OCR Text |
Show Volume XIV Issue XIV The Ogden Valley news Page 3 April 15, 2007 Guest Commentaries Give Vouchers Serious Consideration Unintended Consequences of House for the Children’s Sake Bill 148—“Education Vouchers” neighborhood schools are only a “The children don’t exist for the schools. fraction of those scores found in more The schools exist for the children. If the affluent schools. children are not learning, our first duty is to help them. If these were failing public • Only 8.6% of low income children in this great nation will attend college. hospitals, would you insist that the poor A problem of this magnitude demands patients stay put while the government serious attention. We would be negligent figures out why so many are dying?” -- T. Willard Fair if we did not explore all possible solutions. The voucher program will benefit Utah faces some unique challenges in thousands of Utah children who silently that it has more students per capita to and anonymously slip through the cracks educate than any other state. The Parent into the ranks of illiteracy and the underChoice in Education Program offers parents educated. This program offers a promise willing to forgo public education the oppor- to rescue many students from this hopeless tunity to send their kids to a private school situation at a relatively low cost. at a fraction of the actual cost to send students to public schools. Although this new • Utah will spend $3.5 billion on public education next year, representing voucher program is not a panacea for all, it $7,500 per student. certainly is a part of the solution. Newspapers in Utah continually report • The $9 million allocated for the voucher bill out of the general fund the inequities in public schools: (NOT the education fund) represents only ¼ of 1% of what we will spend • Dropout rates for Hispanic and other on public education (twice as much is minority children are at 50% or higher. spent DAILY on public education). • Low income students of all ethnicities score drastically below their counterparts • Low income children with the greatest needs will benefit the most by from more affluent families—and the achievement gap is widening. VOUCHER COMMENTARY cont. on page 14 • SAT scores in low income ed by teachers unions and parents with BATTLE cont. from page 1 Pat Rusk at the helm as spokesperson to the voting public. The organization claims they sub- for the organization. Rusk is a teacher mitted about 131,000 names by the and former president of the 18,0005:00 legal deadline, about 40,000 more strong Utah Education Association than needed. The signatures now have (UEA). She states that it took act of to be scrutinized and validated. Early courage to sign the petition because it estimates suggest that about 20 percent challenged Utah’s political culture. While it looks like enough signaof the collected signatures could be distures were collected to put the issue qualified because signers were not regof school vouchers on the ballot, the istered voters. If the petition drive was issue isn’t over. Utah Attorney General successful in collecting enough signaMark Shurtleff has clearly stated that tures, the Parent Choice in Education the issue many not be dead—Pomeroy Act will be put on hold until a formal for Parents for Choice agrees. A legal election, or legal decision, decides its battle now seems inevitable. The issue fate. If the petition drive fails, the is over a second law that was also law will be implemented this fall. The passed by the Utah Legislature earlier Lieutenant Governor’s Office has until 5:00 p.m. on April 30 to count the sig- this year—HB 174. This law amended natures and determine whether the peti- the primary voucher bill, HB 148, and tion was “sufficient” or “insufficient.” can legally stand on its own in allowBATTLE cont. on page 14 Utahns for Public Schools is support- Make Mother’s Day Special Dine with us. Hours: 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. 3 p.m. to 8 p.m. Reservations required. 508 Ogden Canyon,Ogden, UT 392-6775 By Michelle Evans, Sixth Grade Teacher, Valley Elementary With your tax dollars, a voucher school could grant enrollment preference to a student based on socioeconomic status, expel students if they do not achieve a certain minimum score on a standardized test, reject a student if the student does not achieve a minimum score on a preassessment as determined or created by the school’s owners, reject students if they have a specific medical condition, such as ADHD or childhood depression, reject a student based on height, weight, or physical ability, deny a student enrollment if the student has a learning disability, remove a student that the owners or an influential donor do not like, expel a student to make room for another student whose parents make a large donation to the school, grant enrollment preference to a student based on proximity to the school, immediately expel a student with or without cause without specifying the reason and without due process of any kind, require family-funded extracurricular activities or out-of-state school trips as a requirement for enrollment, require that parents earn a minimum income, such as $100,000 per year, prior to accepting their children, and require that parents submit to a credit check and require parents to pay for it. With your tax dollars, a voucher school which becomes dependent on voucher funds and then receives a reduction in funds due to legislative action in an economic downturn can require the difference to be paid for by the parents, placing a significant unforeseen burden on families with tight budgets. A voucher school could auction or sell open seats to the highest bidder, hire unlicensed or unqualified teachers, require teachers to sign a loyalty oath, forbidding them from discussing school operations or face financial penalties and/or termination, teach students specific religious philosophies, teach that members of other races or religions are inferior, sell religious books, videos, or software directly to students at significant markup, with the inventory of such materials to be paid for by voucher funds, could require students to make denominational pledges of allegiance (e.g., “I pledge allegiance to the Christian flag”) and expel students who refuse. A voucher school could expel a child for refusing to pray, advocate specific ideologies such as socialism or communism, operate in a building that is unsafe in an earthquake, hire convicted felons, be operated by convicted felons, allow children to browse the web without an Internet filter, hold every single board meeting closed to the public, deny access to all visitors, including district and state officials as well as the parents themselves. With your tax dollars, a voucher school’s parents could be banned from meeting the owners of the school or even knowing who the owners are. With your tax dollars, a voucher school could mandate that all disputes be resolved with binding arbitration, deny all GRAMA requests made by parents or state officials as they are not subject to Utah sunshine laws, and force legislators to appropriate additional money not covered by this bill to provide for oversight costs already being encountered in other voucher implementations such as Florida or Milwaukee. With your tax dollars, a voucher school could change its mission or focus with absolutely no input or discussion from parents or teachers. If the parents don’t like it their only recourse is to “vote with their feet” and leave. A voucher school could COMMENTARY cont. on page 14 |