratic support.

Its advocates say it gives children in troubled school districts such as Washington's an opportunity to obtain a higher-quality education. Urban school districts in New Orleans, Milwaukee and Cleveland have similar programs that use state money.

Detractors contend that the program subsidizes private or religious schools that, unlike public school districts, are not held accountable. And they say vouchers drain taxpayer money from public schools that truly need it, to private schools already flush from high tuitions. They also say there is no proof that students perform better in their new schools.

Democrats accuse Republicans who support the program of hypocrisy, saying they are imposing federal requirements on an autonomous school district to a degree they would never tolerate in their own states.

"How would the rest of the states feel if we suddenly determined what was going to happen in those states with regard to vouchers, school choice, and charter schools?" Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said Tuesday.

The District of Columbia spends more per pupil than any school district in the nation, but still is plagued by low test scores, high dropout rates and underperforming schools. The voucher program was passed by Congress in 2003 as a five-year pilot program. But it has been on House Democrats' hit list for some time.

In a combative debate on the Senate floor Tuesday, Republican Sen. John Ensign of Nevada said Democrats were torpedoing the program at the behest of teachers' lobbies such as the National Education Assn. and the American Federation of Teachers.

"What we are talking about here is putting kids ahead of the special-interest groups," Ensign said as he launched an unsuccessful amendment to reauthorize the program.

The Obama administration is trying to find a compromise. Like Bush eight years earlier, Obama made education reform a linchpin of his campaign, often suggesting that he would seek reform measures that might rile groups like the NEA.

White House spokesman Thomas Vietor said Tuesday that Obama supports allowing the current students to remain in the program until they graduate from high school but not permitting the addition of new students.

"The president has repeatedly said that school vouchers are not a long-term solution to our educational challenges, but in this instance believes that we should try to find a way to keep from disrupting the students currently enrolled in this program," Vietor said. "He looks forward to working with Congress to find a solution."

Education Secretary Arne Duncan, former Chicago Public Schools chief, opposes vouchers, as does Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty, but both have said recently that they believe the children in the program should be allowed to remain.

A running debate among those on both sides of the voucher issue is whether students benefit academically from attending private schools. Both sides have pointed to research that supports their position. But the Department of Education is expected to release a study this spring that promises a comprehensive look at how students have fared in the Washington program.

If the shows that they have thrived, some Democrats, like California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, say they will consider supporting the voucher program further.

"I am prepared to continue to support this if the comprehensive evaluation, due this spring, shows that the program has value and students are improving," Feinstein said Monday.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-vouchers11-2009mar11,0,1134987.story
 
Last edited:
well what do you expect. They can't have their kids surrounded by POOR kids. I mean the very thought!!! How dare they desire a better education. The ingrates. They have the public education system.... why are they so greedy?
 
The District of Colombia had this imposed unwillingly on them. IMHO, the legislature should stay out of the internal affairs of the city. They have no respect at all for democracy.
 
I found this line from 'detractors' in the article very interesting. "They also say there is no proof that students perform better in their new schools." So going on the (I believe) reasonable assumption that kids using vouchers are going to better schools but are supposedly not performing better what does that say? Does it mean these kids won't perform well anywhere? If kids aren't going to perform better at a better school how much incentive is there to really fix their current (or future) school?
 
The District of Colombia had this imposed unwillingly on them. IMHO, the legislature should stay out of the internal affairs of the city. They have no respect at all for democracy.
You do know that the legislators are in charge of that city, right?
 
The District of Colombia had this imposed unwillingly on them. IMHO, the legislature should stay out of the internal affairs of the city. They have no respect at all for democracy.

Yeah, I can imagine the almost 7,000 families who applied for this money to get their kids out of the wonderful D.C. public school system were just outraged that they had this opportunity.
 
The District of Colombia had this imposed unwillingly on them. IMHO, the legislature should stay out of the internal affairs of the city. They have no respect at all for democracy.

You do realize that the parents have a CHOICE.... don't you? No one is forced to go to these schools.
 
You do know that the legislators are in charge of that city, right?

I've always thought it was wrong that the US congress could override the home rule of the people of DC.

If this was provided from the general budget of the feds, then it was still unfair, because if so every child should have the ability to get vouchers, not just those in DC. If children in DC are getting vouchers, it should only be because of a vote by the DC councilors that the majority elected, and it should be taken from the DC budget.
 
I think the voucher system should be extended so these kids can continue to attend better schools.

That said, why can't there also be a serious effort to improve the DC public school system?
 
I've always thought it was wrong that the US congress could override the home rule of the people of DC.

If this was provided from the general budget of the feds, then it was still unfair, because if so every child should have the ability to get vouchers, not just those in DC. If children in DC are getting vouchers, it should only be because of a vote by the DC councilors that the majority elected, and it should be taken from the DC budget.
Why?

