Below is my column in the Hill on moves by some states to create greater choice and control for parents over the education of their children. The move to use funding to change the status quo could soon be used in higher education. Not only are alumni beginning to withhold contributions to schools with little or no diversity or tolerance on their faculties, but states could reduce their levels of support.
Here is the column:
What if they offered public education and no one came? That question, similar to the anti-war slogan popularized by Charlotte E. Keyes, is becoming more poignant by the day.
This month, Florida is moving to allow all residents the choice to go to private or public schools. Other states like Utah are moving toward a similar alternative with school vouchers. I oppose such moves away from public schools, but I have lost faith in the willingness of most schools to restore educational priorities and standards.
Faced with school boards and teacher unions resisting parental objections to school policies over curriculum and social issues, states are on the brink of a transformative change. For years, boards and teacher unions have treated parents as unwelcome interlopers in their children’s education.
That view was captured this week in the comment of Iowa school board member Rachel Wall, who said: “The purpose of a public ed is to not teach kids what the parents want. It is to teach them what society needs them to know. The client is not the parent, but the community.”
State Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Wis.) tweeted: “If parents want to ‘have a say’ in their child’s education, they should home school or pay for private school tuition out of their family budget.”
Now legislators are moving to do precisely that — but with public funds. It could be a game-changer. Parents overwhelmingly appear to support a classical education focused on core subjects rather than “social change.” They overwhelmingly support parental notice when their children engage in gender transitioning or other major decisions.
Many parents also are angered by teachers, unions and boards shutting down schools during the pandemic despite other countries keeping them open and studies that showed children were not at high risk. The United States experienced soaring mental illness rates and plunging test scores.
Parents who questioned those policies were treated as extremists.
Michelle Leete, vice president of training at the Virginia PTA and vice president of communications for the Fairfax County PTA, said parents would not force them to reverse their agenda: “Let them die. Don’t let these uncomfortable people deter us from our bold march forward.”
Many of us have advocated for public education for decades. I sent my children to public schools, and I still hope we can turn this around without wholesale voucher systems. Yet teachers and boards are killing the institution of public education by treating children and parents more like captives than consumers. They are force-feeding social and political priorities, including passes for engaging in approved protests.
As public schools continue to produce abysmal scores, particularly for minority students, board and union officials have called for lowering or suspending proficiency standards or declared meritocracy to be a form of “white supremacy.” Gifted and talented programs are being eliminated in the name of “equity.”
Once parents have a choice, these teachers lose a virtual monopoly over many families, and these districts could lose billions in states like Florida.
While I remain concerned how vouchers could be the death of public primary and secondary education, I believe states need to use the power of the purse to reform higher education.
Despite years of complaints over a rising orthodoxy at schools, most universities have reduced conservative and libertarian faculty to rare oddities. Some schools have virtually no Republican faculty. Faculty have created political echo-chambers that advance their own views while excluding alternative voices. As a result, polls show a high number of students are fearful about sharing their views in classes.
I oppose laws prohibiting certain theories from being taught in universities, but I also believe academics can no longer show open contempt for the half of this country with conservative, libertarian or independent views. At many public universities, the message is that you need to give universities not only total deference but total support in excluding conservative views and maintaining intolerant ideological environments.
It may be too late for private universities, which are likely to continue to exclude all but a tiny number of conservatives or libertarians. They have the support of many in the media. Above the Law’s senior editor, Joe Patrice, defended “predominantly liberal faculties” and argued that hiring a conservative academic is akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism — the idea that the sun orbits the earth — to teach.
While some private schools like the University of Chicago have stood firm in support of free speech, most of the schools on the top of a recent ranking were public universities. That is no surprise. As state schools, these universities are subject to First Amendment protections and there is greater ability to contest the current academic orthodoxy. Indeed, courts repeatedly rule against universities. Yet administrators have an incentive to yield to the mob, even at the cost of millions in litigation costs. And few academics have an incentive to fight for greater political diversity on campus and risk being tagged in cancel campaigns.
This is why public universities could be the final line of defense for free speech in higher education.
States are no more captive to these schools than are parents. Why should conservatives and independents continue to pay taxes for universities that actively exclude faculty who share their values or viewpoints? Half of this country funds schools that have little tolerance for their values or voices; they can reduce their support and let such universities seek private funding if they insist on making a “liberal education” a literal goal.
We need public universities to offer a free-speech alternative. If we can maintain that protection, we may find that public universities become the primary choice of many who want to learn in politically diverse, tolerant environments.
For elementary, middle and high schools, voucher programs may allow parents to speak with their feet. I hope we do not come to that — but the opposition to vouchers is telling. The alarm is based on the recognition that, given a choice, many families would not choose what public schools are offering. This includes many minority families who want to escape from a cycle of education that leaves many students barely literate and lost. They likely would prefer an alternative to a system like Baltimore’s, where a student failed all but three classes and still graduated in the top half of his class.
I worry about how voucher systems will impact public schools because many districts would fare poorly in a competitive market. However, these proposals are a shot across the bow to all such districts. They could easily find themselves with an agenda-packed curriculum but far fewer students to teach.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
244 thoughts on “Captives or Consumers? Public Education Could Be Facing a Major Change”
Get rid of the federal Department of Education. That’s go a long way!
They undermine local control. So much of what broke education is coming from the Federal government, corporations, and NGOs.
It’d help, too, if parents bothered to pay attention to their local school districts and speak of their concerns and preferences. Trouble is, very few people, outside of activist-types and older tax-payers, bother to come.
If parents want a classical education for their kids, they need to speak up!
Congress has no power to tax for education which is specific, individual and particular welfare, and charity and favor, distinctly NOT “…general Welfare….”
General meaning ALL or the WHOLE which can only be infrastructure – roads, water, electricity, internet, post office (archaic), phone, sewer, rubbish collection, etc.
States may tax for education.
Unions in states are illegal criminal organizations that function through the use of force and violence.
Thomas Jefferson disagreed with you.
If you wanted an a free and independent people educated to be self-governing and capable of upholding their duties and responsibilities in a constitutional republic such as ours, the WHOLE and General population must be well educated.
“minority students”. Ah, but which ‘minority’? Jews are the best students, closely followed by the Asian-Americans who are descendants of people from Japan and China. Not so much so those from Vietnam.
Hopelessly bed, it seems, are students from Latino backgrounds. This doesn’t apply to the few Spanish-Americans who are the descendants of the landifundia of California.
I only know about the descendants of the slaves by reputation. On the contrary, the 2 Maasai from Kenya that I have met are among the quickest, sharpest, most questioning students it has been my pleasure to know.
“I have lost faith in the willingness of most schools to restore educational priorities and standards.”
With punitive and coercive threats of funding loss or lawsuits if schools don’t toe the line, ugly things creep in.
I would say administrators and State and Federal laws, mandates, and money with coercive strings are a bigger problem.
There are problems with school boards, but not the problems promoted by the media. If people in the community do not understand what is necessary for a sound education for a free people, they will have trouble evaluating their local schools. This goes for Board members.
It is complicated and thorny problem.
Not only in education, but in other areas of American society, I am beginning to see actual, somewhat intensified resolve to push back and/or remove wokism and multicultural claptrap from our various institutions and culture. This is a sign that the prog/left has gone “a bridge too far” and awoken the pre-occupied middle to just what has happened over the past 60+ years. I hope this isn’t too late.
This might be a “Me, Too” movement I could actually agree with! 😉
One practical concern the school choice movement needs to face is “Who owns the public k-12 school campus?”
