Denying school vouchers maintains the need for social programs.

As a child of an inner city school in my first years of education, I personally have seen the differences in education between affluent communities and those that are less financially stable. The inadequacies are immense and lead to a great divide in the overall quality of education due to lack of updated materials, deteriorating environments, social atmosphere, apathy within the faculty, and equipment that is out of date. These things do matter - and the best way to ensure that all children, regardless of income, have access to the best possible education is to allocate opportunity via voucher programs to include charter schools. Vouchers, which should be meant to include options such as charter schools, are an option that allow that choice. Vouchers should not in anyway be tied to a dollar amount - and should be issued as credit for attendance for every family under 200% of the poverty level. In no way should these programs be offered to the affluent - who most likely have the means to live in a more affluent school system, but no doubt have the ability to pay for private schooling if they so choose. Vouchers would not be subject to inflation based upon that factor and that a Voucher would hold/offer/ensure a place of enrollment into a school - not a monetary value. All schools, public and private would be mandated to offer a percentage of their overall enrollment for voucher students without selection criteria based upon socioeconomic, race, sex, religion, etc.. Rather, selection would be based upon time of enrollment. Thus students would be given fair opportunity to attend the school of their choice, in the community of their choice, public or private, without discrimination. These students would be given, as I was as a child from the projects, an opportunity for social interaction within a community and group as to lend to personal development and social growth up and away from that of poverty mentality and socioeconomic influence. It would open doors of influence and role mentorship within a social class that many children would never have access to or observance of. Thus creating the possibility for personal social growth, development and choice. My best example of this theory is myself. As for our teachers and their choices between public and private school; we must keep in mind that many teachers do not support the current public school path. Nor do all teachers support Unions. To say such would be completely inaccurate and a distortion of the overall reality of the persons who elect to teach our youth. While charter schools, private schools, and religious schools do start teachers out at lower wages - they also offer the opportunity for teachers to advance based upon merit, barter and negotiate wages and benefits, and yes, to teach in a more unconventional way dependant upon the school's mission. In unionized pubic schools, teachers are not rewarded as individuals, are forced to work with substandard performing teachers who are protected by the unions and accept working conditions based upon the whole - not their own individual needs, wants and goals. In the end, vouchers, in the form of place-holders, and the example of charter schools - as in Ohio, are an option that all families should have who find themselves seeking an education choice away from the hardships, poverty and lack of opportunity within failing public school systems. These programs should be protected from inflation and abuse by limiting the total household income to 200%, not using the vouchers as cash, and mandating that all schools maintain a set percentage of available openings within their rolls for children eligible for this benefit. No child should be denied the great gift of social freedom, economic stability, and personal mobility of a better education.