Reason Writers Around Town: Shikha Dalmia on Obama's Hypocrisy on D.C. School Vouchers

At Forbes, Reason Foundation Senior Analyst Shikha Dalmia wonders why President Obama nixed Washington, D.C.'s school voucher program just as positive results were coming in.

Read all about it here. 

Comments

[bubba]

maybe he nixed it *because* positive results were coming in?

[spambot]

If he has such a high opinion of the DC public schools why doesn't he send his kids there?

Just asking.

[Mike in PA]

It's sad that we have to provide vouchers in order to have school choice, but it's horrific that these kids that were using these vouchers as a way to escape the violence and stupidity of government schools are now going to be forced back into them just for the sake of keeping the union money flowing into the coffers of corrupt politicians.

*How's that for a sentence? 😉

[Blossom]

Change the third "that" into "who" and you might just have something.

[Blossom]

Wher in PA, Mike? I used to live in Lancaster, Woodward and Red Lion.

[JP]

Good article.

[LarryA]

"Look for the union lable"

[crrech]

My pro-obama colleagues say that the reason his kids are going to private school is simply that the security is easier there and, thus, the taxpayers aren't paying as much as if the girls had to be guarded in public school. That's their argument and they are sticking to it.

[R C Dean]

My pro-obama colleagues say that the reason his kids are going to private school is simply that the security is easier there and, thus, the taxpayers aren't paying as much as if the girls had to be guarded in public school. That's their argument and they are sticking to it.

Ask them why, since security such an overriding concern, the Obama kids aren't being homeschooled.

[Mike in PA]

Blossom, Butler, PA - other side of the state. Might as well be a different country.

[raivo pommer-www.google.ee]

raivo pommer-www.google.ee
[e-mail]

PIRATE BAY

Ein schwedisches Gericht hat die Betreiber der Internet-Tauschb?rsen-Website The Pirate Bay wegen Verletzung des Urheberrechts verurteilt. Die vier Angeklagten wurden zu einj?hrigen Haftstrafen verurteilt. Au?erdem m?ssen sie Schadenersatz in H?he von 30 Millionen Kronen (2,74 Millionen Euro) an verschiedene Musik- und Filmunternehmen zahlen, darunter Warner Bros, Sony Music Entertainment, EMI und Columbia Pictures. Schon vor dem Urteil hatten die Angeklagten angek?ndigt, im Falle eines Schuldspruchs in die Berufung zu gehen.

Den Betreibern von The Pirate Bay wurde vorgeworfen, Millionen Internetnutzern ein Forum f?r den kostenlosen Download von Musik, Filmen und Computerspielen geboten und sie damit ermutigt zu haben, Urheberrechte zu verletzen. Die Angeklagten - Gottfrid Svartholm Warg, Peter Sunde, Fredrik Neij und ihr Finanzier Carl Lundstr?m - verwiesen darauf, dass die Website selbst kein urheberrechtlich gesch?tztes Material zum Download bereitgehalten habe. Sie vermittle lediglich entsprechende Verbindungen. Die Verteidigung pl?dierte daher auf Freispruch.

[catMozes]

"My pro-obama colleagues say that the reason his kids are going to private school is simply that the security is easier there and, thus, the taxpayers aren't paying as much as if the girls had to be guarded in public school. That's their argument and they are sticking to it."

So take the public schools (the kids) to Sidwell. Start a voucher program if they can't afford it.

[prolefeed]

Perhaps hard-bitten cynics aren't surprised by the quiet ruthlessness with which this administration has deep-sixed a popular D.C. school voucher program.

Shikia, you don't need to be cynical to suspect that someone who is pwned by the teachers' unions is gonna do their bidding and kill their competitors. Really, you have to be a naive liberal thinking Obama is Teh Good to expect anything else.

[brotherben]

So all that talk hereabouts saying rich folk can do what they want only applies to the wealthy people you happen to agree with?

[Joel]

If he has such a high opinion of the DC public schools why doesn't he send his kids there?

Now, that's just crazy talk. Clearly you are a terrorist.

[prolefeed]

My pro-obama colleagues say that the reason his kids are going to private school is simply that the security is easier there and, thus, the taxpayers aren't paying as much as if the girls had to be guarded in public school. That's their argument and they are sticking to it.

Ask them why, since security such an overriding concern, the Obama kids aren't being homeschooled.

A prolonged belly laugh is the best rebuttal to this ridiculous argument. Sometimes you have to embarrass people who parrot such complete BS rather than employing logic.

[libertarian democrat]

As much as I loathe Obama for the end of the voucher progarm, I find it quite reasonable for the president's kids to be in private school. There is an issue of security, seriously.

