From: sstover@sumax.seattleu.edu (Maven o'Mirth)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Public Education (Was: Re: Family Leave)
Date: 14 Oct 92 05:03:20 GMT
Organization: Seattle University, Seattle WA


Some thoughts on this issue, as I attend a private college, where it is
occasionally *more than clear* that we live by different rules than public
schools, as in issues of policy within the student body.

First off, if you allow vouchers to be used to pay for private schooling,
you are delegating tax dollars.  As it works here in Washington, at least,
the taxpayers in a public school district also vote on school board issues
and on local issues regarding the school district.  They (the taxpayers)
consider that voting power a right *purchased* with their taxes.  If we
begin delegating tax dollars to individuals, to use it for private
education, do we not run the risk of stepping on the toes of taxpayers who
would like to see their money used in programs which they have some
influence over? (NOTE: I am not necessarily saying that I think that way,
but it has been a major issue every time vouchers come up as a topic for
educational legislation here in WA)

More importantly, as I began thinking during the VP debate this evening,
if you allow individuals to use their vouchers to pay for private schools,
(you=legislative body/policy-making body) you are essentially delegating
the responsibility for quality education to the individual schools and
institutions.  Right now, public schools are *certainly* influenced in
their policies by the necessity to draw students (in WA, by drawing
residents into the area whose tax dollars fund the school district). 
However, a voucher system which allows use of public tax dollars to pay
for private schools makes it overly simple for parents to send their kids
to one or another institution without picking up and relocating, as would
be necessary the majority of the time in a system which relies on property
taxes for education funding.  When we sold our property back home, a major
selling point was the school district that the property was in; still,
making a decision to live in a given area requires more serious thought
and makes for a more evenly distributed student population than the
ability to live in one area and go to a private school in another area
with the education dollars granted to the family.

On the surface, I believe it would be beautiful if *every* student could
go to any school they wanted to, public or private, regardless of where
they lived; sadly, in the case of Bush/Quayle, the policy would, it seems
to me, take all of the responsibility off the government in the area of
education reform, and turn the schools into a cutthroat market like any
other business--a corruption that our education system most likely would
not survive, and which would harm its students most directly and severely.

--
Sheryl Stover				|  How passing fair is youth,
*>sstover@sumax.seattleu.edu<*		|  Forever fleeting away;
and Hemingway, feline philosopher	|  Who happy would be, let him be;
Watch this .sig for news of the		|  Of tomorrow, who can say?
upcoming album from Seattle's 		|	-Lorenzo de'Medici
premier band, the Medici!		|