The democrats don't seem to be able to respect something that actually works.

[Foxfyre]

And in the category of concern and caring for the less fortunate among us, our esteemed Democrats in Congress slipped this jewel into a thousand page spending bill along with hundreds of millions in payoffs to their cronies, contributors, and self-serving interests.

In so doing, as custodians of the D.C. school system, they are effectively dismantling one of the few government programs that is actually producing positive and lasting results and they are re-segregating the kids. So much for concern for poor and minority students. If there ain’t enough votes in it, it won’t be done.

The leaders of D.C.’s school choice movement, Kevin P. Chavous (former D.C. Councilman) and Virginia Walden Ford (executive director of D.C. Parents for School Choice), today issued the following statement:

“House and Senate Appropriators this week ignored the wishes of D.C.’s mayor, D.C.’s public schools chancellor, a majority of D.C.’s city council, and more than 70 percent of D.C. residents and have mandated the slow death of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. This successful school voucher program—for D.C.’s poorest families—has allowed more than 3,300 children to attend the best schools they have ever known.

The decision to end the program, a decision buried in a thousand-page spending bill and announced right before the holidays, destroys the hopes and dreams of thousands of D.C. families. Parents and children have rallied countless times over the past year in support of reauthorization and in favor of strengthening the OSP.

More here:
DC School Choice Leaders Blast Appropriators' Decision to Kill School Voucher Program

2009 testimony to Congress in support of the D.C. voucher system.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/051309Williams.pdf

 

[Mr. Peepers]

And in the category of concern and caring for the less fortunate among us, our esteemed Democrats in Congress slipped this jewel into a thousand page spending bill along with hundreds of millions in payoffs to their cronies, contributors, and self-serving interests.

In so doing, as custodians of the D.C. school system, they are effectively dismantling one of the few government programs that is actually producing positive and lasting results and they are re-segregating the kids. So much for concern for poor and minority students. If there ain’t enough votes in it, it won’t be done.

So, why should really poor kids get to go to a tony "good" school in a rich county? Their parents aren't wealthy or by your standards, successful (and thus lazy), so these kids obviously didn't earn a spot there. They don't DESERVE it. Besides, aren't you then taking away a space for a privileged white child that has been groomed for college since birth? This should be a perfect example of the "way it should be" according to neocon/conservative/rep/corporatists - oh hell, I don't even know what to call you clowns anymore. Make up your minds!

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

I think that this is part of that situation where the teachers union was royally pissed over the Chancellor's efforts to consolidate under attended schools, streamline things and make the system function better.

Apparently the teachers' union won, and they pulled off a to hell with the students move here.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Kind of makes sense ,if they are educated and start making there own money, move out of the city and grow up , they are not part of the DNC base any longer.

 

[MaggieMae]

I'm all for kids getting the best primary education available. I think probably the biggest opposition to charter schools is simply that they can write their own curriculum and that there are currently so few that those students lucky enough to be chosen represent only a blip in the number who really NEED smaller classrooms, etc. So to allocate federal funds for only one particular jurisdiction seems discriminatory.

I do think that to do education reform within the public school system that Arne Duncan has been looking into the success stories of charter schools as models to design the same learning improvements for public schools, so it's possible we haven't seen the end of charter schools, or at least implementing what works for them and what doesn't.

 

[blastoff]

I'm all for kids getting the best primary education available. I think probably the biggest opposition to charter schools is simply that they can write their own curriculum and that there are currently so few that those students lucky enough to be chosen represent only a blip in the number who really NEED smaller classrooms, etc. So to allocate federal funds for only one particular jurisdiction seems discriminatory.

I do think that to do education reform within the public school system that Arne Duncan has been looking into the success stories of charter schools as models to design the same learning improvements for public schools, so it's possible we haven't seen the end of charter schools, or at least implementing what works for them and what doesn't.

Should be interesting how Duncan breaks the news to the teachers' unions.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm all for kids getting the best primary education available. I think probably the biggest opposition to charter schools is simply that they can write their own curriculum and that there are currently so few that those students lucky enough to be chosen represent only a blip in the number who really NEED smaller classrooms, etc. So to allocate federal funds for only one particular jurisdiction seems discriminatory.

I do think that to do education reform within the public school system that Arne Duncan has been looking into the success stories of charter schools as models to design the same learning improvements for public schools, so it's possible we haven't seen the end of charter schools, or at least implementing what works for them and what doesn't.

Since DC is not a state and not allowed to receive state monies, those living there pretty much have to be under federal jurisdiction. I don't think federal money should be going to ANY of the states for education or much of anything else, but that is a separate discussion.