First, nobody had to apply for them, yet more did than were available. It was basically a scholarship that allowed poor kids to go to school with the President's daughters. All without adding to the budget of the schools. Of course it appears as if that kind of nonsense won't be happening any longer. Whew. The President's daughters are now safe from poor people. Good thing you support it so strongly. Got to keep those poor people down. Don't let them into better schools just in case they might take the job of a rich kid.
 
Public Schools Vs Private Schools: New Study Says There Is No Difference

Many people assume that students enrolled in private schools perform better academically than do students attending public schools. The Center on Education Policy (CEP), however, disagrees. According to a new CEP study released this week, private school students and public school students perform equally on achievement tests in math, reading, science, and history.

Summary of CEP Findings

Low-income students attending public high schools performed just as well academically as low-income students attending private high schools.

Neither private school students nor public school students with similar background characteristics were more likely to attend college.

Young adults at age 26 who attended private school are no more likely to be engaged in civic activities than young adults who attended a public school.

Private school graduates aren't any more satisfied with the jobs they hold at age 26 than are public school graduates.

'Contrary to popular belief, we can find no evidence that private schools actually increase student performance,' stated Jack Jennings, the president and CEO of CEP. '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.'

What sets the CEP study apart from other studies that have compared private school students to public school students is that the CEP study used an additional range of factors, including earlier test scores, parental expectations, parental involvement, and the effects of income. Other studies have typically relied on academic test scores alone.

The one difference that CEP found between private schools and public schools involves SAT scores. According to the study, private school students have the edge on the SAT. The CEP notes that this could be because private schools tend to offer more test prep resources than do public schools.
http://education-portal.com/article...s:_New_Study_Says_There_is_No_Difference.html

There are a thousand such studies that come to the same conclusion.

Good students are made by good parents, and that remains true whether the child is in public, private, charter, or a religious school.
It's the same lie of integration.
 
Good students are made by good parents, and that remains true whether the child is in public, private, charter, or a religious school.

Well I can't argue with that statement. There are those rare students that have no support at home but have an extreme drive and determination in them that overcomes it but that is not the norm. Ultimately kids need that support at home.
 
Good students are made by good parents, and that remains true whether the child is in public, private, charter, or a religious school.

Well I can't argue with that statement. There are those rare students that have no support at home but have an extreme drive and determination in them that overcomes it but that is not the norm. Ultimately kids need that support at home.

I have and will continue to motivate students in this way. I tell them the absolutely best way to improve their condition is to get a quality education and it starts at Junior High (really earlier but this is when I get them). It works on some. I have been in education for 21 years and have seen several kids rise above their raising. Unfortunately some will not. "Welfare was good enough for mama and daddy so it's good enough for me."
 
I have and will continue to motivate students in this way. I tell them the absolutely best way to improve their condition is to get a quality education and it starts at Junior High (really earlier but this is when I get them). It works on some. I have been in education for 21 years and have seen several kids rise above their raising. Unfortunately some will not. "Welfare was good enough for mama and daddy so it's good enough for me."

I'll never forget a day at the office during 'Bring Your Kids to Work Day' and this Secretary brought her daughter in and the little girl goes 'Mommy I want to fax something for you'. The mommy tells her daughter 'no you don't because you'll be doing this the rest of your life'. Man, I was dumbfounded. It was just sad.
 
I'll never forget a day at the office during 'Bring Your Kids to Work Day' and this Secretary brought her daughter in and the little girl goes 'Mommy I want to fax something for you'. The mommy tells her daughter 'no you don't because you'll be doing this the rest of your life'. Man, I was dumbfounded. It was just sad.

Let me guess, the woman was your mother and you were that special little girl who wanted to fax something? It seems to fit with what you might be able to learn at USC.
 
I have and will continue to motivate students in this way. I tell them the absolutely best way to improve their condition is to get a quality education and it starts at Junior High (really earlier but this is when I get them). It works on some. I have been in education for 21 years and have seen several kids rise above their raising. Unfortunately some will not. "Welfare was good enough for mama and daddy so it's good enough for me."

I applaud your motivation of students brother, but it isn't just the "welfare mentality" that affects them. Many failing students aren't coming from welfare homes and come from homes that are middle class. In fact, there aren't that many welfare homes left.

Education is not taken seriously in this country and we spend more money bulding prisons than schools or colleges .. then we target students to fill the prisons.

We exist in a society based on McSuccess where oppulence, celebrity, and material are more valued than work ethics and education. Too often students get in the way of its parents strive to keep up and far too many come home from school everyday to an empty house where TV and video games assume the role of parenting.
 
I applaud your motivation of students brother, but it isn't just the "welfare mentality" that affects them. Many failing students aren't coming from welfare homes and come from homes that are middle class. In fact, there aren't that many welfare homes left.

Education is not taken seriously in this country and we spend more money bulding prisons than schools or colleges .. then we target students to fill the prisons.

We exist in a society based on McSuccess where oppulence, celebrity, and material are more valued than work ethics and education. Too often students get in the way of its parents strive to keep up and far too many come home from school everyday to an empty house where TV and video games assume the role of parenting.

This is absolutely true, BAC. Education is not valued here. Truly a shame.
 
Back
Top