Education Freedom Wins Big in Arizona
Instead of being attached to public schools, funding follows students to learning options they choose.

Arizona came closer to the important goal of separating education and state with the defeat of a ballot challenge to a recently adopted school-choice law. In June, the state legislature voted to allow education funding to be used for whatever learning path best suits individual children, not just to support government-run institutions that fail to meet the needs of many students. Opponents pushed an initiative to block expanded education options, but ultimately fell short in their effort to gather signatures. That leaves the instantly popular program free to proceed.
Arizona first introduced Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESAs) in 2011, originally only for children with special needs, and later expanded to encompass students in failing schools, children of military families, and those who are adopted. The new law makes the ESA program available to essentially all students in the state of Arizona, providing funding for the education of their choice, subject to broad requirements.
"An ESA consists of 90% of the state funding that would have otherwise been allocated to the school district or charter school for the qualified student (does not include federal or local funding)," notes the Arizona Department of Education. "By accepting an ESA, the student's parent or guardian is signing a contract agreeing to provide an education that includes at least the following subjects: reading, grammar, mathematics, social studies and science."
At current spending levels, "families would receive over $6,500 per year per child for private school, homeschooling, 'learning pods,' tutoring, or any other kinds of educational service that would best fit their students' needs," adds the Goldwater Institute, which has long championed ESAs.
Once made available, the expanded ESA program won immediate support. In August, the online application form warned visitors: "Due to high volume, you may receive an error message.…Please try again later."
The tidal wave of applications should be no surprise. Gallup finds that 54 percent of Americans are dissatisfied with the quality of K-12 education, and only 28 percent express a "great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in public schools (33 percent say they have "very little" or "none").
These miserable numbers come after years of general decline, but also after growing controversy over the performance of government-controlled educational institutions. Many public schools spectacularly face-planted in response to COVID-19, resulting in serious reading and math losses among students. Disagreement over pandemic policy as well as over interpretations of history and current events have also turned classrooms into political battlegrounds. What families want is often irreconcilable, whether involving public health or curricula, resulting in a sharp partisan split over public schools.
"The percentage of Republicans having a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in public schools fell from 34% in 2020 to 20% in 2021 and 14% today," Gallup's Lydia Saad observed in July. "Since 2020, independents' confidence has declined nine percentage points to 29% and Democrats' has remained fairly high – currently 43%, versus 48% in 2020."
The obvious solution would be to stop forcing people into shared institutions where opposing preferences invariably come into conflict. Instead, parents should be able to educate their kids by their own values, and according to the particular needs of their children. People were nominally able to do that in the past, but only if they paid twice— once through taxation for government institutions they rejected and then, again, for private schools, homeschooling, or other options they actually used. Something has to give to end classroom disputes and encourage some degree of happiness with children's schooling.
National polls tracked by the American Federation for Children finds anywhere from 63 percent to 74 percent support for giving "parents the right to use the tax dollars designated for their child's education to send their child to the public or private school which best serves their needs." A poll from February of this year specifically about education savings accounts of the sort adopted by Arizona found 77 percent of respondents supported the idea.
But even though nobody is compelled to make use of ESAs, and everybody who is satisfied with public schools is free to leave their children in the government-controlled institutions, not everybody is happy with the expanded program. Save Our Schools Arizona, a union-backed group, tried to put a challenge to school choice on the ballot in a replay of a successful tactic from 2018. Voters that year overturned ESA expansion, approving a confusingly worded measure that may have led many of them to vote the opposite of what they intended.
To get on the ballot, the group needed to gather over 118,000 signatures. But this time, a pro-ESA Decline to Sign effort worked to persuade voters to spurn petitioners. They succeeded; on September 30, Secretary of State Katie Hobbs rejected the anti-choice ballot effort, noting "our office has inspected enough petitions & signatures to confirm that the 118,823 signature minimum will not be met."
Arizona families are again free to apply for Empowerment Scholarship Accounts, with the deadline extended to October 15 because of the ballot battle.
The fight for education freedom isn't over. Hobbs may have rejected the challenge to ESA expansion out of necessity, but she's the Democratic candidate for governor on a platform including opposition to school choice. Hobbs, who attended private school herself, puts forward an education plan that would restrict charter schools and that also boasts she "continues to oppose the universal expansion of school vouchers. As governor, she will work to roll back universal vouchers."
