Jacob Sullum | May 14, 2008
Former Washington, D.C., mayor and current D.C. Council Member Marion Barry comes out in favor of school vouchers, provided the money does not come from the existing public school budget. That proviso relieves much of the competitive pressure that otherwise might encourage public schools to improve, but at least Barry acknowledges the desirability of choice and diversity in education:
I support this package [$74 million in federal money for public schools, charter schools, and private school scholarships] because it provides much-needed financial support to all D.C. schools and because it offers parents a choice without hurting public schools. That's a win-win situation. We must make sure that children in the District are given every chance to attend schools that work for them. To do anything else is wrong.
Is it too much to hope that, if voucher-equipped students leave D.C.'s public schools in droves, the reduced enrollment will one day lead to a lower budget? The Cato Institute's Andrew Coulson estimates that "DC public schools are spending about $24,600 per pupil this school year—roughly $10,000 more than the average for area private schools."
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
"DC public schools are spending about $24,600 per pupil this
school year-roughly $10,000 more than the average for area private
schools."
Metal detectors ain't cheap.
...$24,600 per pupil this school year-roughly $10,000 more
than the average
Oooohhh. Those students in DC must be extra smart by now.
It'd be more cost-effective to just enroll every kid in private school!
Is it too much to hope that, if voucher-equipped students
leave D.C.'s public schools in droves, the reduced enrollment will
one day lead to a lower budget?
$74 million will only support about 5,000 students. Once they leave
public schools will apply for a tax increase, claiming that the
remaining students will be the hard-to-teach ones.
Is it too much to hope that, if voucher-equipped students
leave D.C.'s public schools in droves, the reduced enrollment will
one day lead to a lower budget?
This is Washington D.C.
Of course it's too much to hope,
That proviso relieves much of the competitive pressure that
otherwise might encourage public schools to improve,
Maybe, maybe not.
But like the starfish parable, it improve the lot of $74 mil /
($25K / 1 student) = about 3000 kids.
I love the fact that the FBI thought they had ruined Marion Barry's political career with that sting operation. The Feds couldn't understand that the D.C. residents saw it for what it really was, railroading a black politician. I remember being in D.C. not long after it happened there were street vendors all over the city selling t-shirts calling the prostitute a bitch for setting him up.
Do I dare click on a link up top to the NEA's website called
"The truth about vouchers"? Yes I do.
What an adorable little group. Nothing brings out the best and most
honest political discussion like people feeling their livelihood is
being threatened.
School vouchers could also help end the debate about evolution vs. creationism being taught in public schools.
It'd be more cost-effective to just enroll every kid in
private school!
If the goal were education, sure. The goal of public schooling
however, is indoctrination and patronage.
-jcr
Sort of like the post office - the more kiosks (less cusomized delivery), the more the price of postage goes up. Government can have some pretty perverse incentives.
The sad thing about the FBI's attempt to railroad Barry on a
drug charge, is that they were too goddamned lazy to build the case
and bust him for the corruption he was up to his eyeballs in. His
right-hand man, Ivanhoe Donaldson (no kidding, that was the perp's
name) got busted for taking kickbacks on city contracts. Displaying
a stunning level of incompetence, the FBI agents involved assumed
that if they caught him with drugs, then he'd have no support at
all from the public.
-jcr
"DC public schools are spending about $24,600 per pupil this
school year-roughly $10,000 more than the average for area private
schools."
As I recall, the number for Catholic schools was around $3,000 pp,
and they had some of the highest test scores in the country whiie
DC public schools have some of the worst.
Pols need to get out of the pockets of the teachers' unions. Like
the charter school guy in the Drew Carey video said, we don't build
schools for the teachers.
Pols need to get out of the pockets of the teachers'
unions.
Pockets? Never heard it called that before.
-jcr
As I recall, the number for Catholic schools was around $3,000 pp,
and they had some of the highest test scores in the country whiie
DC public schools have some of the worst.
No, it's higher than that, but DC is about to get much worse as
they're taking on a $3B improvement program for their
infrastructure.
Of course, now that they know they have not only lead contaminated
Astroturf but also arsenic
in their natural grass playing fields, maybe the cost will go
higher still.
provided the money does not come from the existing public
school budget.
On a related note, I am in favor of having a Porche as long as it
does not in any way affect my ability to pay for my Saturn.
I don't mind paying extra at the post office to use kiosks. It
is much more convenient and I DO NOT WANT to see or deal with
postal employees.
I also choose to use grocery stores ( plus hardware and other
stores) that use self-checkout. Again, it makes a much better
shopping experience.
I would gladly pay more for education if it means less/no teachers
( who pretty much serve the same purpose as a cashier).
Public school teachers aren't bad people, they're just not very
bright. They want complete control over every aspect of the school,
including pay, hours, number of children per teacher, school
building projects, etc.
Example:
They generally agree that teachers need to be paid more because
it's better for children because you get better qualified people
applying to be teachers. Oh but heavens, keep us tenured people on
but give us the same pay increase, even if there is someone better
than us who would take the job.
Disclosure: My mom is a school teacher.
It really screwed the country in unexpected ways when women were
allowed to work in every profession. Up to the 1970s, you basically
had restricted the top IQ members of half the population to either
teaching or nursing. By allowing them to become doctors, CEOs, or
whatever else they wanted, we got the bottom of the barrel for
teachers and nursing, while costs shot way up.
I thinks it's getting better.
$74 million will only support about 5,000 students. Once they
leave public schools will apply for a tax increase, claiming that
the remaining students will be the hard-to-teach ones.
The ones left will be the harder to teach ones, generally speaking.
However, that doesn't justify a tax increase.
Public school will become a school of last resort for students with
family/behavior/fill in the blank problems. Maybe that does cost
more money. That doesn't bother me. Let the easy to educate kids
make up the difference and it should work out.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245