Denying school vouchers maintains the need for social programs.

Whereas I understand your arguments against my position, I believe that I can explain away many of your fears and misguided perceptions on a point by point basis. You admit that the current system is disappointing and yet you worry about damaging that system. The current system is more than damaged - it is virtually in disrepair. Under a Voucher/Charter school plan - these schools would be able, if not mandated, to participate in these programs by opening up their rolls by 25% to out of area children. While children may choose to leave a school - others will no doubt choose to attend said school if they perceive it better than their current option. In trying to attract students to fill that 25% opening instigates effort to draw interest via new programs, academic standards and restructuring - only benefit can arise when compared to the current condition. Thus, in a way, we are enabling and promoting improvement within even the worst school house. Vouchers would be funded in a manor as follows - as with charter schools, x amount of money comes from the federal government and x from the state, while still x comes from the city or municipality. The city funding would remain in the city school system - thus allowing a portion of funding to be left behind even when a student leaves. Funding by city should be based on residency - not enrollment. If for some reason rolls fall so low that a school cannot operate - does that not speak volumes about what the community and citizens have chosen for that schools fate? Why should the people not be heard? Why on earth would we want to keep failing schools open even if those who literally own the school (the residents and taxpayers) do not want it or feel that it is worthy? Schools are for education first, employment second. And since all children must go to school - when one door closes another will open - thus fostering competition for the best/better teachers, who will be able to negotiate their salaries and benefits if they so choose not to apply for a position within a public school. Segregation - since their is no criteria for enrollment under the voucher system - how can segregation be a factor? First come/first serve. This would also insight parental research, involvement and participation. It would be easy to see those parents who believe education is paramount - their children would be those enrolled the quickest - and for that effort, they have earned their spot. In Ohio - a testing ground for vouchers and charter schools, many schools exist - secular and non-secular. My children attend an non-religious school that is a charter school. The class size is smaller, art, gym and music are the norm and they are accelling as are the other children from inner city schools, surrounding failing schools, military families and those who want a different method in teaching their child applied are those that fill the halls. There are other non religious schools in the area - mostly charter schools. But, if we look at the mandatory 25% slot in all public schools that would be available - then we see that there are even more non-faith based alternatives as well. So too, private schools who accept the vouchers - again funded by the federal allotment for the child and the state allotment, would be mandated to accept the same 25% in order to maintain their charter. Taxes would not be raised, as stated very clearly funding would be simple and direct. If anything, we would find that we are getting more bang for the buck since schools, private, religious, charter and public would be fighting for each and every way to draw your $'s to them = making them spend more wisely. Scholarships do not work, for as with our family, we were not poor enough for a 100% scholarship, and too poor to make the difference up with only a 15% scholarship. Not acceptable if we are to take children and assist them in getting up and ahead in life regardless of income, faith, residence, race or other outside factor. The goal here is opportunity = the responsibility for both parent and child is to take that opportunity and do with it what they will - well with all hopes. You bring up Gay, Muslim and Jewish students. Why should any of these issues be factors in education? If a Muslim's open a school, as long as they don't exclude from their rolls - and honor the 25% enrollment, their institution could and should participate to obtain a charter. Same with any school a specific group would wish to charter. Choice in education is the first large step up out of poverty. All should be entitled to it regardless of race, sex, orientation, faith, etc..., if we are going to offer and mandate education we need to do all that we can to ensure it is fair, comprehensive, competitive with the world (of which if we don't compete within our own borders - how do we compete with other countries) safe, and providing the absolute best chance of a future for all. This is no dream - it is a possible future that will only strengthen the minds of future America, and would be available to all who have no choice for upward mobility in life from the start due to childhood poverty. It is a system that while maybe not perfect - is a huge leap from the crumpling present towards a more stable and successful future path. Thank you.