But if she wins election to office (she and Republican Kari Lake are running neck-and-neck), any attempt to roll back ESAs will result in stripping them from thousands of families already enjoying education options. As of September 30, according to the state Department of Education, Arizona families submitted over 12,100 ESA applications for the expanded program. Any reversal will elicit outrage.
Meanwhile, West Virginia's Supreme Court just cleared the way for the similar Hope Scholarship program. "The Hope Scholarship Program is an education savings account (ESA) program that will allow parents and families to utilize the state portion of their education funding to tailor an individualized learning experience that works best for them," according to the office of State Treasurer Riley Moore.
The fight for separation of education and state isn't yet won. But advocates scored an important victory in Arizona, another in West Virginia, and have momentum on their side.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fuck Joe Biden
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I did not ever think it would even be achievable , however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks, easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail.
For more detail visit this article… https://incomebuzz7.blogspot.com/
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a (ad-09) lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
Just open the link——————–>>> https://smart.online100.workers.dev/
Yea, let's focus on the personalities, ignore the issues, that's always worked. ---- NOT!
If tyranny is ever ended, e.g., coercive politics boycotted, ended, then it will be because the change began in grammar schools, with training in non-violent resistance and independent thinking. A child who becomes politically mature will be a sovereign citizen, immune from the promises of "protection" at the expense of freedom.
This was a fairly neutral article that discussed the views from both sides.
Now a days Software Development Plays a Major role in our daily Lives. I will discuss Importance of Software development https://itjobsupdate.com/importance-of-software-development/?amp=1
Wow. What a biased article.
Examples?
You don't think it is biased?
Support of school choice is bias?
Do you think this article is biased, Jesse?
No. It is consistent with their views for decades on school choice.
Do you think anyone has ever complained about their support of school choice? It is the only way your strawman works.
Reason hasn’t changed their views on this topic like they have in other areas.
I know your only purpose now is to troll, but this is a retarded topic to do it on.
I see. So in your world "biased" only means "disagrees with your views".
No. This was a fairly neutral article that discussed the views from both sides.
Just going with pure retard this morning I see.
The article didn't own any libs, which means it supports the left. Jeez, dood, follow your own rules for once.
No. This was a fairly neutral article that discussed the views from both sides.
Really?
The article cites as authoritative articles from the American Federation of Children and the Goldwater Institute, both of which are biased in favor of school choice.
The article also cites a poll showing support for school choice, but the poll was conducted by an explicitly conservative polling firm on behalf of American Federation of Children.
You don't think those are examples of bias?
Like you said, it's not biased because he agrees with it. Anything he disagrees with is evil lies from evil people with evil motivations and evil intent. But he agrees with this one, so it's fair and balanced. Like
Right WingFOX News.Yup. I suspect that with Jesse, like with a lot of commenters here, when they complain about “bias”, what they really are complaining about is “views that I disagree with”.
I used to be surprised when I would see people complain about “BIAS!!!” from the major media, and then cite as authoritative sources articles from explicitly partisan or slanted sources. Wait, you think CNN is “too biased” but then here you are citing The Federalist as an authoritative reference? Really? They are even more biased than CNN!
But now that I understand that what they really mean by “bias” is “they tell me words that make me sad” then it all makes sense. They have a difficult time processing information from a variety of sources so they retreat to their ideological “safe space” partisan media bubble so they never have to think, they are told what is the “correct” position on any issue.
And then of course the irony is, it is often these same people who complain about “ideological brainwashing” at schools or universities. LOL.
When everything is biased, nothing is.
Do you think the article is not biased?
No, ChemTard, it isn't biased. You are biased, Democrat.
Is your concern that parents are empowered to choose the direction of their child’s education. I know you are closer to the Kamala camp where kids should be property of the state, but what is your issue?
Parents who opt in recieve less dollars than the public schools do per child. Is it parental freedom that scares you? That the schools can’t indoctrinate the kids against parental wishes?
Fewer grooming opportunities upset jeffy.
I didn't say I had a concern about the contents of the article itself. I'm merely pointing out that I think it is biased.
I support freedom, i.e., individual sovereignty, against the sovereign ruler/ruled paradigm, i.e., master/slave paradigm.
