Letters

From the December 2001 issue

(Page 2 of 5)

Rob Jenkins
Lawrenceville, GA

While at my children's school registration, I had to complete an Emergency Contact Form. I noticed that, for the first time, it has a spot for cell phones.

My peers in the mortgage processing business have been busy reformatting interest rate calculations, reports, and systems to translate between American currency and European currency. Meanwhile, my kid's school just made a leap to acknowledge cell phones -- kind of. You see, the fifth grade teacher said she thought cell phone use was a sign of self-importance. This is the person preparing my child to join the global economy 10 years from now?

Lynne Sommer
Jacksonville, FL

To Lisa Snell, it seems that choice in schooling can only exist if government provides it. After complaining that her local government schools are low-performing (surprise, socialism doesn't work), she complains that her "only options are relocation, home schooling, or...investment of a small fortune in private school tuition."

This sounds like a fine set of choices. In reality, Snell's complaint is that the improvement in her child's education from one of these alternatives is not worth the cost to obtain it. She wishes the state would reduce the cost/benefit gap with a voucher. The voucher movement is not talking about choice per se, but government subsidized choice. As Snell implicitly acknowledges, the market is already providing school choice. In most locations there are numerous private school options and they don't all cost "a small fortune." In the Raleigh, N.C., area, for example, tuition ranges from $2,000 to $10,000 a year. Even in the relatively expensive suburban Washington, D.C., area, there are private schools with tuition as low as $4,000 to $5,000. Parents often pay more than this for pre-school or daycare.

If parents don't think their children's education is worth the cost associated with private or home schooling, then the government already provides them with one cheap out -- that's more than enough.

Roy Cordato
Angier, NC

Lisa Snell replies: While I applaud the incremental reforms that Gov. Bush has implemented in Florida, politicians discount the trials and tribulations of parents who actually have to enroll their children in failing schools.

As for a realistic alternative, give parents the right to exit to a better-performing public school. Open enrollment between public schools should not be optional.

Robert Holland is right -- for a few lucky parents, there are a few more modest choices. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of vouchers, there should be more grassroots school-choice experiments.

I identify and sympathize with Susan Sarhady and Lynne Sommer. Yes, these are the people preparing our children for the global economy. Rob Jenkins is right on target, but until you give parents the opportunity to exit the public schools in a cost-effective manner, most parents will continue to shrug off the responsibility for their children's education.

Finally, Roy Cordato is partly right. The three choices are a "fine set of choices" for some parents. My son Jacob is enrolled in a small high-quality private school. I can afford to pay twice. Too bad all the other El Cerrito Elementary school parents cannot afford to pay twice and leave the school and its 36th percentile reading scores.

Criminal Profiling

Gene Callahan and William Anderson's otherwise excellent article, "The Roots of Racial Profiling" (August/September), failed to expose the role of race in America's first drug laws. Drug war apologists typically describe the disproportionate impact on minorities as "unintended consequences." That's not entirely true. The Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 was preceded by a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment. Opium was identified with Chinese laborers, marijuana with Mexicans, and cocaine with African-Americans.

Comments

nfl jerseys|11.14.10 @ 7:36PM|#

xrgf