The public owns it, including the buildings, computers, athletic equipment, band equipment, theater, science labs, and library. When student enrollments are dropping and private education firms and home schooling are picking up the slack, shouldn’t that weaken the school administration’s claim to monopoly control over the campus?
Is it realistic to assume the school admin can be prodded into a truly competitive posture while it retains a monopoly over campus facilities? Doesn’t that confer an unfair advantage?
Looking ahead, it might be necessary to hand over control of campus facilities and equipment to a neutral facilities management company, while restricting the Superintendant/Principal’s job to merely learning achievement. This way, the public’s big investment of tens of millions in campus could be shared by multiple learning organizations co-existing on the same campus, driving innovations in content and methodology.
THAT would make Admins have to compete on a level playing field. It would denude the teachers unions of their monopolistic punch.
I’m optimistic about public educators ability to innovate once thrust into a new playing field where it’s down to a choice of “keep up or perish”. It will take diligence and forethought to create those conditions — including who has control over campus facilities. It just doesn’t make sense to force a redundancy in facilities as a cost of creating competition. Taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay twice for buildings and equipment.
Your future awaits. Are you ready? Egad.
Content optional, by the way.
Turley clearly opposes school vouchers. So does the republican majority school board in Utah.
“Utah’s Republican-majority state school board votes to oppose vouchers”
…”She also is concerned that it only offers choices to those in the Wasatch Front, where most of the private schools in the state sit. Those in rural areas, like her district in southern Utah, have fewer options.
Others on the board said they were worried about the lack of accountability for public taxpayer money in the program. In Utah, private schools don’t have to hire licensed teachers, don’t have any requirements for curriculum and can handpick which students they admit.”
That is not much of a choice if schools are allowed to handpick only the students they want. This law was rushed thru the legislature trying to avoid input from school officials and teachers. It also put in an “incentive” to support it by attaching a $6000 raise and bonuses for teachers across the board if the measure passes. That kind of raise is unheard of in Utah, but this time it was use as a “bribe” to pass the law without really questioning it. It will only benefit those who are closest to private schools and leave about rural students who don’t have much of a choice. Republicans are opposed to this bill.
Everyone interested in this topic should watch “Yellowstone 1923” about the federal government, forcing American Indians into church run schools in order to assimilate and civilize them.
Apparently, according to many historians, this is a very accurate depiction of what an “unconstitutional” education system can look like.
In more recent history, some states’ (like Florida) have kicked disabled children out of private religious school (receiving federal tax dollars) because the child’s parent was gay. The child was punished because their parent was gay. These constitutional violations happened after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalized equal marriage rights and legalized equal adoption rights for LGBT parents.
Also, in states like Alaska, Hawaii, Oklahoma, etc. there are native indigenous religions that are excluded, but the schools favor a particular religion over another, while receiving taxpayer money.
If private religious schools are to operate this way, they shouldn’t receive any taxpayer dollars.
Proof why school choice will guarantee nothing: Hunter Biden attended private schools and eventually graduated from Yale Law School!!!! How did that work for him? LOL
The Daily Mail reports that #BelieveAllWomen and #RightWingMisogyny make cute left wing talking points, but otherwise, Hunter Biden has followed in his father’s footsteps in being a male chauvinist pig, misogynist, sexual predator, rapist and has blackmailed and abused more women thanHarvey Weinstein Donald could have ever hoped. How is that for school choice not being a guarantee? Then again, look at how Joe Biden turned out with his pristine education
‘Set phone up so I can spy on you showering.’ Hunter Biden threatened to withhold cash-strapped assistant’s pay if she didn’t FaceTime him naked, texts show – as it’s revealed she’s the FOURTH employee with whom he had a sexual relationship
Texts obtained by DailyMail.com show First Son asked assistant for video sex
‘The rule has to be no talk of anything but sex and we must be naked,’ he wrote
Biden filmed their sex sessions and saved the images on his laptop hard drive
PUBLISHED: 09:25 EST, 31 January 2023
Public unions are cancerous.
Nearly all harm to children can traced to two sources.
The academic lounge where hard left agenda is formulated and the unions that protect them and force real harm on the world.
The hard left agenda appears to be formulated on college campuses and in NGOs. It is then passed along through superintendents’ associations and the unions. Teachers worth their salt are too busy teaching and actually avoid the teachers lounge.
Mussolini “made the trains run on time” and was great at breaking up bureaucratic inertia, but would we want our children’s education designed by someone with that concept (even if well intended)?
Even if we borrow ideas from private business, it’s vitally important those solutions are within “constitutional” legal boundaries.
In recent history, there are active cases of private religious institutions, using government institutions like public schools (involving taxpayer dollars), to impose a particular religious interpretation onto students.
Whatever the solution it should operate within the legal out-of-bounds of the U.S. Constitution. Government agencies have a long and terrible track record of violating constitutional rights of it’s students and citizens.
I posted this yesterday on the “Racism Interruptor” article:
January 30, 2023 at 9:59 AM
I say we can start by promoting school choice, getting students out of public indoctrination education and into private, charter, or home schooling that focuses on the basics, STEM, history in context, civics, and real home economics.
And form colleges that follow suit.
“e basics, STEM, history in context, civics, and real home economics”
School boards are in charge of approving curriculum. If they want this in the schools, they need to make their wishes known to the curriculum directors.
“I worry about how voucher systems will impact public schools because many districts would fare poorly in a competitive market.”
Voucher systems undermine public education and allow for fraud and lack of accountability when there are weak laws scrutinizing private schools. If public funds are used in a private school the same accountability standards should apply. Many private schools choose not to accept vouchers in order of be more independent on their choices and keep government watchdogs from intruding into their programs.
Svelaz wrote, “Voucher systems undermine public education and allow for fraud and lack of accountability when there are weak laws scrutinizing private schools.”
1. Voucher systems DO NOT “undermine public education”, that argument is a propaganda lie.
2. Voucher systems DO NOT “allow for fraud”, that argument is a propaganda lie.
3. Voucher systems NOT NOT allow for a “lack of accountability”, that argument is a propaganda lie.
4. What the heck are you talking about when you wrote this nonsense, “weak laws scrutinizing private schools”.
Svelaz wrote, “Many private schools choose not to accept vouchers in order of be more independent on their choices and keep government watchdogs from intruding into their programs.”
That’s a really terrible argument against school vouchers, it’s their choice to receive or deny vouchers for what ever reason they see fit. By the way, it’s NOT the governments place to be dictating school programs. It’s not a bad thing to be free and independent of government intrusion.
“Voucher systems DO NOT “allow for fraud”, that argument is a propaganda lie.”
Nope. Oklahoma recently experienced a scandal involving private charter schools. Tens of millions were embezzled by one company and the founders are now in jail for it. The result was students left behind academically and the state lost tens of millions of taxpayer dollars.
“What the heck are you talking about when you wrote this nonsense, “weak laws scrutinizing private schools”.
See the response above I also discussed the issue on another post below. There is ample evidence that a lot of these laws lack serious oversight and accountability of those private schools that receive public funds.
“By the way, it’s NOT the governments place to be dictating school programs. It’s not a bad thing to be free and independent of government intrusion.”
It is if they are using public money for supporting a private school. When government funds a program they can dictate how it should be used.
Svelaz wrote, “Nope. Oklahoma recently experienced a scandal involving private charter schools. Tens of millions were embezzled by one company and the founders are now in jail for it. The result was students left behind academically and the state lost tens of millions of taxpayer dollars.”
You just provided an argument that proved that your own statement was false and my statement was true.