That makes me "biased". In full context, I find the coercive govt. paradigm immoral, impractical. It can only be defended out of context, e.g., focusing on the benefits, while ignoring the costs. Or, by fraud, lying.
I am biased when truth is the issue. I NEVER support lying, as a tool to sell a concept, especially in politics.
No.
Biased how?
I have yet to see see any school choice article at Reason address what, for me, is the elephant in the room. Accountability. "Education reform" on the right has spent the last three decades pushing for accountability in public schools.
Jeb Bush in Florida made the A+ Plan his signature achievement as governor, where schools receive letter grades based on student performance on state tests. Schools that receive F’s repeatedly can then be taken over by state bureaucrats instead of local bureaucrats. Later FL GOP governors and legislatures built on that and included student test scores in teacher evaluations. That resulted in districts creating tests for courses that weren’t covered by state tests in order to comply with state laws that teacher’s evaluations had to include a student performance measure.
Not to be outdone, Jeb’s older brother pushed No Child Left Behind as President to require schools across the country to engage in high-stakes standardized testing. All of this has been a boon for school choice advocates as it arms them with data about how poorly students perform in poor, urban areas. School choice to the rescue, they say.
Left unsaid is how parents are supposed to choose among private schools when none of that kind of data is collected and made publicly available on private schools. As much as it might make sense to think that parents with the power to move their children will hold private schools accountable, parents still need data to make an informed choice in the first place. And they will need data once their child is at the school to know whether that school is working for their child. Or, at least, that is the supposed purpose of all of that testing in public schools, right? To understand how well the schools perform?
At current spending levels, "families would receive over $6,500 per year per child for private school, homeschooling, 'learning pods,' tutoring, or any other kinds of educational service that would best fit their students' needs," adds the Goldwater Institute, which has long championed ESAs.
$6500 a year may cover the tuition at some private schools, but look at any list in any metro area of the top private schools and that will fall thousands of dollars a year short. In Pheonix, I couldn’t find a private school among the top schools at privateschoolreview with less than $9500 a year tuition, while even some of the Catholic schools on that list were $15,000 a year.
No doubt they will hold up Florida as a model of school choice done well. But Florida’s school choice systems have next to zero accountability. Search “schools without rules” to find the series of articles one Florida newspaper did exposing just how little accountability there is in the system. Schools were found that forged fire safety reports, closed in the middle of the school year with no notice due to financial mismanagement, having hired people with criminal records, and more. Some of these schools are no more than people without any training as educators and no college degrees monitoring students as they work through homeschooling materials.
It would be interesting to see if school choice politicians would be willing to make a deal. “Backpack” funding, but schools that accept those vouchers would be required to have the same level of scrutiny of student performance as the regular public schools. And, of course, the private school would not be able to turn away or expel a student for reasons that a regular public school could not. Sound fair?
There is still standardized testing for students in private schools.
There is also college admission rates.
I had my children in Catholic School and was very happy with the value for the price.
Then they attended to the “A” rated public school in Boca Raton, Fl.
That is an excellent school. Practically all the minorities who attend live out of the district and are in the junior ROTC program.
It’s in a wealthy district and there is lots of parental involvement.
I am certain if they ever put a trans boy in the girls locker room, the parents would riot.
I am certain if they ever put a trans boy in the girls locker room, the parents would riot.
So you live with bigots.
(Filling in for OBL)
lol
>>(Filling in for OBL)
hashtag mandatory.
#sellthevatican
There is still standardized testing for students in private schools.
The students using vouchers in Florida don't have to take the same state tests that public school students do, and rarely do the private schools choose that as the option. Also, they don't have publicly report the results the way public school results are easily available.
There is also college admission rates.
This would only apply to high schools. And even then, it could be reflective of how selective the school is at choosing its students as much as it is the school's quality.
I had my children in Catholic School and was very happy with the value for the price.
Then they attended to the “A” rated public school in Boca Raton, Fl.
That is an excellent school. Practically all the minorities who attend live out of the district and are in the junior ROTC program.
It’s in a wealthy district and there is lots of parental involvement.
Not sure how this argues against anything I'm saying, but okay.
I am certain if they ever put a trans boy in the girls locker room, the parents would riot.