I hate when people argue that ideas aren't serious, but ignoring the potential differences in sending clear targets into dangerous schools vs a private school isn't serious. Let's be realistic here. He may be screwing tons of kids, but even a better, average, public school probably isn't an appropriate place for children of high-profile, polarizing individuals.

There's no good reason to end the voucher program, but I really don't think there is anything but a political reason to consider sending the kids to public school.

[Dee]

"Ask them why, since security such an overriding concern, the Obama kids aren't being homeschooled."

Well they sure as hell wouldn't learn anything at home if either of their parents had to be the teacher. What would they offer classes in Community Shake Down Operations, Name Changing Skills so no one can figure out where exactly you came from? They could teach how to get your spouse a job as a hospital director after using tax payer money as pork for same hospital.

Something tells me with the scores coming out of DC that if nothing was mentioned about them being Obama's kids none of the other kids would even know who they are. Just a couple more black kids in the DC school system, they would blend right in. Of course they wouldn't learn shit but hey if not learning anything is good enough for the public children it should be good enough for Obama.

[Mike in PA]

libertarian democrat,

Did you really just say the President may be screwing tons of kids?

Is he learning from Bill Clinton?!

[B]

Wonders why? Christ that "essay" would be two fucking words: the unions.

[Barack Obama]

If he has such a high opinion of the DC public schools why doesn't he send his kids there?

Be quiet, you little peon.

[Mad Max]

Let me reiterate that President Obama is a husband and father before he is a President, and that it is an unambiguously good thing that he makes decisions about his daughters' education based on *their* interests, not political expediency.

If Obama were to be "consistent" and send his daughters to public DC schools, that would make his attitudes *worse,* not better. It's one thing to mess with the education of other people's children because of politics, but to mess with the education of *his* children would make him a much worse person than he is.

[PETE]

Can anyone recommend a good primer on vouchers from the libertarian perspective? I don't know a whole lot about this issue.

Obviously, being the commie librul that I am, I read this: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0804.anrig.html

Interesting critique on why the vouchers movement has lost steam. Still seems like a decent idea though. I'll have to read about the DC program.

[R C Dean]

Let me reiterate that President Obama is a husband and father before he is a President, and that it is an unambiguously good thing that he makes decisions about his daughters' education based on *their* interests, not political expediency.

I agree with that. So, having recognized in the most definite terms that the DC schools are deficient, and that alternatives to those schools are in the best interest of the children, why is he killing the voucher program?

[Mike M.]

My pro-Obama colleagues say that the reason his kids are going to private school is simply that the security is easier there and, thus, the taxpayers aren't paying as much as if the girls had to be guarded in public school. That's their argument and they are sticking to it.

Ask your colleagues why the kids were going to the University of Chicago Lab School well before the family ever got a Secret Service security detail.

[crimethink]

So all that talk hereabouts saying rich folk can do what they want only applies to the wealthy people you happen to agree with?

I don't think anyone here has ever said that wealthy people can't be criticized for doing what they want. Especially when doing what they want shows that their true opinions of an issue are at odds with what they say publicly.

[crimethink]

thus, the taxpayers aren't paying as much as if the girls had to be guarded in public school.

Wouldn't this provide a much-needed stimulus for the DC economy? But if making taxpayers pay for shit that's not needed is a concern of Obama's, couldn't he pay for the security himself?

He may be screwing tons of kids, but even a better, average, public school probably isn't an appropriate place for children of high-profile, polarizing individuals.

I'm really not understanding how the "publicness" of a school inherently makes it less safe than a private school. There are some pretty rough kids (with rich parents of course) even at the best private schools.

Not saying that the DC public schools are safe by any stretch of the imagination, but Obama apparently thinks they're good enough for everyone else in DC.

[Chad]

What always bugs me about the teacher's unions with respect to this matter is that they don't realize that THEY SHOULD LOSE A TIE.

Even if vouchers or charters provide only the SAME education for the SAME price as regular public schools, then we should support these programs, as they allow more choice at no cost. The data is fairly ambiguous, either showing modest gains or none, and total costs that are similar or slightly less. But either way, the data NEVER shows worse education or higher costs. Therefore, we have won the debate.

[BakedPenguin]

This was obviously one of the wasteful programs he promised to cut.

[Evil Alternate Universe Chad]

What bugs me about these (free-market fundies) with respect to this matter is that they don't realize that THEY SHOULD LOSE A TIE.

Even if (the stimulus package) provides only the SAME (economic growth) for (HIGHER PUBLIC DEBT) as (leaving the market to right itself), then we should support it, as it (allows government social engineering). The data is fairly ambiguous, either showing modest gains or none, and total costs that are similar or (significantly more). But either way the data NEVER shows (lower growth). Therefore, the pro-stimulus has won the debate. Fuck you free-market libertardians.