Only an irrational babbling idiot would write that as being support for a statement like this, “voucher systems”, “allow for fraud”. No you babbling idiot they don’t allow it, they noticed the fraud, they caught the fraudsters, they prosecuted the fraudsters and they threw the guilty criminals in jail – that’s NOT allowing it you idiot. I can’t believe that I actually had to explain that to someone, but considering the source, I guess I should have expected that kind of irrational extrapolation from you.
Additionally; that criminal activity in Oklahoma is not representative of school vouchers across the USA. It seems like you think that one bad apple spoils the entire system; I’m sure you apply that bad apple view of the world to all things without any hypocrisy, right? Rhetorical question: Do you apply that bad apple view of the world to the Democratic Party as a whole because House Representative Adam Schiff is a bald-faced LIARt therefore all Democrats are bald-faced liars.
I stand behind what I wrote; “Voucher systems DO NOT “allow for fraud”, that argument is a propaganda lie”.
Try actually using your brain Svelaz.
The Oklahoma scandal spanned several years before they were caught. There was no oversight until things were not adding up. It wasn’t until an audit by the state AFTER being forced to audit the charter school company that they found out they were embezzling the state for years.
Their voucher system had little no oversight and it’s what led to the scandal in the first place.
“Additionally; that criminal activity in Oklahoma is not representative of school vouchers across the USA.”
Didn’t say it was, but it is a common occurrence with school choice programs that have little to no oversight. In Oklahoma it cost the state tens of millions and didn’t serve those families what they were promised. My statement was not proved false. As usual you just went on an emotional outburst without thinking or researching the scandal.
Yet, public schools waste money often with no accountability. When they perform poorly, the answer is always “well, we just need more funding”. They never look for ways to both improve the product and consider the costs at the same time. Public schools are absolutely behaving as though the students are captive and have no choice. They are increasingly excluding parents from the process and then forcing controversial views on kids.
Svelaz wrote, “It is if they are using public money for supporting a private school.”
That’s misinformation; better yet, you’re parroting pure propaganda.
They aren’t using public money to support a private school, they’re literally sharing some, in most cases not all, of the dollars allocated to educate a specific child to the institution that is providing that education.
Svelaz wrote, “When government funds a program they can dictate how it should be used.”
They are. They’ve dictated that it must be used for the education of the child, but the government cannot dictate the specifics of the education or programs. You seem to want the government, which is controlled by partisan people, to control all education. Sorry Svelaz, this is the United States of America and We the People are in charge of the government NOT the other way around. It’s not the place of the government to dictate the specifics of education, that’s what totalitarian governments do.
“Svelaz wrote, “It is if they are using public money for supporting a private school.”
That’s misinformation; better yet, you’re parroting pure propaganda.
They aren’t using public money to support a private school, they’re literally sharing some, in most cases not all, of the dollars allocated to educate a specific child to the institution that is providing that education.”
That public money is spent on tuition at a private school. Tuition is what supports the operation of a private school. The money allocated to a child for public school literally follows the child to the school of their choice. Meaning if they choose a private school they are supporting that school by using public money to pay for tuition. This isn’t rocket science Witherspoon. Come on man.
“Svelaz wrote, “When government funds a program they can dictate how it should be used.”
They are. They’ve dictated that it must be used for the education of the child, but the government cannot dictate the specifics of the education or programs.”
They must adhere to state approved curricula in order to accept public money. If a private school chooses to use public sourced funds they must adhere to government standards and rules associated with that money and that includes which curriculums they are required to teach.
“It’s not the place of the government to dictate the specifics of education, that’s what totalitarian governments do.“
It is when they are the ones providing the funds. When government pays for the majority of education they get to dictated specifics.
We the people are in charge of government meaning we are the government. We gave them the authority to do what they are doing.
“You seem to want the government, which is controlled by partisan people, to control all education. ”
Nope. That’s purely your own assumption. Are republicans who got voted on school boards not also partisan and controlling education? Why aren’t you railing about them?
I’m not wading through this entire thread to cherry pick out your nonsense; what laws are weak, be very specific.
States that have implemented school choice programs and school vouchers have weak oversight rules and accountability of private schools and charter schools. This is why there are many scandals and cases of fraud. It’s not hard to find. Google it and see for yourself. You are not going to accept any links I give you because you are already not going to bother trying.
Oklahoma’s scandal occurred because it HAD weak oversight and the fraud that they discover happened over years until the state finally did it’s job and scrutinized the charter school company.
If public money is to go to private schools government has a right to make sure that money is used for what it’s supposed to. Oklahoma is a good example of a state having weak accountability laws and what happens when you “trust” these charter schools to regulate themselves.
Svelaz wrote, “States that have implemented school choice programs and school vouchers have weak oversight rules and accountability of private schools and charter schools.”
AHA! Just as expected.
You moved the goalposts to “weak oversight rules” instead of “weak laws” because you can’t support your lies. I’m done arguing with a trolling twit.
Catcha later dude.
My children were educated in a cyber charter when after 5 years of excellent public school teachers my very successful daughter who also has learning disabilities got the team of teachers from H311.
We looked at many things but we had to do something. We put her in a cyber charter because it was easy, it actually appeared to be a good fit for her, and it could not be worse than leaving her in school.
The cyber charter proved excellent – though overtime the quality declined – mostly as the teachers unions lobbied the states to impose more and more regulations on cyber charters to make them closer and closer to the same as traditional schools.
When my Daughter started – they had “learn at your own pace” which was excellent for her. But that went on the chopping block with the imposition of fixed schedules and traditional classes over zoom like systems.
A couple of years into our daughters cyber charter education there was a major scandal with our Cyber Charter.
Fraud !!! The director was purportedly pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars. Oh, My!
My wife was concerned.
We talked. I pointed out that My Daughter was still getting a much better education than in public school.
That cyber Charters still cost the state only 75% of what regular schools cost.
And that we had the choice of half a dozen other cyber charters, if this concerned us.
I am not looking to condone fraud. And obviously it should be policed.
But frankly as long as my daughter is getting a better education, at a lower cost – why is it my business of that of the state how the cyber charter spends their money ?
And finally – if I actually care, as a cyber charter parent I have an easy remedy
PICK ANOTHER SCHOOL.
Later we did – not because of the fraud allegations, but because the cyber Charter that was really good at elementary education was not the best on for High School.
“I am not looking to condone fraud. And obviously it should be policed.
But frankly as long as my daughter is getting a better education, at a lower cost – why is it my business of that of the state how the cyber charter spends their money ?
It’s good that you don’t condone fraud. But that “lower cost” comes with a lot of caveats.
Didn’t cyber charters fall out of favor during covid?
It should have been your business how the cyber charter spends their money because it affects the future of state support. The fraud that occurred seems to be common among charter schools. That means they are not making enough money or don’t have enough to operate as they claim.
Picking schools when one isn’t working out may be wise educationally, but how does that affect the student? Constantly changing schools every time you’re not happy with the outcomes affects the student. They can’t make friends or grow their social skills if they are moved every time there’s an issue. Long term stability should also be an important consideration.
“Didn’t cyber charters fall out of favor during covid?”
Nope, they actually did a booming business – so booming that AGAIN the State limited the number of students thaey were allowed to accept, because thousands of parents were leaving traditional public schools that switched rapidly to piss pooor online education, to cyber charters that had decades of experience and knew what they were doing.
Poor online education by traditional public schools is the primary cause of a generation that has lost a year of education the will never get back.
“It should have been your business how the cyber charter spends their money because it affects the future of state support.”
What is my business is the VALUE I get for the education dollars I spend on my child.
It is the SCHOOLS business how it spends those dollars to deliver ME VALUE.
“The fraud that occurred seems to be common among charter schools.”
Nope, it is rare and relative small even when it occurs.
