Here is why I love to read The Utah Hornet’s Nest – he writes about “Why I Oppose Vouchers” rather than resorting to writing about “Why voucher supporters are trying to sacrifice your children for money.” We can always use more solid examples of “what I believe and why” on both sides of any argument to replace some of the “what can I say to bully people into believing me (or voting for me or the issue I am promoting).”
One thing that often bothers me in many public discussions is that people rarely offer all the pertinent information when they argue for their cause. The result is arguments like this against vouchers. I will be the first to admit that voucher supporters are just as guilty of only discussing facts that are favorable to their position, but both sides seem to assume that the citizens can’t make an informed decision and must therefore be coerced into one position or the other.
For too many Utah families vouchers don’t offer a real choice. More than half of Utah’s counties have NO private schools at all. The average private school tuition is almost $8,000 a year. The average statewide voucher is estimated to be only about $2,000. That means that for a family with four children, the additional $24,000 in tuition puts private school completely out of reach.
I just can’t get over the fact that voucher opponents will argue that vouchers are too expensive and at the same time they argue that public schools should get more money, and that the vouchers are too cheap to do any good. The argument above says that $24,000 is prohibitively expensive while ignoring the fact that $32,000 (the cost without voucher support) is substantially more expensive for the same family. The reality is that if that difference between $32K and $24K is not enough to make people switch from public to private school then vouchers won’t cost us anything.
Another beautiful contradiction that I have always laughed at is the argument that we don’t pay enough into our public schools coupled with the following (from the same page linked above):
FAST FACT:
20.8 % of Utah’s graduating public high school seniors have passed their AP tests. This is the third highest rate in the nation.
And another:
FAST FACT:
At 83.8 percent in 2004, Utah’s public high school graduation rate is the best in the country.
Third highest rate in the nation for A.P. tests passed and highest graduation rate but our schools are failing. I guess we need to define what it means to pass (or fail). The only thing I can tell for sure is that there is apparently no strong correlation between money spent per pupil and success in A.P. testing or graduation rates.
I posted in June about the voucher debate exemplifying the worst of political discourse. Apparently Frank had similar thoughts about the voucher debate while reading The Audacity of Hope. I really liked Frank’s post because it illustrates one of the root causes of our unhealthy levels of partisanship that we currently have in Washington (and around the country). It also serves as a good illustration of why I consider Obama to be a top tier candidate even though I disagree with him on a range of issues. He understands the root cause of our political problems.
Frank has also written a second post about where he, as a conservative, agrees with Barak Obama.
The current voucher mess illustrates a sad low point in public discourse. The course of events reads like the script of a soap opera. Our legislature passed two laws to implement a voucher system with the expressed intent of giving citizens a choice in educating our children. One of the two bills is now up for a ballot referendum in November which casts a cloud on the whole situation. The second bill stipulates that the State Board of Education should implement vouchers this summer but the chairman of the Board of Education, an outspoken critic of vouchers, has refused even after the Attorney General has told the board to comply with the law as written. Of course the whole thing has gone to the courts for “clarification” but no matter what the courts say we will still have dedicated people on both sides of the debate who will push their respective agendas. Now we have the Attorney General revoking the status as “special assistant to the Attorney General” of two attorneys working for the Board of Education.
It boils down to the fact that the Board of Education is refusing to comply with the law when they are not elected either to make law or to interpret it. On the other hand, the legislature managed to pass two bills that are largely redundant and forcefully opposed. They have done this in such a way that neither the ruling of the courts nor the ballot referendum will necessarily settle the issue. This sounds more like the work of a handful of powerful partisans than the result of honest efforts by 104 people (the combined size of the House and Senate) trying to represent their constituencies and bring about the best resolution to a high-profile issue.
People on both sides of the issue have called for a special session as the means of clearing up the two existing bills and paving the way for the issue to be resolved. Those who advocate for this approach are likely the most intent on finding a solution rather than just pushing an agenda.
Whatever the outcome of the whole thing, I fear that the final effect on education will be to provide a striking example of how our system of government can be manipulated and hobbled by any minority that is determined enough about what they are trying to accomplish or prevent.
UPDATE: The state Supreme Court ruled that if the citizens voted against vouchers on the referendum in November it would be binding on both bills.
Today is the anniversary of the official surrender at Appomatox that ended the Civil War in 1865. That random tidbit struck home to me as I was reading The Passing of the Armies by Joshua Chamberlain (who officially received the arms and flags of the Confederate army in surrender). I had not realized until I was getting to that climax of the book that I was reading of the events on the day 142 years after this all happened. When I realized that, it really made me think about the results of that war and the example of humanity displayed during that surrender.
Now, a century and a half later, we are engaged in a war that is, in many ways less civil than that one. I am not talking about Iraq or Afghanistan – I am talking about America. Our political and social ideologies are every bit as divided as they were in the 1860’s. We have seen the same rancor and the same intensity of rhetoric for the last 13 years (or more) and it signals a deep rift in our nation. Like the war that brought about a rebirth in our nation, most of the citizens are able to live rather amicably with their neighbors, but our public discourse on ideas rages hotter and hotter when we feel free to express ourselves.
I ask myself, where is our Gettysburg, where the tide turns and we stop winding up our division and start winding down our conflict? Is it past? Or is it (more likely) yet to come? When we finally come to a resolution will we act with the dignity and honor displayed by the Union and Confederate soldiers? They honored each other with displays of respect and valued the courage displayed by their former enemies and forged again the bonds of national brotherhood even when they did not see eye to eye on some of the (semi)concluded issues.
Like the Civil War, I am confident that a resolution will come to the issues we face today which cause so much division among us. Will we be able to effect a better reconciliation than they did? We had to fight a second campaign after 100 years to bring further resolution to the questions of how all people should be treated and we still feel the effects of that divisive war.
Where is our President Lincoln or our General Lee who could fight so passionately and so honorably for the ideas they believed in and yet they held no malice for their opponent, only for the ideas they opposed?
What lies ahead for us? Is it possible that we can be passionate without being scurrilous?
I was having a discussion with Laura last night about me and how I react to people. It is more pronounced in groups, but the fact is that I keep myself distant from people. Laura told me that it comes across as arrogant. For my part I was complaining that people never take me seriously. They always seem to think that I am naive or inexperienced and that really grates on me because I think that I have something to offer (most of the time) in most situations.
I got thinking about that whole thing and the thought struck me that the two things might be related. I realized that, for whatever reason, I expect that people will not place any value on what I say. I expect them to disregard what I have to say and so I don’t speak up loudly – why waste my breath. Because I have preempted people the whole thing becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Having figured that out, now I need to figure out how to correct it.
I think that David has captured one of the keys to being a dependable voice in the blogosphere as he talks about childish behavior. One of the things that really tells me that a blogger is fair and civil in their discussions is when they can accept comments of disagreement without getting petulant or childish. Deleting comments falls in the class of childish – my policy is to never even consider deleting a comment except for the “comments” left by bots as popularity boosting links to online casino’s and the like; those get deleted and banned.
My viewpoints disagree with the viewpoints of David Anderson somewhat regularly, but he has consistently proven himself to be mature and civil. His thoughts are honestly held and fairly well thought out. For all these reasons he is one of the people I most enjoy reading.