Every year, many special interest groups such as the teacher's unions and other public education advocacy groups Lobby the State Legislature with requests for more money for class size reduction, greater per pupil spending and higher wages for teachers.



Why is it then, that when a viable plan, such as Referendum 1, is within our grasp to accomplish all three of these vitally important objectives, as well as empower parents with options for
Read more...

I appreciate this letter, although I believe it is a personal opinion rather that an "official position" as inferred by the editors of the PCE newsletter.  I only have 2 questions.  First, would Mr. Moss tell me and the rest of the voters where the money to fund these vouchers will come from after the five year "hold harmless" clause runs out.  Mr. Bramble and the rest of the legislature have no idea, and the editors of the DH/Parents for Choice newletter won't touch it.  Maybe you could answer that for us.  Second, if our public schools are failing as it has been stated, and you are a member of the State Board of Education, then why aren't you doing something about it? What have you done to improve the public schools you were elected to serve?  Putting public money, even a percentage of the total budget does nothing to help the public schools and we all know that in 5 years the total amount of allowed vouchers will come, not from the general fund as the advocates suggest, but from the education fund.  It's a dirty little secret that nobody wants to address.

dailyherald wrote:

Utah families win because the children receive an education that the parents have chosen in their best interest, whether it be public or private.


The above quote is designed to play on the emotions. Why shouldn't the parents decide?

Well, if they don't like the local public school, why don't they pull their child out and put them in a charter school? Or any other public school in the state? Or homeschool them? Or send them to private school and pay for it? Aren't those decisions that can be made? Why is "choice" only about a badly conceived attempt to stick it to public ed while handing a kick back to the wealthy who don't need it and not providing enough funding to really help those who need it most? Good grief!

Parents will have the same choices regardless of the outcome on November 6. Up to the voters is whether or not those choices will be subsidized. I don't think they should be. Vote no.

You are looking at this completely wrong. You need to consider education just like any other service that government provides. In order to get the best value for the money, government will frequently contract those services out to private industry. Vouchers are just a contract service and the government gets that service for a cost that is between 4 and 40 percent of what they would pay to educate a child in the existing system. (based upon an average of $7500 per child in the public schools) Here are some of the arguments against vouchers and why they are inconsequential:

No accountability, no requirements for teacher certification, etc.

There is plenty of accountability. It's called the parents. If a private school offers a lousy service then parents won't put their children there. You're not suggesting that parents are too stupid to manage the lives of their own children, are you? Additionally, no one will force YOU to send YOUR kids to be taught by an "uncertified" teacher.

This will cost 450 million dollars.

Yes, over 13 years. But then again no because all we are doing is spending 450 million instead of what the full amount of educating these children would have cost.

After 5 years, the schools will lose the money.

Stop and think. After 5 years, with the growth we have, there will still be just as many kids in public education hence there will be no loss of money. All the kids in private school will be costing us less to educate. No one will lose their job in the public schools.

It won't be available to the poor.

Many of the middle class people can not currently afford a private school. Many have said that this would be enough to make it a possibility. Additionally, there will be many options available to the poor as the free market system kicks in and private schools will be available at a reasonable cost. There are already schools out there that would be affordable to the poor if they had the voucher.

Public money might go to a school run by a religion!

So I guess you have a problem with Medicare money going to LDS Hospital or Saint Marks? Yep, patients getting public money might actually see a picture of Jesus on the wall. Remember, this is a contracted service that NO ONE has to go to or use.

The arguments go on an on but they have zero basis or validity. They are nothing more than scare tactics to protect an existing system which does not meet the needs of everyone. I'm not saying public education is bad and I probably will not take my child out of it if vouchers were available. I do feel that they will benefit the public education system and help us to cope with the growth that we are experiencing in this State.

Vote Yes on 1

Elder J. Golden Pittakos wrote:

You are looking at this completely wrong. You need to consider education just like any other service that government provides. In order to get the best value for the money, government will frequently contract those services out to private industry.

So police, fire, library, and military are services the government provides. Should we contract them out to get the best value?

Elder J. Golden Pittakos wrote:

There is plenty of accountability. It's called the parents. If a private school offers a lousy service then parents won't put their children there. You're not suggesting that parents are too stupid to manage the lives of their own children, are you? Additionally, no one will force YOU to send YOUR kids to be taught by an "uncertified" teacher.

Parents in Milwaukee sent their kids to uncertified, unqualified teachers with vouchers. Parents don't always know what is good and what is bad in education. If a parent wants to send their kid to a school that is not credentialed, that's fine with me, as long as they are not doing it with taxpayer money.

Elder J. Golden Pittakos wrote:

This will cost 450 million dollars.

Yes, over 13 years. But then again no because all we are doing is spending 450 million instead of what the full amount of educating these children would have cost.

$450 mil is only the beginning. Vouchers just need to get their foot in the door before the legislature really starts to divert money from public ed to them.

Elder J. Golden Pittakos wrote:

The arguments go on an on but they have zero basis or validity. They are nothing more than scare tactics to protect an existing system which does not meet the needs of everyone.

Speaking of scare tactics, when was the last time you saw the voucher ad about Ted Kennedy, Hillary, and the big scary NEA?

The Utah Voucher law has nothing to do with parent choice. The private school has full right of choice under the Utah Voucher program of whom to admit and whom to exclude. In Florida they have a parent choice voucher program where any parent with a voucher is admitted open enrollment style to any Private school accepting vouchers.

Surpringly (or rather not surprisingly) over ninety percent of the private schools opted not to accept Vouchers. I think we can drop the pretense of parental choice behind this movement.