In this case, I don't think 3,300 kids can be called a 'blip'. The theory is that the more students that are able to go to good schools and thereby take funding away from poor schools, the more incentive the poor schools will have to become good schools. Or they go out of business as they should. To defund a program that was actually beginning to work and educate kids makes absolutely no sense especially when they aren't saving that money but simply shifting it to some other pet project. The best case scenario would have been to continue to increase the program until the entire system was actual educating kids.

 

[MaggieMae]

I'm all for kids getting the best primary education available. I think probably the biggest opposition to charter schools is simply that they can write their own curriculum and that there are currently so few that those students lucky enough to be chosen represent only a blip in the number who really NEED smaller classrooms, etc. So to allocate federal funds for only one particular jurisdiction seems discriminatory.

I do think that to do education reform within the public school system that Arne Duncan has been looking into the success stories of charter schools as models to design the same learning improvements for public schools, so it's possible we haven't seen the end of charter schools, or at least implementing what works for them and what doesn't.

Should be interesting how Duncan breaks the news to the teachers' unions.

Believe it or not, the Obama Administration has essentially blown off the NEA by its non support of tenuring and favoring a merit system instead. Obama was boo'd during his campaign speech before the teacher's union.

 

[MaggieMae]

I'm all for kids getting the best primary education available. I think probably the biggest opposition to charter schools is simply that they can write their own curriculum and that there are currently so few that those students lucky enough to be chosen represent only a blip in the number who really NEED smaller classrooms, etc. So to allocate federal funds for only one particular jurisdiction seems discriminatory.

I do think that to do education reform within the public school system that Arne Duncan has been looking into the success stories of charter schools as models to design the same learning improvements for public schools, so it's possible we haven't seen the end of charter schools, or at least implementing what works for them and what doesn't.

Since DC is not a state and not allowed to receive state monies, those living there pretty much have to be under federal jurisdiction. I don't think federal money should be going to ANY of the states for education or much of anything else, but that is a separate discussion.

In this case, I don't think 3,300 kids can be called a 'blip'. The theory is that the more students that are able to go to good schools and thereby take funding away from poor schools, the more incentive the poor schools will have to become good schools. Or they go out of business as they should. To defund a program that was actually beginning to work and educate kids makes absolutely no sense especially when they aren't saving that money but simply shifting it to some other pet project. The best case scenario would have been to continue to increase the program until the entire system was actual educating kids.

That is so not true. Washington D.C. has an annual budget (including for education) just like all the states do. Charter schools in D.C. receive the same amount per pupil that public schools do. They also receive federal funding based on student count, as do public schools all across the country. When students transfer out of a public school and into a charter school, the public school records that loss and the charter school records that gain (and thus more funding). Public schools in poverty areas do receive more federal money, however.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

And in the category of concern and caring for the less fortunate among us, our esteemed Democrats in Congress slipped this jewel into a thousand page spending bill along with hundreds of millions in payoffs to their cronies, contributors, and self-serving interests.

In so doing, as custodians of the D.C. school system, they are effectively dismantling one of the few government programs that is actually producing positive and lasting results and they are re-segregating the kids. So much for concern for poor and minority students. If there ain’t enough votes in it, it won’t be done.

The leaders of D.C.’s school choice movement, Kevin P. Chavous (former D.C. Councilman) and Virginia Walden Ford (executive director of D.C. Parents for School Choice), today issued the following statement:

“House and Senate Appropriators this week ignored the wishes of D.C.’s mayor, D.C.’s public schools chancellor, a majority of D.C.’s city council, and more than 70 percent of D.C. residents and have mandated the slow death of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. This successful school voucher program—for D.C.’s poorest families—has allowed more than 3,300 children to attend the best schools they have ever known.

The decision to end the program, a decision buried in a thousand-page spending bill and announced right before the holidays, destroys the hopes and dreams of thousands of D.C. families. Parents and children have rallied countless times over the past year in support of reauthorization and in favor of strengthening the OSP.

More here:
DC School Choice Leaders Blast Appropriators' Decision to Kill School Voucher Program

2009 testimony to Congress in support of the D.C. voucher system.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/051309Williams.pdf

Why do you think im not a liberal anymore....besides the fact that I am no longer at UMASS amherst .

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm all for kids getting the best primary education available. I think probably the biggest opposition to charter schools is simply that they can write their own curriculum and that there are currently so few that those students lucky enough to be chosen represent only a blip in the number who really NEED smaller classrooms, etc. So to allocate federal funds for only one particular jurisdiction seems discriminatory.

I do think that to do education reform within the public school system that Arne Duncan has been looking into the success stories of charter schools as models to design the same learning improvements for public schools, so it's possible we haven't seen the end of charter schools, or at least implementing what works for them and what doesn't.