I think you're getting the terminology wrong. A "trans boy" would be a child that had been considered a girl but identifies as a boy now. Social conservatives would think that child belongs in the girls locker room.
There are plenty of groups that grade private schools. In Arizona they still take the same state exams that public schools take. At least for charters this is the case. Basis is one of the biggest charter schools here and they take the state GED in 8th grade with massively higher pass rates than public high school students.
At least for charters this is the case.
Charters are still public schools. No one needs this ESA to attend one.
Basis is one of the biggest charter schools here and they take the state GED in 8th grade with massively higher pass rates than public high school students.
While charters can't turn kids away that meet their requirements, they can require higher levels of parental involvement, have tougher discipline policies, etc. Since parents are seeking them out, that inherently adds some self-selection to their test results. And not all charters actually do better than regular public schools. Pointing to one particular high-performing example is great for that school, but it takes more than that to generalize.
re: "Charters are still public schools" - That depends on the state but in my state (and most that I know of), no, charter schools are not public schools. They are privately owned even though they are subject to and regulated by government-issued charters.
They are privately run, the buildings are privately owned, but they are funded by government. Parents don't have to pay anything that they wouldn't have to pay at a regular public school. Charter schools cannot be religious any more than a regular public school could.
You are mostly making a case about semantics.
It doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to be better than it is now. It may take some time, but the market should sort out the good schools from the bad.
That's not so much an "elephant in the room" as a pretty small mouse.
Yes, education reformers pushed for accountability. Missing from your retelling is the degree to which teachers' unions and their allies fought all accountability measures, making it functionally impossible to fire bad teachers, impose discipline or reward merit.
After several decades of that obstructionism, the reformers tried a different tack - markets. If you let families decide for themselves, the bad schools will either figure out how to reform themselves or they will wither away and die.
You quibble over the "lack" of data yet ignore the fact that parents themselves seem to have no difficulty at all figuring out which schools are good or bad. It may take a painful year to discover you made a bad choice but at least you're not locked in for the kid's 12-year educational career. Sure, a 'Consumer Reports' or 'Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval' would be a great addition to the process but it's not necessary.
Will there be some bad private schools? Of course. But the whole point is that the entire system including government inspectors has entirely failed to generate accountability. There are some truly awful public schools as well as a few bad private schools. What you are advocating is to take the worst of that problem in the public sector and impose that on the private sector. You're missing the point that the government inspectors ARE the problem and that the solution is to let parents decide for themselves.
Missing from your retelling is the degree to which teachers’ unions and their allies fought all accountability measures, making it functionally impossible to fire bad teachers, impose discipline or reward merit.
You make it sound like only self-interest groups (teacher unions and such) have ever criticized the kind of high-stakes testing that is the main mechanism of accountability imposed over the last 30 years. That is certainly not true at all. There have been plenty of parent groups pushing to reduce the overemphasis on standardized testing and the stress it puts on students. Even Florida has been looking for ways to appease these critics. And having self-interest doesn't make teachers wrong to criticize these systems, either.
It is not "functionally impossible to fire bad teachers." Even in states where tenure exists (which doesn't include Florida anymore), it just means that administrators have to show objectively that a teacher is "bad". That kind of due process job protection exists pretty much everywhere in the public sector. It isn't just teachers that it applies to. If it is difficult to fire a "bad" teacher, then it is probably because evaluating teachers objectively is inherently difficult. Truly incompetent teachers may be fairly easy to spot, and thus documenting their failures should be straightforward for administrators. But mostly, teachers just want to be judged on performance fairly, and not upon things outside of their control. Test scores are difficult to tie to a single teacher's performance in a single year, given that students are not widgets, but are human beings with their own motivation or lack of it, and that don't all start the year at the same place.
Every attempt at merit pay for teachers I've ever seen tried here in Florida has been pretty much a joke. None of us buy into them as actually being reflective of our worth as teachers. (Yes, I am a public school teacher in Florida, if you didn't already know that.) Nor has it ever been enough difference in pay to actually change anyone's efforts. No teacher would put more effort into their jobs because of any merit pay scheme I've ever seen tried or proposed.
