Arizona's Dismantling of Public Education

That's one view. Thanks for it, seriously. I still believe the main opposition to civil rights in general and integration of the schools in particular was from the right, largely made up of those largely insensitive to the plight of black Americans - overt racists in most cases - regardless of what one called the party they belonged to at the time.

You're right, though - I shouldn't have singled out Republicans. I was thinking of a type of person in the context of today's Republican Party.

 

No, I already pre-empted the expected “But they weren’t real Democrats” retort. And, by the way, I wasn’t suggesting no Republicans opposed civil rights. As you point out, Goldwater led the minority of Republicans who joined Russell’s opposition. My point is precisely that it was not a simplistic “good” party versus “bad” party thing. The Democrats have as much to be ashamed about that period of history as they do pride. So do the Republicans. Trying to minimize the ills of “our” team while exaggerating the evils of “their” team, though, is just going to get a lot of inconvenient historical facts thrown back at you.

 

I guess that would be southern Democrats. Here’s some examples:

“The Democratic Governor of Mississippi, Ross Barnett, declared "no school will be integrated in Mississippi while I am your governor".”

James Meredith - Wikipedia

“George Wallace, the Governor of Alabama, in a symbolic attempt to keep his inaugural promise of "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" and stop the desegregation of schools, stood at the door of the [UA] auditorium as if to block the entry of the two African American students attempting to enter.”

Stand in the Schoolhouse Door - Wikipedia

“When integration began on September 4, 1957, the Arkansas National Guard was called in to "preserve the peace". Originally at orders of the governor, they were meant to prevent the black students from entering due to claims that there was "imminent danger of tumult, riot and breach of peace" at the integration.”

The Democratic governor was Orval Eugene Faubus.

Little Rock Nine - Wikipedia

 

I think you're missing the larger point, but I'm going to belabor it given that fact.

 

My party? Which party is that?

 

I am still confused as to where what I am suggesting in any way implies that I want to erode the public school system?

 

I think I get your larger point. However, you asked me two specific questions:

“Guess who loudly voted against it?
Guess which political party members still raised Hell?”

I presume that you were implying the answer was Republicans. I was responding to your questions by pointing out that the answer was southern Democrats.

I think @uftaipan (post 82) gave a very good perspective on this. Both political parties are culpable.

 

It's been pointed out numerous times how the privatization movement aims to erode public schools. Rufo and the nutjob who runs Hillsdale College are just a couple examples of folks who would erode public schools. I don't think the poster specifically put that claim on you, though.

 

You are failing to recognize that kids rich and poor might do better in public. Or might do better in private. We are all tax payers. And all kids regardless of situation should be afforded what is best for them. A universal system is not the answer. You know this. It is not right to keep a family without the means from getting their kid in a school that is better for them and their situation!

The good news for your DIL is she is doing far better than most private school teachers. I commend her for what she does as based on your posts she is really good at what she does. Like I said…I know a few public school teachers that deserve six figure salaries. At the same time there are others that…

 

I was referencing Republicans as they are today --- some, not all. However, I was thinking more of a type of person(s) rather than a political party. In hindsight, I should have not referenced Republicans.

 

This feels like a great place to let Dr. Baucham discuss the issue of race and education from the view of Genesis…

 

I definitely agree that children learn differently and need to be accommodated to their individual strengths and weaknesses, but most parents don't know what those are. All they know is they want to get their kids out of a bad situation, whatever that is. So they put them in any voucher school that is close to them. We are a prosperous state yet our teacher pay is at or near the bottom. Spend some of that money and attract the best of the best along with investing in testing for kids to see what they need.


These are facts that has given me my position that its a waste of taxpayer money:

• There are pop up voucher schools that are not held accountable, so they hire unqualified people with questionable backgrounds to teach.
• They don't hold those who own the school accountable for their finances so they typically fail and the family is left scrambling to find another school in the middle of the school year.
• We don't know what they are teaching the kids. There have been crazy curriculums uncovered.
• People who can afford their kid's school don't need the money, so don't give it to them.
• They aren't held accountable to prove the students are learning even at a public school level.

Every child needs to be in the best environment for them to learn. Let's make our public schools better, which some have figured out, but the powers that be for some reason don't want to make them better. Test kids to see what their needs are. Charter schools have more freedom than public schools but are still public and are held accountable for testing etc. Maybe my DIL is paid more because she has to deal with a ton more than a private school teacher. They take lower pay for a reason other than their faith.

This is not cheap either, it can cost us upwards of $4 billion, yes, billion of which 890 million will go to those who can afford it.

:Florida's school voucher bill could cost taxpayers $4 billion [WJCT News]

Don't get me started on the fact home school moms can now get $$$$.

I get your point, but it just sounds like a platitude to make it look like it is such a service for disadvantaged families, when while there have been some here or there, most are not getting what WE pay for.

 

We pay for a public education system, we dont pay taxes to educate our own children. By draining money from the public education system they are doing just that. Maybe people without kids get a voucher for skii lessons? It is a ridiculous grift for private schools and a targeted deconstruction of public education by people who call them "government schools" thinking they are indoctrination sites. Sure there is some good intent by some proponents but its ultimately a terrible terrible idea.

 

You said what I've been blasting about in less words. I tend to go on and on to the point my kids say "Mom! Get to the point already!"

 

You guys keep going off script here to look for apples to oranges stuff.

My suggestion would not remove any money from the system above what my child would have gotten already and my suggestion provides no vouchers for anything but education of children who are at certain income levels.

Like it or not, their are bad and good schools/districts...and the fact that only lower income kids are trapped in those situations is dead wrong.

 

Thats a mom thing. My kids say it to my wife too.

 

We want to make sure everything we are thinking is out there. That can be a lot!

 

Again... you dont pay taxes for your child's education, you pay for an educational system. Pulling money out doesnt reduce the fixed costs in the school that then need to be recovered from variable costs. Those variable costs have resulted in art totally eliminated from many schools, guidance counselors spread over the entire district, large class room sizes, and very low salaries attracting less high quality teachers. It's lean already and about to tip over and those bent on destroying public schools know that and align people like you to be complicit, regardless of the motivation.

People with no kids have a better argument for their tax money than people with kids who dont want to pay their fair share of public education so they can give that money to a church school. Its a terrible plan.

 

Im in between funny and agree here. When my wife tells my boy to make sure he gets his homework done it comes with a 6 minute discussion of how he'll ruin his life if he doenst. I just tell him to go do his homework.

 

How much do you think a parent should get from the public coffers to send their kid to private school? Does it depend on how much their property taxes are so richer people get a bigger voucher? And on the other side, how much does it cost, in your opinion, to send a kid to private school, and does that money equal out? Keep in mind that the money you are being taxed on is per household no matter how many kids you have so if you have 4 kids, you shouldn't get 4 times the amount to send them to private school.