When Government subsidizes anything there will be fraud – medicare, Vouchers, ObamaCare, PPP loans.
This is why the best solution is to eliminate public school entirely and eliminate school taxes.
But that is not politically feasible.
There is a moral hazard as well as an opportunity for Fraud in Voucher based public education.
But the problems and overall costs are MUCH lower than traditional public schools and the education quality is higher.
“That means they are not making enough money or don’t have enough to operate as they claim.”
False. And stupid. It ACTUALLY means the opposite. It means they are capable of delivering a better education to students and parents for LESS than they are being paid to do so, and therefore they look for ways to POCKET the excess.
In my state Charters are paid about 75% of the local districts cost per student – so charters save the government substantial money. The fact that these is some fraud means they could provide the same eduction for even LESS.
I would note that Fraud is just a form of Waste. Traditional public schools are incredibly wasteful – far more than charters.
But that waste is not in the form of Fraud – or atleast not the same kind of fraud. Someone always profits from wasteful spending – that too is a form of fraud.
“Picking schools when one isn’t working out may be wise educationally, but how does that affect the student?”
My kids changed twice – once to Cyber Charters, once to a different cybercharter that was better for HS.
I changed traditional public schools 6 times before graduating from HS, some of those changes were just moves to different buildings, But several changed the teachers, the building, my friends, my home.
There were far more disruptive than changing cyber charters.
I changed college 3 times. My son has changed three times including a year in Japan and he is doing quite well.
Change is good for people.
Regardless, the BIG deal is not constant change – that actually does not happen. It is the freedom to change.
Each school knows it must make PARENTS happy – or they will leave.
It is the ability of parents to change schools, that matters, the actual frequency is based on the FAILURE of specific schools.
NOT the freedom to change.
You really do not understand how free markets work.
“Constantly changing schools every time you’re not happy with the outcomes affects the student.”
Again you really do not understand at all.
Cyber Charters particular are MORE stable. there is no building, no bus trip every day.
My kids only changed cyber charters once. They were part of that decision.
There are differences between regular charters and cyber charters. One of those differences is that cyber chartered kids tend not to develop their friends based on school. Therefore changing schools has no effect on friends.
My kids had lots of extra curricular activities that were NOT tied to schools. Those and neighbors and even people they met in other online activities is where they form their friends and relations. This has also resulted in freindships that are not tied to public schools that have lasted into college and adult life.
“They can’t make friends or grow their social skills if they are moved every time there’s an issue. Long term stability should also be an important consideration.”
You are repeating long debunked nonsense. You presume that the way things work in traditional public schools is the only way they can work.
We have decades of experience with Charters – which are really traditional PRIVATE schools, and cyber charters.
The problems you complain about do not occur. Kids make friends – one way or the other. School is just one way they do so.
Initially colleges were skeptical that Home Schooled and cyber chartered students could thrive in traditional colleges.
Experience has shown that in most every way thy do BETTER that public school students with similar backgrounds.
They are far more prepared to self motivate and to work independently – something public schools are poor at.
They have no problems socializing. All YOUR made up fears have come to naught.
To be clear – I am NOT advocating any ONE SIZE FITS ALL solutions.
I do not want, and it would be a very bad idea to have 100% online private cyber charters.
I want “a thousand flowers to bloom.
Kids are not identical. They do not each have the same needs.
Cyber charters have proven a godsend for poor single minority mothers in $hitty school districts with failing schools and violence in the community. Their kids are educated from home.
You talk about socialization – in THEIR world it is socialization that will cause them to FAIL.
One of your problems is that you are thinking of schools in the same way you think of everything in government.
You do not understand free markets at all.
They do NOT have the problems that government does.
If there is a problem with medicare, it takes and act of congress to fix it – litterally.
If there is a problem in the free market – it gets fixed rapidly – or customers leave rapidly.
You keep posting all kinds of potential problems with charter schools.
In the unlikely event those problems are both important and were not considered by the charter school – the school would have fixed them quickly – or parents would move their kids.
You are worried about too many moves – but in the real world that does not happened. The unstated threat that parents might move, assures that charter schools are responsive to parents.
My kids moved when they went to HS – but because there was a cyber charter that was better for HS.
The one they started was better in elementary.
Interestingly most of their cyber charter friends move too – and too the same school for the same reason,
because their parents too waned a better HS education for their kids.
When we moved them – we involved them in the decision.
In fact when we moved them from public school to cyber charters we involved them.
My daughter was very enthusiastic – after several good years with excellent teachers she was MISERABLE in public school.
She was moving no matter what. The only question was where.
Regardless, with regard to every problem you have thought of and many you have not – charters thought of them.
And if they hadn’t, they would have confronted them early and had to fix them anyway.
That is how free markets work.
Further, charter schools can not remain static. – Because parents can move, and they WILL move if something better comes along there is presure on charters to CONSTANTLY improve.
Further many many studies have found that in states were there are charter programs, the Public schools improve faster.
Otherwise They loose too many students to charters.
Competition is NOT the sole factor that makes free markets wonderful – though it is an important one.
Regardless competition ensure constant improvement. It even improves traditional public schools.
I would personally entirely eliminate existing public schools, I would sell every single one of them to priavte education entities and just have a gigantic voucher system.
But even if public schools remain – where they have competition, they too must improve.
We are talking schools, but my arguments are mostly about free markets.
There is almost nothing that can be provided by the free market that should EVER be provided by government.
We will always get better quality, lower cost, constant improvement from markets.
We NEVER get that from government.
It does not matter what the service or product is.
If it can be provided in a free market – do NOT do so through government.
These laws need absolutely Zero oversight and there is no reason to be concerned about fraud.
It is irrelevant.
Provide school funding to the parent and let the parent decide what school to spend it at.
So long as multiple choices exist – there is no need for oversight of fraud concerns.
If parents are unhappy with their childrens education – they can move to another school.
Does the state waste lots of effort policing fraud at McDonalds ?
Of course not. If you are unhappy with what you get from one fast food place – you go to another.
Do you care if McD’s has twice the profit margin of Burger King ?
Or do you care which burger tastes better and costs less ?
Free markets allow us to focus on what matters – the quality of the service and the value delivered – as WE the consumer decide.
We do not need the state stepping in to “protect us”
In a free market all exchange is voluntary. I do not need to send my daughter to cyber charter X, or to get my Burger at McD’s or to by my car from Jone’s auto or ….
I choose who I will buy from. When I am selling I am usually – and should always be free to choose who I sell to.
I do not buy from people I do not trust.
I do not sell to people I do not trust.
Some of the wisest legal advice I get was from my lawyer when I was trying to bullet proof a contract with a difficult client.
When I asked what more I should do – he said “Nothing” – it you beleive you need more – DO NOT do business with this client.
You can not fix lack of trust with a contract or a law.
But you can easily by chosing only to do business with places you trust.
Fraud is not a problem with free competent adults.
“These laws need absolutely Zero oversight and there is no reason to be concerned about fraud.
It is irrelevant.”
There’s plenty of reasons to be concerned about fraud. Students are affected, state and local governments lose money and it sows distrust of charters. Parents want accountability if they want the best education possible for their kids. Government can hold charters accountable as it should. They are receiving taxpayer funds after all.
“So long as multiple choices exist – there is no need for oversight of fraud concerns.
If parents are unhappy with their childrens education – they can move to another school.”
That’s easier said than done. Schools, good ones, fill up fast and once they are it’s harder for parents to put their kids in.
“There’s plenty of reasons to be concerned about fraud. Students are affected”
If students are effected – parents will move their students to another school.