Since DC is not a state and not allowed to receive state monies, those living there pretty much have to be under federal jurisdiction. I don't think federal money should be going to ANY of the states for education or much of anything else, but that is a separate discussion.

In this case, I don't think 3,300 kids can be called a 'blip'. The theory is that the more students that are able to go to good schools and thereby take funding away from poor schools, the more incentive the poor schools will have to become good schools. Or they go out of business as they should. To defund a program that was actually beginning to work and educate kids makes absolutely no sense especially when they aren't saving that money but simply shifting it to some other pet project. The best case scenario would have been to continue to increase the program until the entire system was actual educating kids.

That is so not true. Washington D.C. has an annual budget (including for education) just like all the states do. Charter schools in D.C. receive the same amount per pupil that public schools do. They also receive federal funding based on student count, as do public schools all across the country. When students transfer out of a public school and into a charter school, the public school records that loss and the charter school records that gain (and thus more funding). Public schools in poverty areas do receive more federal money, however.

How is that budget funded, Maggie?

 

[MaggieMae]

Since DC is not a state and not allowed to receive state monies, those living there pretty much have to be under federal jurisdiction. I don't think federal money should be going to ANY of the states for education or much of anything else, but that is a separate discussion.

In this case, I don't think 3,300 kids can be called a 'blip'. The theory is that the more students that are able to go to good schools and thereby take funding away from poor schools, the more incentive the poor schools will have to become good schools. Or they go out of business as they should. To defund a program that was actually beginning to work and educate kids makes absolutely no sense especially when they aren't saving that money but simply shifting it to some other pet project. The best case scenario would have been to continue to increase the program until the entire system was actual educating kids.

That is so not true. Washington D.C. has an annual budget (including for education) just like all the states do. Charter schools in D.C. receive the same amount per pupil that public schools do. They also receive federal funding based on student count, as do public schools all across the country. When students transfer out of a public school and into a charter school, the public school records that loss and the charter school records that gain (and thus more funding). Public schools in poverty areas do receive more federal money, however.

How is that budget funded, Maggie?

DC collects taxes just like very other state.

Washington, D.C. -- District of Columbia -- state taxes

 

[Foxfyre]

That is so not true. Washington D.C. has an annual budget (including for education) just like all the states do. Charter schools in D.C. receive the same amount per pupil that public schools do. They also receive federal funding based on student count, as do public schools all across the country. When students transfer out of a public school and into a charter school, the public school records that loss and the charter school records that gain (and thus more funding). Public schools in poverty areas do receive more federal money, however.

How is that budget funded, Maggie?

DC collects taxes just like very other state.

Washington, D.C. -- District of Columbia -- state taxes

Income taxes yes. DC residents who pay taxes pay some of the highest combined local/federal taxes in the nation. Nevertheless, a high percentage of DC residents pay little or no taxes. DC is essentially one city, not a state, and unlike a state, it is under the absolute authority of the federal government. Congress does sort of 'sub contract' local government to a mayor/council, but, unlike states, can override any laws they make. Without federal subsidies, it is unlikely that DC could sustain a school district.

DC has the higher per capita costs per student than any state and has worse performing schools than any state. In the previous school year, 79% of the public school population was black, 12% hispanic, 7% white, 2% other. 20% of the population of DC are below the poverty level and more than 70% below the national median. 59% of DC school kids live in poverty. No members of Congress nor the President and his cabinet and staff nor government employees send their kids to DC public schools and most live outside of the city and pay no taxes to support the DC schools.

I couldn't find a specific link to prove it one way or the other, but I'm pretty sure the huge lion's share of support for DC public schools comes right out of the national treasury.

So you can see why concerned educators would be dismayed that Congress, who holds their purse strings, is defunding the one bright spot in the whole scenario and forcing them to return to the substandard dismal performance across the board.

 

[garyd]

DC is a city maggie and like every city they rely primarily on sales taxes and ad valorem taxes not income taxes for revenue. They are also manage/second guessed every step of the way by The US congress which likely goes far to explaining why the place is a pit...

 

[MaggieMae]

How is that budget funded, Maggie?

DC collects taxes just like very other state.

Washington, D.C. -- District of Columbia -- state taxes

Income taxes yes. DC residents who pay taxes pay some of the highest combined local/federal taxes in the nation. Nevertheless, a high percentage of DC residents pay little or no taxes. DC is essentially one city, not a state, and unlike a state, it is under the absolute authority of the federal government. Congress does sort of 'sub contract' local government to a mayor/council, but, unlike states, can override any laws they make. Without federal subsidies, it is unlikely that DC could sustain a school district.

