The primary motivation, the thrust of all statistical evidence, for SB-1  is to reduce educational costs to Pennsylvania taxpayers.  
This  becomes problematic when children of private schools, which receive few  benefits from the public school system, would also receive these  funds.  In many scenarios throughout the years, such as with Ridge's  bill many years ago, only private school enrollments would have been  affected.  There is no direct cost-savings in these scenarios.
A school district is much like an aircraft carrier in  the sense that you can't fund "just half of it" and expect it to work.   Withdrawing funds to send 500 kids to private/parochial schools would  certainly sink school districts, but not before desperate attempts to  raise property taxes through the roof.
But I have never seen it  this way.  The failures of our educational system have nothing to do  with the cost.  This should be obvious as we've been greatly increasing  funding for public schools over the decades.. to no effect.  Cutting  costs too would have little or no positive impact on education.
So  either you're just pissed about government spending, or you actually  want an alternative to our public schooling system, one that would work better  than what we have today.
If we can curb our irrational hatred of  "teachers" for just one moment, we can look at the public schooling  system as a failed model of social welfare.  A parallel to state farms,  state housing, state stores and state health care eludes to a structural  failure of central planning versus their free-market, direct-subsidy  alternatives.
Consider that a voucher for $3,000 is a pointless  gesture to the majority of parents in PA.  At most, it is only a  supplement to people already outside the public school system.  It doesn't  resolve the core failures (and costs) of our present system.
It  is no wonder that "vouchers" have been embraced by the social  conservatives in the Republican party who finally get to throw some pork  to their constituents.  A few thousand dollars is a nice bonus to  parents struggling to send their kids to private school for their own  religious reasons.
But I don't care about any of that.  The real  issue is the model of public education that we want to embrace.   Some say "zero" public education-- no funding for anything.  I say  great, go out and sell that idea to somebody.
The simple  argument:  to divide the costs of education into the number of students  affected, and send the money down directly to ALL kids.  Keep the  teacher licensing idea and let ANY teacher reimburse the voucher.  Let  teachers be free to teach as professionals, like medical doctors do  now.  Free market delivery of public education would be responsive to  the people.
This argument isn't being made, at least not  directly.  Sure, it might happen in rhetoric and in passing discussion,  but it is never part of the hard political initiatives coming out of  Harrisburg.  Win or lose on SB-1, the moral failure of conservatism on this issue will kill the idea of vouchers.
No comments:
Post a Comment