Lastly, restrictions on discipline of students is not coming primarily from teachers, if it comes from us at all. It has come from decades of parents suing schools and districts and otherwise demanding what they consider to be "fairness" in behavioral discipline. Some of it has been reasonable, while some of it has been a shift from parents demanding high standards of behavior from their children to siding with their kids against their teachers. (Anecdote: A retired Navy captain that taught chemistry at my school last year told us about how a parent complained that he was being disrespectful to her daughter by wanting her to put her phone away. She said that she wanted her daughter to be able to answer her if she called or texted.)
I fear you are misunderstanding some points.
1. I never said that only self-interest groups opposed the high-stakes testing. I never even addressed that. That kind of testing has essentially no connection to the problem you addressed - accountability. It is a comparatively poor and very incomplete measure of a school's performance. What the self-interest groups opposed long before the high-stakes testing was actually holding individual teachers and administrators accountable.
2. re: "functionally impossible to fire bad teachers" - look for the many articles (including right here at Reason) about teacher 'rubber rooms'. Yes, it's theoretically possible to fire a bad teacher but in practice the burdens go far, far beyond "due process".
3. re: "discipline", I was not talking at all about student discipline. I was talking about disciplinary measures (short of firing) of those same bad teachers.
re: merit pay - You have a point. Most of the teacher merit pay programs I've seen I would agree to be ineffective even before they were watered down in the union negotiations. That doesn't mean the idea is bad, though. Merit works in every other industry - including ones with highly variable inputs. It's not a panacea but it can and probably should be a part of the whole accountability program.
After several decades of that obstructionism, the reformers tried a different tack – markets. If you let families decide for themselves, the bad schools will either figure out how to reform themselves or they will wither away and die.
Parents have always had one method of school choice - where they live. Any house for sale in a neighborhood where the public schools are highly rated is certainly going to note that in its sales pitch. The issue with trying to improve public education is almost entirely a matter of improving outcomes for students from lower-income families. Also, despite what I'm seeing in this article and in the comments, most parents are satisfied with their child's education. What people think of K-12 education as a whole vs. the school attended by a parent's child can be different questions.
Idealizations about markets in education need to reckon with the limitations of where the families live when it comes to school choice, as well. A private school in a high-crime, high-poverty neighborhood is only likely to be an oasis if there are still regular public schools that have to take anyone that lives in the zone.
re: school "choice" by deciding where to live
That used to be true - and still is in some jurisdictions but even there only for the affluent. Most people can't afford to move just because they discover that the school is not as good as they thought and many can't afford to move at all.
Then bussing and other "anti-discriminatory" measures took even that small control away from parents in many jurisdictions. For all too many, our "choices" are to suffer with the sub-standard public school that we're assigned or to pay twice for our kid's education - once through our taxes and again to the private school.
You’re missing the point that the government inspectors ARE the problem and that the solution is to let parents decide for themselves.
And you're missing the point that even in your ideal world, the private schools would have choice as well. It isn't just a matter of a parent saying, "I want my kid in this school." There a) has to be room for the child and b) the school has to accept the child. Private schools have a huge amount of discretion in deciding whether to accept a student that public schools just don't have. A private school doesn't want to try and teach students with disabilities - it doesn't have to. A private school doesn't want to try and teach students that speak little or no English - it doesn't have to. A private school doesn't want to try and teach students with a checkered discipline record (but nothing quite to the level of warranting expulsion) - it doesn't have to. A private school doesn't want to try and teach students with uninvolved parents or students with a history of low grades - it doesn't have to. Public schools get none of those choices, and parents with children that fit in those categories won't be able to choose a private school that doesn't want their child.
(That doesn't even get into religious private schools that might not want students from families with different religious beliefs or that don't want students that are LGBT or with parents that are LGBT.)
Am I suppose to weep for public school teachers with their fat pensions and short work week and year? LOL
This is completely wrong. This program makes schools accountable to parents since their funding disappears if their customers are unsatisfied. This is 1000 times better accountability than publishing letter grades.
Orlando Sentinel? They lean left, especially on topics that can be used to tar their opponents as hating children. As for failing safety reports, I suggest you get familiar w/ public schools and their history of this same practice. Every accusation you make, other than the personal cost, is one that applies equally to public schools, and that may be moot depending on what you pay in taxes.
Orlando Sentinel? They lean left, especially on topics that can be used to tar their opponents as hating children.
If you can't dispute any of the facts in their reporting, or you just took one look at their political leanings and decided to discount whatever they had to say, then just say so.