“state and local governments lose money”
No they do not. Government pays a fixed amount to educate each child.
If there is “fraud” as you claim – all that means is that Charter schools are able to effectively educate kids for even less than the 75% of public school cost they are typically paid.
If that is true the reimbursement to charters should be reduced
AND the cost of public school should be reduced.
Whether there is fraud in public school or no – public schools are inefficient and cost more to educate kids.
In most instances private schools – not charters but actual private schools cost less than public schools and provide far better education.
Catholic schools cost about 1/3 of what public schools cost.
Local private schools cost between 75% and 125% of what public schools cost and deliver a far better education.
“and it sows distrust of charters.”
And yet they are growing.
“Parents want accountability if they want the best education possible for their kids.”
Charters are accountable to parents – parents can change charters if they are unhappy.
We do not need government to regulate McDonalds, consumers do an excellent job.
“Government can hold charters accountable as it should.”
Why ? Govenrment pays a fixed amount per child to educate kids.
If parents are unhappy – they go elsewhere and the charter fails.
“They are receiving taxpayer funds after all.”
And taxpayer funds come from tax payers – many of whom are parents.
Regardless, government has no say in how you spend your social security.
This is the same.
““So long as multiple choices exist – there is no need for oversight of fraud concerns.
If parents are unhappy with their childrens education – they can move to another school.”
That’s easier said than done.”
Nope it is really easy.
Have you charter schooled your children ? I have. Have you moved them to another charter ? I have.
“Schools, good ones, fill up fast and once they are it’s harder for parents to put their kids in.”
Only where government puts arbitrary limits on the number of students allowed to charter school.
Free markets work.
We do not have the problems you claim with fast food.
We do not have them because FREE MARKETS WORK.
We have billions of examples all over the world, over the past 300+ years.
Your spitting into the wind.
One of your problems is that you do not understand trust, or understand people.
Free Markets work and work well – specifically because their design and evolution is a centuries long effort to match them to people.
“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages”
― Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature & Causes of the Wealth of Nations
Free markets only exist, and only work because both parties in a voluntary exchange beleive they will be better off after the exchange.
Every exchange in a free market must be a win win or no exchange occurs.
I suggest an experiment to you.
Go to the dollar store and buy $50 in $1 items – anything, a random collection.
Get 10 people. Give each of them 5 items at random.
Get each person to value each item – what it is worth to them on a scale of 1-10.
Then give everyone 30 minutes to trade itmes if they wish.
After the trade period is over – get them to revlaue the items they have.
I will bet that almost everyone will have a higher value after exchange.
Humans do not all want the same thing to the same extent,
and we trade what we want less for what we want more.
As an example we trade an hours labor for a hamburger.
We do this freely and we are better off.
“Voucher systems undermine public education”
Good, private education is better.
“and allow for fraud and lack of accountability”
Schools are accountable to parents. If parents are not happy they can go to another school.
The entire purpose is to make schools accountable to PARENTS – not the state.
“when there are weak laws scrutinizing private schools.”
Good, we do not need laws scrutinizing free exchange. it is self regulating.
“If public funds are used in a private school the same accountability standards should apply.”
Then lets get rid of school taxes and let parents pay directly.
Regardless, I do not aggree – when the government gives you social security – do they get to dictate how you spend it ?
“Many private schools choose not to accept vouchers in order of be more independent on their choices and keep government watchdogs from intruding into their programs.”
False, regardless – get rid of the government watchdogs. They are an unnecescary cost and inefficincy.
Schools are accountable to PARENTS.
That is the problem we are trying to solve.
If you want to send your child to Gender Rainbow Woke HS – your choice.
If your neighbor wants to send their child to Joseph Smith Elementary – their choice.
No more fights over who is banning what.
Left wing nuts parents get to control the schools they send their kids to.
The rest of us can focus on actually preparing our kids for a better future.
Regardless, neither the left nor the right nor the flavors in the middle get to dictate to everyone.
This is how free markets work – and we have LOTS of evidence they work REALLY REALLY well.
If you need clarification – go to the breakfast aidle in your grogery store.
A dozen brands of plain old corn flakes, Plus everything else you can imaging.
If you want cruelty free fair trade, organic high fiber vegan Kaschi – they got it.
Before you pick up a box of cereal do you ask yourself “Is General Mills engaging in Fraud ?”
Probably not, but if you ask that – you can selct a different cereal.
Years ago there was a very high profile news story because someone was tempering with Tylenol to poison people.
Johnson & Johnson sales tanked. They discussed removing Tylenol from the market.
Within Weeks J&J came out with tamper proof seals – no regulation involved.
J&J recongnized they needed to get their customers to trust their product again – despite the fact that the problem was NOTY of their making.
Subsequently tamper proof seals are now the norm on most food and medicine. It is possible there is now regulation on this.
But the changes were lightyears ahead of the regulation.
The FACT is Free Markets need very little in the way of regulation.
Some of the worst frauds in the country are not because consumers got hodwinked by a charleton.
But because they trusted regulators.
Bernie Maddof had been reviewed by the SEC repeatedly. Many people doubted his promises – but invested anyway – Because the SEC gave him a clean bill of heatlh.
“Schools are accountable to parents. If parents are not happy they can go to another school.”
Again, it’s much easier said than done. Free market ideas often run into problems when put into practice. The ease of changing schools is highly dependent on the assumption that there will be enough schools to choose from. Another school may not be close enough to work for a family. A school may only accept students they want. Others may be full, etc. these choices are then no longer as convenient as it seems on paper.
Free market does a lousy job of regulating itself. The housing bubble and the financial disaster that ensued was due to the reliance on the market to self regulate. Obviously it didn’t work.
What about students in rural areas? They don’t have the choices that urban students have. The free market doesn’t incentivize private charters to setup shop in rural areas unless they are heavily subsidized.
“Some of the worst frauds in the country are not because consumers got hodwinked by a charleton.
But because they trusted regulators.”
Nope. Because they trusted those who were intent on manipulating the market to their advantage because lack of regulation allows it.
The idea of the free market self regulating is a myth. If that were true the GameStop spectacle would have been allowed to decimate the multibillion dollar hedge funds that were looking at losing billions to Reddit investors. They stopped the trades because those free market advocates suddenly didn’t like the idea of facing the reality of what the free market really does.
“Again, it’s much easier said than done. Free market ideas often run into problems when put into practice. ”
Nope, they do not. We have had free markets for atleast 300 years. They have worked unbeleivably well.
Nothing ever has come close.
They do not need any regulation at all – beyond nornmal, criminal, contract and tort law.
They work in countries with massive regulation – they work in countries with no regulation.
They work in countries where the rule of law is weak.
They work BEST where the rule of law is strong, and there is little or no regulation.
Should you bother to aquaint yourself with probably over 100,000 economic studies of this done over the past 75+ years
the results are rock solid.
“The ease of changing schools is highly dependent on the assumption that there will be enough schools to choose from. ”
Of course there will. This is an idiotic claim.
Are there enough fast food resturaunts ?
What people need and want – free markets will provide, at better quality and lower price than anything else EVER.
“Another school may not be close enough to work for a family.”
Cyber charter, Or your neighbor can open a school in their home.
“A school may only accept students they want. ”
I post as JBSay – that is from John Batiste Say – the economist who first expressed “Say’s law” otherwise known as
The law of supply and Demand.
All modern economics – even flawed keynesian economics accepts says law as GOSPEL.
Where there is sufficient demand – and it is humanly possible free markets will supply that demand PERIOD.
“Others may be full, etc.”
“these choices are then no longer as convenient as it seems on paper.”
If there is a real shortage of charter schools – I will personally invest and open some charter schools.