DC has the higher per capita costs per student than any state and has worse performing schools than any state. In the previous school year, 79% of the public school population was black, 12% hispanic, 7% white, 2% other. 20% of the population of DC are below the poverty level and more than 70% below the national median. 59% of DC school kids live in poverty. No members of Congress nor the President and his cabinet and staff nor government employees send their kids to DC public schools and most live outside of the city and pay no taxes to support the DC schools.

I couldn't find a specific link to prove it one way or the other, but I'm pretty sure the huge lion's share of support for DC public schools comes right out of the national treasury.

So you can see why concerned educators would be dismayed that Congress, who holds their purse strings, is defunding the one bright spot in the whole scenario and forcing them to return to the substandard dismal performance across the board.

So of the 59% of students living in poverty, what percentage of those are chosen for the luxury of attending a charter school? THAT is the problem, imho.

 

[uscitizen]

And in the category of concern and caring for the less fortunate among us, our esteemed Democrats in Congress slipped this jewel into a thousand page spending bill along with hundreds of millions in payoffs to their cronies, contributors, and self-serving interests.

In so doing, as custodians of the D.C. school system, they are effectively dismantling one of the few government programs that is actually producing positive and lasting results and they are re-segregating the kids. So much for concern for poor and minority students. If there ain’t enough votes in it, it won’t be done.

The leaders of D.C.’s school choice movement, Kevin P. Chavous (former D.C. Councilman) and Virginia Walden Ford (executive director of D.C. Parents for School Choice), today issued the following statement:

“House and Senate Appropriators this week ignored the wishes of D.C.’s mayor, D.C.’s public schools chancellor, a majority of D.C.’s city council, and more than 70 percent of D.C. residents and have mandated the slow death of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. This successful school voucher program—for D.C.’s poorest families—has allowed more than 3,300 children to attend the best schools they have ever known.

The decision to end the program, a decision buried in a thousand-page spending bill and announced right before the holidays, destroys the hopes and dreams of thousands of D.C. families. Parents and children have rallied countless times over the past year in support of reauthorization and in favor of strengthening the OSP.

More here:
DC School Choice Leaders Blast Appropriators' Decision to Kill School Voucher Program

2009 testimony to Congress in support of the D.C. voucher system.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/051309Williams.pdf

And how much did it cost taxpayers for those 3300 recipients?

Just want all the facts on the table.

 

[MaggieMae]

I couldn't find a specific link to prove it one way or the other, but I'm pretty sure the huge lion's share of support for DC public schools comes right out of the national treasury.

Here ya go. DC's taxes are collected against precisely the same categories that states tax. It is treated as a STATE, not as a city.

Scroll down to about page 4 and you can see a chart which should answer your questions.

District of Columbia: Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Now I've forgotten what we were arguing about. Federal funding for public vs. charter schools? If that's the case, then as I said, the feds fund BOTH, with primary funding for charters coming from the education fund and complemented by a variety of philanthropic organizations.

Frankly, I do believe that charter schools (and private schools too) can provide a better education than public schools, but the vast majority of kids cannot participate, so the logic it seems to me is to design public schools to be more efficient, not dole out x-number of dollars to benefit only a few kids. But now I'm repeating myself.

 

[Harry Dresden]

So, why should really poor kids get to go to a tony "good" school in a rich county? Their parents aren't wealthy or by your standards, successful (and thus lazy), so these kids obviously didn't earn a spot there. They don't DESERVE it. Besides, aren't you then taking away a space for a privileged white child that has been groomed for college since birth? This should be a perfect example of the "way it should be" according to neocon/conservative/rep/corporatists - oh hell, I don't even know what to call you clowns anymore. Make up your minds!

you did not get what is going on here did ya numbnuts.....all you did was politicize it...typical hack....ignore what these assholes in Congress do every day to fuck ya as long as i can say something about the other side....

 

[Polk]

The problem here is that it doesn't "actually work". While people who get the vouchers are happier with their new schools, there really isn't any evidence that they learn more.

 

[Polk]

* No evidence of a statistically significant difference in test scores between students who were offered an OSP scholarship and students who were not offered a scholarship.
* The program had a consistently positive impact on parent satisfaction and their perceptions of school safety.
* Students who were offered OSP scholarships did not report being more satisfied with school or feeling safer in school than those without access to scholarships.
* This same pattern of findings holds when the analysis is conducted to determine the impact of using a scholarship rather than being offered a scholarship, taking into account the approximately 20 percent of students who were offered but chose not to use their scholarships the first year.

Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Impacts After One Year - Introduction

Also, if you look at the date on the report, it's June 2007, so this is coming from an administration that favored vouchers.