As for failing safety reports, I suggest you get familiar w/ public schools and their history of this same practice.
It wasn't failed safety reports that was in those articles, it was forged safety reports. You have to be more specific with your whataboutism to adequately deflect this.
It is impossible for anyone to guarantee the excellence of any single school or all public schools in general. Libertarians generally believe in free markets in the hopes that competition will raise the quality and optimize the price of any product or service you can imagine. Education in America has suffered from the suppression of competition among education service providers. The obvious solution is to privatize all education by eliminating all tax-supported educational institutions. Failing that, the next best temporary measure is to privatize use of the educational tax money.
Libertarians generally believe in free markets in the hopes that competition will raise the quality and optimize the price of any product or service you can imagine.
Free markets work to raise quality and optimize prices when consumers can make informed choices. My question is how parents are going to get that information before their children are in a school.
Test scores, graduation rates, college admission rates. Bios of the staff and administration.
AND parent scope out which PARENTS are heading in the same direction. They talk to each other and move in little herds.
Private schools do the same test, particularly in states where tax money is in play.
In any state with a new school choice program, the first few years are fluid and choatic. The best survive and government schools as well clean up their act. Give it a moment for the process to play out. And remember, Vermont has had HS school choice since 1896.
JasonT20: "Sound fair?" "Fair" as in equitable? "Fair" as in all get the same education? "Fair" as in forced uniformity? "Fair" as in taking choice away from the parents, giving it to bureaucrats?
School choice is a subset of choice that parents exercise in raising their children. Those choices will never be uniform, standardized, in a free society. There will always be mistakes, tragedies, abuse. But the worst possible tragedy would be to remove parental choice, replace it with bureaucrat's choice. The Nazis did that. It was a total failure, destroying babies.
So Save Sour Schools are the communist party nationalizers, and the other bunch wants anything but that--even if is means no Lateran Treaty, cadavers on the walls, kneeling in the aisles for prayer and banning evolution. They had me at including math in the curriculum. Interesting is the shift in meaning of anti-choice, which normally means girl-bullying religious fanatics.
After leaving my previous job 12 months ago, i've had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me.They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $4500.Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.
Read all about it here.........>>> OnlineCareer1
Looks like this was put into place by Republicans and is currently opposed by Democrats.
That means Reason is praising Republicans while criticizing Democrats.
That never happens, which means this article doesn't exist.
No no. Reason is still a leftist rag because they didn't denounce Democrats hard enough.
"True libertarians" have "make the libs cry" as their only principle.
Oh. This is the idiocy you two are going with this morning.
It pains both of you that reason has recently stopped carrying so much water for the left.
Ignoring that reason has always been for school choice and nobody here has ever really complained about their support of this discussion.
But you have to generate a strawman to degenerate the argument into attacking your perceived enemies that never claimed reason was anti school choice. Deflect, defend.
This is all you two offer now.
I read your posts to the tune of the Mexican hat dance.
We're mocking you and your tribe for whining THEY'RE CARRYING WATER FOR THE LEFT whenever they post an article that is insufficiently critical of Team Blue.
But you have to generate a strawman to degenerate the argument into attacking your perceived enemies
that's you, Jesse. that's you.
But you’re not. You’ve created a strawman and use it whenever anything on the left is criticized. It isnt mockery. It is deflecting from your teams losses.
Where is my strawman jeff?
Translation: "You're not mocking me! You're deflecting! Don't you dare tell me what you are doing! I tell you what you are doing, and what you're doing is supporting the other team! Aaauuughhh!"
Right now I picture you on the playground with your fists clenched yelling "No you're not! No you're not! No you're not!"
Good point. Unless they can say "I owned those libs" then they're supporting leftists.
When core libertarian policy advances sarc and jeffey are unhappy. What does this tell us about their goals?
Aaaaand where did I say I was unhappy? Oh yeah. No where. I was mocking the "REASON IS LEFTIST" brigade. You know, you and your buddies.
So what do you do? You make shit up and argue against it. Next you'll do a JesseAz, as in you'll tell me what I think and call me a liar when I disagree. C'mon boy! You can do it! Whoof whoof! Good boy!
where did I say I was unhappy?