That is how markets work
“Free market does a lousy job of regulating itself.”
Left wing nut marxist BS with ZERO support in Fact.
Throughout the world functional free markets exist in places with ZERO regulation.
They have also existed in the US in the Past without regulation.
Nor is there an actual example of any regulation anywhere ever actually working.
As an example – the US passed laws requiring safetybelts in cars.
Go look at the DATA on highway traffic deaths – show me the pronounced drop in highway deaths that occured as a result of seat belt regulations ? THERE IS NONE.
Product safety, workplace safety are all driven by ONE AND ONLY ONE thing – in the US over time, and accross the world.
And that is STANDARD of LIVING.
The higher our standard of living, the more we care about safety (and Quality) and the more we make purchasing and working decisions accordingly. The higher our standard of living the more valuable workers are, the more valuable employers treat them.
Factory safety in the US today is not driven by OSHA – it is driven by the losses that occur if a worker is injured or a production line is shutdown.
“The housing bubble and the financial disaster that ensued was due to the reliance on the market to self regulate.”
Nope, ALL asset bubbles are the result of bad monetary policy artificially reducing the price of credit.
Look at the stupidity that was passed – Dodd-Frank to address this. There is absolutely nothing in the laws passed as a result of the financial crisis and housing bubble that had anything to do with the financial crisis or housing bubble.
The Congress regulated payday lenders and other completely unrelated things.
They did NOTHING to regulate mortgages, or housing.
Why ? Because it is not the markets that F’d up – it is Government – primarily the Federal Reserve.
We are seeing something similar RIGHT NOW – with inflation.
Anytime the price of anything rises rapidly and disproportionately to its actual value – you can be absolutely certain there is a MONETARY – aka GOVERNMENT cause.
The Great depression was NOT caused by stock purchases on the margins – that was ALWAYS total idiocy
The 1929 stock market crashed for pretty much the same reason they housing bubble burst.
Too much credit too cheap caused rising prices and production – beyond anything that was sustainable in the markets.
In 1929 the market tanked because the US had built factories capable of producing far more than people could consume.
They did this because the FED kept interest rates artificially low through the 20’s.
There was a similar – though smaller bubble in housing.
We have seen similar bubbles all over the place and throughout history – including modern history.
The good news is that MOST of those are not in fixed assets.
The tech bubble bursting was bigger than the housing bubble bursting, but caused only ripples in the market.
Lots of tech stocks tanking does little economic harm.
As left wing nuts note – Musk losts 200B in the past year – more than half his worth, as did Zuckerberg and most of the Tech Billionaries.
Did that ruin the economy ? Nope.
But when GOVERNMENT policies – monetary and otherwise create a bubble in a long term fixed asset – like factories and houses.
The impact is painful.
You need not belive anything I am saying – Milton Friedman is considered the best economist on the causes of the great depression – Monetary – just like the housing bubble.
But if you do not like Friedman – how will Obama’s Cheif Economic advisor – Christine Romer work for you ?
Th markets did not cause the housing bubble or the financial crisis – Government did.
In FACT most of the things that were blamed – securitization, CDO’s CDS’s, …. actually mitigated the harm.
Have you ever wonders why no Bank agreed to TARP I – government buying all their MBS’s ?
Have you ever wondered why even though AIG had MASSIVE exposure – through CDS;s and CDO’s that it NEVER was in actual financial trouble – because no bank EVER tried to collect on the CDS’s and CDO’s – because they were just a private version of TARP I – banks give AIG their MBS’s and AIG gives the banks money.
Why is it that not a single financial institution agree to seel their MBS’s – not to the Treasury, not to AIG ?
Why is it that AIG never needed actual money and paid off the loans that were forced on it in no time at all – as did ALL banks.
Because there was no actual free market “financial crisis” – the FAILURE was a GOVERNMENT failure.
We are also in the midst of similar problems all over the world RIGHT NOW.
Pakistan is on the verge of economic collapse – Government economic mismanagement.
Turkey has runaway inflation that makes what we have here look trivial – govenrment monetary mismanagement.
China has an atleast 28T housing bubble that is bursting – as a result of all kinds of Government economic management errors.
Japan has one of the most government managed economies in the world – 0% growth for 3 decades and then are likely headed into very severe economic problems.
“Obviously it didn’t work.”
Obiously you are unfamiliar with reality.
“What about students in rural areas? They don’t have the choices that urban students have.”
Why not ? In my community the Amish run their own schools and have for over a century – completely rural.
My kids were cyber chartered.
You make up problems and pretend they have no solutions.
The FACT is that if those problems involve something people WANT an NEED, and we have a standard of living capable of affording them – they will be solved by Free markets.
Does everyone in Rural areas Starve ? Don;t they have cars ? Cloths ?
How is it that Rural communities – you know the ones that have dominated the world for all of human existance – survive without massive government assistance ?
How do they heat their homes ?
They must all be out there dying.
“The free market doesn’t incentivize private charters to setup shop in rural areas unless they are heavily subsidized.”
Then why is it that rural states have successful charter programs ?
“”Some of the worst frauds in the country are not because consumers got hodwinked by a charleton.
But because they trusted regulators.”bviously you are unfamiliar with FACTS
Nope. Because they trusted those who were intent on manipulating the market to their advantage because lack of regulation allows it.”
Maddoff did not manipuate the market.
Even Ponzi – who gave his name to the infamous ponzi scheme – even though his schem was NOT a ponzi scheme – did not manipulate the market.
This is another idiotic left wing nut Claim – NO ONE successfully manipulates an actual free market.
George Sorros got fabulously rich be Grasping that the Bank opf England was “manipulating the market” and betting against them.
The Infamous JP Morgan “whale” tried to manipulate the market – with Billions and Billions of JP Morgan funds at his disposal.
As a result Morgan LOST Billions – because some tiny hedge find managers in the mid west realized that somebody was manipulating the market, bet against him and were joined by others – and the Whale LOST.
You can not successfully manipulate an actual free market – Because it is Free,
When you try to deliberately push the market in your favor divorced from underlying reality you create the oportunity for those who grasp that the market is being manipulated to make a killing.
“The idea of the free market self regulating is a myth.”
“If that were true the GameStop spectacle would have been allowed to decimate the multibillion dollar hedge funds that were looking at losing billions to Reddit investors. They stopped the trades because those free market advocates suddenly didn’t like the idea of facing the reality of what the free market really does.”
So your argument is that because government stepped in and did something that you do not like – that markets do not work is a very strange argument.
With respect to the specific that you are ranting about – GameStop has an ACTUAL value. Whoever was closest to correct regarding that value – the Redditor or the Hedge Funds would have ultimately prevailed if the market was left alone.
I do not know who that was – nor do I care. Whether you are a hedge fund or part of some Redit group of investors,
If you value a stock properly – you will profit. If you calue it incorrectly you will not.
Free markets do not guarantee that everyone makes money all the time.
Markets punish people who make mistakes – that is how we learn.
And reward those who get things right.
It is not possible for government to interfere in this process benefitically – because that presumes that govenrment actually knows what the correct answer is.
One of the most fundimental reasons that economic regulation is BAD, is specifically because of that problem.
It is called the “knowledge problem” or sometimes the price problem, it is why all forms of socialism fail.
The value of ANYTHING is what a willing buyer and a willing sellor agree to.
That is the ONLY value that anything in existance has.
Value is determined by humans and ONLY in the process of free exchange.
Governments do not know – and can not know the value of anything. This is one of the many reasons all price controls fail.
Even individuals do not know, but they can “bet” that they know.