It's strange you think things have to be admitted rather than demonstrated. But is speaks to your inability to understand anything beyond the basics.
When given the opportunity to cheer libertarian policy advancing (a rare occurrence) or attacking other commenters you chose to attack. This is perfectly consistent with your previously explicitly admitted role as a troll and directly contradictory to the role you often claim as interested in discussion you are unable to achieve only because others prevent it. As with all your other fake principles (like engaging in schoolyard taunts and then later whining that others do so) your actions prove the persona you claim is not who you are. Rather, you're a low life only here to interfere with better people's discussions of libertarianism.
It’s strange you think things have to be admitted rather than demonstrated.
The key word being "admitted" meaning that you know what I think better than I do. Is there a word for people who tell others what they think and call them liars when they disagree? There should be. I personally like "decomposing."
When peoples words and actions conflict their actions reveal what they really believe. Alll the rest is just you flailing hoping that people won’t notice what you are.
A good article describing the situation in Arizona. The anti choice movement is much larger than the article goes into with Red for Ed and other activist groups that support public school unions being much louder and against these measures. They have pushed false studies on outcomes for the test runs of these programs as well that focused mostly on special needs children.
Arizona attempted a different form of school choice measures where parents could apply to any public school, but these ended up not going well due to lack of transport to schools of a parenrs choosing. Now parents can choose closer private schools if given the option.
The misinformation from anti school choice advocates here is legion. They still push lies like charter schools only perform better to student selection despite lotteries for applications being required. All charters must also provide the same support for children that public schools do such as students requiring special needs teachers.
Public education is essentially a tax-supported monopoly that suffers from the same maladies that all tax-funded government monopolies suffer from: incestuous relationships between elected and appointed government officials and government employee unions. The only check on government pricing and abuses of power is the election process, which seems to have failed massively with the polarization of voters into blue districts and red districts and the extreme difficulties of fighting corrupt city halls.
Now to see what stupid thing we do next - AZ, two steps forward, one step back.
“So tell me this, smart guy, who is going to feed all those kids?”
– CA progressive
https://edsource.org/2021/free-school-meals-here-to-stay-in-california/658564?amp=1
sell the conformity factories?
If this works out, they could sell the buildings to the private schools that replace them.
exactly. instead of just closing them which is my usual exclamation.
You jest, but in nearly every Western Massachusetts town, there is a small independent school that took over the school facing the town square. The public school kids are bused long distances to large education factories.
After leaving my previous job 12 months ago, i've had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me.They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $4500.Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.
Read all about it here.........>>> OnlineCareer1
At current spending levels, "families would receive over $6,500 per year per child for private school, homeschooling, 'learning pods,' tutoring, or any other kinds of educational service that would best fit their students' needs," adds the Goldwater Institute, which has long championed ESAs.
Aside from homeschooling, what school of education do the teachers of the "private schools, learning pods or 'other educational service'" attend?
Give the state to today's "schools of education" NOT attending them is a boon.
My daughter's middle school biology class was taught by a biology grad student. And she was a GREAT teacher.
My neighbor taught Math and Science for years at a top Private school, after an engineering degree at the Naval Academy. He could have worked anywhere, but with five of his own kids getting free tuition, the teaching private was the way to go.
So don't assume that attending a school of education is the only route to being a good teacher.
Sounds like a good start. It would be better if it included local property taxes that are allocated to education.
Sounds like an improvement. Now if they would only stop stealing from people to force them to pay to educate other peoples' kids (and remove all the strings that come with that funding, regardless of the recipient institution.)
Very little of Wyoming property taxes goes to schools. 85% is from coal, gas and other mineral royalties.
"85% is from coal, gas and other mineral royalties." So what happens when the Greenies get their way?
Vermont has had HS school choice since 1896. The world has not ended. The government regional school are well attended BECAUSE they have to compete with the many top flight privates in New England. Everyone wins.
Free education is very cool. In general, I am very glad that now people have many opportunities to choose what they want to study and where. For example, I dream of going to an art academy and found best art portfolio online singapore to make my portfolio as attractive as possible and show my skills.
It is nice to know that Arizona came closer to the important goal of separating education and state with the defeat of a ballot challenge to a recently adopted school-choice law. We can contribute to Phoenix based businesses by offering them full service digital marketing agency services https://lightmindmedia.co/