The actual value is determined BY THE MARKETS
Free markets are the 8Billion people in the world all acting concurrently.
They set the value of EVERYTHING.
The knowledge of prices is the constantly changing judgement of 8B people acting in the market.
No government can know the value. Individuals make their best guess – and profit if they are correct.
That is not something you can regulate correctly – even if you wanted to.
“IT’S THE [CONSTITUTION], STUPID!”
– JAMES CARVILLE
If federal, state and local law enforcement stopped crime absolutely, there would be no unions.
The only “bargaining chip” of unions is violence and threats of violence.
Unions are illegal and unconstitutional criminal organizations.
Congress has the power to tax for ONLY debt, defense and general Welfare (not individual, specific, particular welfare, favor or charity), aka infrastructure.
Congress cannot fund education or maintain an unconstitutional Dept. of Education, or Dept. of Labor, etc., incidentally.
All education is local – powers not provided to the federal government or prohibited States are reserved TO THE PEOPLE or to the States.
Certainly, the private sector can and does provide education to people.
That should take care of the issue.
“I oppose laws prohibiting certain theories from being taught in universities, but I also believe academics can no longer show open contempt for the half of this country with conservative, libertarian or independent views.”
Funny, I’ve never seen Turley writing a column criticizing Florida’s anti-WOKE act. Which does exactly that. Even now they are considering restricting the teaching of those theories in higher education. Those that show contempt for conservative or libertarian views is part of the discourse that develops with free speech. Just as there are those who show contempt for liberal or progressive views. Turley has been not been as critical as he should be when conservatives engage in the same tactics against those who hold progressive and liberal views.
These ideas for school choice and letting parents choose sound great on paper, but the reality is far more problematic and not as practical as it seems. There is a reason why Teachers and school boards have the attitude they do towards parent’s when it comes to education. Many parent’s are truly clueless about what their children need and what society needs of them, but those who advocate for parent’s to have a choice are not being told the whole story regarding those ideas. Many states have implemented school choice into law allocating public funds for private schools and for profit charters. Two of those are Florida and Oklahoma.
What school choice advocates don’t tell you is that many of those programs have resulted in fraud and embezzlement and their children left worse off than they were. Oklahoma experienced a massive school funding fraud scandal involving a charter school operator that swindled tens of millions of dollars from taxpayers and those parents.
“The founders of Epic Charter Schools have been arrested and charged with bilking Oklahoma’s largest school system out of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars by enrolling ghost students, falsifying invoices and fraudulently using credit cards paid for with school funds to cover personal and out-of-state charter school expenses and even political contributions.
Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater on Thursday filed the racketeering case against David Chaney, 43, and Ben Harris, 46, after a years-long probe by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation and a damning October 2020 investigative audit by the state auditor and inspector.”
Many of these laws lack strict oversight of these companies and private schools and most of those advocating for school choice are enabling those kinds of fraudulent endeavors to flourish.
Florida is not exception either,
“Leslie Postal and Annie Martin wrote about Winners Primary School in Orange County, which recently changed its name to Providence Christian Preparatory School:
The job applicant hoped to teach fourth grade at Winners Primary School, a small private school in west Orange County. She didn’t have a college degree and her last job was at a child care center, which fired her.
“Terminated would not rehire,” read the reference check form from the daycare.
Since 2018, the school, dependent on state scholarships for most of its income, has hired at least three other teachers with red flags in their employment backgrounds and at least 10 other instructors who lacked college degrees, an Orlando Sentinel investigation found.
One Winners teacher — whose only academic credential was his high school diploma — was arrested in November, accused of soliciting sexually explicit videos from a boy in his class. Others have criminal backgrounds or histories of being fired for incompetence in other jobs, the records show. Despite that, the Florida Department of Education recently opened and closed an investigation into the school without taking any action.
The school is constantly hiring because many teachers work there only briefly. With about a dozen teachers on staff, Winners had a teacher turnover rate of 83% between 2019 and 2020.”
Parent’s still don’t have any clue what their kids are going to even with these new school choice laws. These ideas about school choice are being pushed by those wanting to make money off teaching kids the cheapest way possible while getting guaranteed state money just for having kids in their schools. Many of these laws don’t have any accountability or oversight provisions and those that do are rarely enforced. So you have to ask yourself if these claims about parents’ deciding is really a better choice. Parents are being scared into moving their children to these kinds of schools where these companies can make more money on the illusion that these are better than public schools. It’s a false choice.
Many parent’s are truly clueless about what their children need and what society needs of them
Parents are society. Government serves society
40% of students are not reading at grade level. That is under the tutelage of public school teaching. You should be complaining about the Teachers, something you can change, not parents, something that is none of you business.
“Trombetta [PA Cyber CEO] pleaded guilty in August 2016 to conspiring to defraud the Internal Revenue Service from collecting income taxes, siphoning $8 million from the charter school he created to spend on houses, a plane and other luxuries.”
Then there is the waste with materials. Families get new materials every year and are not expected to return things. So, in a family with four kids, they’ll end up with 4 copies of materials for each grade when all is said and done. School districts reuse materials for as many years as possible before replacing it.
Seems like following a “Constitutional” system would be supported by both Republicans and Democrats. Public school officials are a “government entity” governed and restrained by the First Amendment. In this scenario, students are the “citizens” with First Amendment rights that cannot be infringed upon by government officials (public school employees).
All “constitutional” points of view should be heard, including Conservative views, as long as those views don’t violate the U.S. Constitution. Liberals and Progressives shouldn’t violate the First Amendment either.
Currently in 2023, it is legal for any student to wear any religious symbol or tee-shirt to school (unless a school has a uniform policy for all students) but that usually doesn’t apply to jewelry, backpacks, etc. (non-uniform items). What is illegal for any public school, is for public school officials (government entity) to promote any particular religion over other religions onto their students (citizens).
For example: a public school (government entity) could have a poster including all religions plus atheism, but it would be illegal to only show the 10 Commandments but exclude other religions. Under the First Amendment, a public school can’t legally do that.
I think Michelle Leete misspoke and intended to say “our Great Leap Forward.”
Schools are no different than any other industry or service that is in demand. Let market forces prevail and the good will rise to the top and those that fail will go the way of the Dodo.
School board and teachers’ union officials are achieving their white supremacy goal to keep minority children down by removing education standards and teaching them “what society wants them to know”. This way they can deprive minority children of the education they will need to compete and keep them from advancing and improving their lot.
The administrators bring a bunch of this garbage to the table and the school boards probably do not sufficiently debate it, thinking, well, that’s the way society is headed.Or, they miss how such things distort the larger picture of a sound education.
See Learning 2025 from the superintendents’ association.
And, “standards” are rearing their ugly head. So much so that they can essentially just be considered check boxes. Measure what matters garbage, as though only what can be measured equals a good “education”.
Look, everything has been checked off or given a 4 or 3! You have been educated!
White, black, gay, straight. If you wish your child to have a bright future make sure they are well educated in those areas that enable them to produce real value that other people want and need.
All the educational values of the left – if they have any value at all, if they are not net harmful are all at Best – Luxury goods.
They are values that we can afford to have because we are a highly prosperous society.
We do not remain prosperous unless we produce real value and to do that we need the educaion that allows us to produce that value.
If 8th graders are not proficient in math – we will be less able to produce cars, and steel, and homes, and food.
A successful country/society is an educated one.
Woke Leftists are not interested in educated citizens. They want mindless bots, lacking the basics, STEM, critical thinking, objective analysis. They want indoctrination into wokeism.
We need to fight them at all levels.
Here is a video of Jordan Peterson interviewing Temple Grandin on her analysis of the fact that all too soon
We will not be able to maintain our own country.
There is a pattern to progress.
When we are in abject poverty – our efforts are directed exclusively towards food and shelter.
And the value of these is astronomical.
As we prosper – and prosper litterally means we produce better food and shelter more cheaply.
Higher order values become our focus.
Always the most valuable items in a society are luxury goods. Those things we want but do not need.
The more we prosper the more yesterdays luxuries become today’s necessities and their cost declines.
HOWEVER, should something threaten the abundance of ACTUAL necessities, their value will skyrocket.
Whether it is iPhones, or societal acceptance of sexual diversity – these are NOT necescities.
They are are among the luxury goods of the moment.
Any real threat to actual necessities and we will abandon interest in these in an instant.
Aside from the fact that the left’s version of many of these values is bat$hit crazy – even those aspects with merit
are luxuries – not necessities.
The production of luxuries is only profitable if necessities are cheap and abundant.
“”The purpose of a public ed is to not teach kids what the parents want. It is to teach them what society needs them to know.”
And we, your Leftist Overlords, are the Voice of society. Parents are unenlightened serfs, peons — with no access to the Higher Truths that speak to us through our bones and bowels. The Collective (that mysterious force that speaks to us) is everything. You, the individual, are nothing. Silence, peasant. Submit and obey — from cradle to grave.
Still claim that it “can’t happen here?” Once collectivism infects your culture, that tyranny can, and is, happening here.
“”The purpose of a public ed is to not teach kids what the parents want. It is to teach them what society needs them to know.”
I agree with this, in part. To maintain our constitutional republic, a government instituted from amongst men, what do we, as a society, need children to know?
“To maintain our constitutional republic . . .”
That end goal is your first mistake.
The purpose of education is not to craft “good” citizens. Its purpose is to impart a body of knowledge and to teach a student how to think independently.
There are many goals for a good education.
For what purpose is a body of knowledge and the ability to think independently?
One might be to enjoy interesting things for their own sake.
One might be to engage and understand the world, in all its complexity, in a deeper and richer manner.
One might be to understand yourself and others better.
One might be to make yourself more independent–to be able to do useful things and figure things out for yourself instead of having to run to someone else to fix stuff for you all the time.
One might be to self-govern in your own life, to make wise decisions that lead to more long-term successful outcomes–in your home and in relationships with family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues.
One might be to participate helpfully and wisely in your community through your church, civic organizations, or other activities.
One might be to prepare you to participate in the self-governance of your community at the local, State, and Federal level–the element of good and useful citizenry.
One might be to participate productively in work.
I have focused on citizenship lately because that seems to be the one that has not been attended to sufficiently by too many people. Perhaps making yourself independent by learning useful skills is another.
All well and good – but the initial purpose for PUBLIC education was to make better Cannon Fodder.
Much beyond that there is not a legitimate Government Purpose to public education.
Just as there is not a legitimate Government purpose for you to have a car, or a home, or myriads of other things.
“Much beyond that there is not a legitimate Government Purpose to public education.””
I disagree, John.
We are the government, each one of us–we elect representatives from amongst ourselves, we are supposed to communicate with our representatives about the direction of our government. If we want government to reflect our vision of what is in our best interest generally and in the long term, we all need an excellent education to develop as broad an understanding of the world as possible, to develop our ability to think and reason and consider complex ideas and problems that face us as a nation and to try to see through shenanigans, and to develop our own humanity and wisdom, which will aid in our ability to judge what is good and right, not just what is logical.
“All well and good – but the initial purpose for PUBLIC education was to make better Cannon Fodder.”
Why do you say that? That is terribly cynical. I sincerely doubt that was Jefferson’s initial purpose for public education. I’d more readily believe that is the corporatists’ purpose.
“We are the government”
This is a fallacy pushed by Barney Frank long ago.
It is false. That we elect a governement does nto alter the fact that WE are NOT the government – they are.
And They can be very dangerous if not kept constantly in check.
The easiest way to minimize the task of keeping THEM in check is to deny government to domains where government is not necescary.
Government is FORCE.
I have repeated this constantly.
That is a tautology – if force is not necescary – Government is not necescary.
We do not have private armies, provate courts, private police – because these are all applications of FORCE.
If we could incorporate FORCE into free markets without destorying them – we would not need any government at all.
But most of us are not anarchists and accept that SOME tasks require FORCE and therefore must be done by government.
But the converse is also true. Those tasks that do NOT require FORCE shoudl not be part of government.
You say you disagree – fine, but this is more than an opionion. It derives from centuries of experience as well as the development of philosophy, ethics and morality.
When you “disagree” – you are disagreeing with more than just whether schools should be part of government,
You are taking a position on when it is legitimate for us to use FORCE to get our way.
The use of force does not escape the moral requirement for justification just because we have chosen do so through elected officials or through the will of the majority.
“we all need an excellent education to develop as broad an understanding of the world as possible, to develop our ability to think and reason and consider complex ideas and problems that face us as a nation and to try to see through shenanigans, and to develop our own humanity and wisdom, which will aid in our ability to judge what is good and right, not just what is logical.”
So how is it that our founders managed to govern ? There was no public education, and very little education overall.
““All well and good – but the initial purpose for PUBLIC education was to make better Cannon Fodder.”
Why do you say that? That is terribly cynical.”
Because that is quite litterally the actual justification for the German system of public education that the US borrowed.
This goes beyond education.
Nearly all our modern political conflicts are directly or indirectly about issues that are not the business of our neighbor.
I do not care where you fall on the political spectum,
What business is it of yours how I run my life so long as I do not directly harm you ?
If I want to dress up as the oposite sex ?
If I wish to alter my body through surgery or hormones to that of the oposite sex ?
If I wish to pay for Sex ? Drugs ? Alcohol ? Cigarettes ? Sugary Drinks ?
Why are any of these and many others the business of my neighbor ?
Whenever you shift from I to WE you empower others to control YOU, and in the instance of government that control is by FORCE.
I can leave my family, my church, my employer, every other voluntary association where I move from I to We.
“We” are here fighting over CRT and Sexualizing the Kids.
When these are trivial problems so long as they are I problems not WE problems.
“We” do not ever need to agree about what “I” Do.
I cannot find a good argument against Professor Turley’s column. My only point is you have to make all your decisions on a local level because schools vary so much from place to place. I have no problem with teacher’s unions as long as they only can negotiate for certain things like salary, benefits, retirement, but have no input into hiring decisions, or of course selection . All schools should have total transparency of the courses they teach with the available books and websites used. Remove secrecy. Or give the parents and tax payers total control of where they send their children and let competition reign. At this point in time I favor the competition. Also schools will be liable if they fail to uphold the program they are selling. The marketplace can be brutal for those not used to working in it..
As far as Justice Holmes and ATS are concerned, I don’t think we would go back to the time of the inquisition, flat earth, and theocracy. The only thing that approaches theocracy any more is progressive politics which is all encompassing, suppressing free speech and trying to destroy anyone who disagrees. I do not have any problem with tar and feathers, however.
“Also schools will be liable if they fail to uphold the program they are selling. The marketplace can be brutal for those not used to working in it.”
This is an inappropriate way to use taxpayer money.
Taxpayers and parents need to be the check on their local public schools.
They need to talk to their Federal and State reps about the nonsense being imposed on local districts. The ESSER funds, for instance, are a mess.
My only point is you have to make all your decisions on a local level because schools vary so much from place to place.
The government closest to the people is the best government.
There is a reason the Federal govt has limited enumerated powers. Note: Education is not on that short list.
While the Federal Constitution does not have it enumerated, education can be on the list at the local level.