CNN - "Commentary: Obama, Dems wrong to kill school vouchers" - Obama's Strongly Supports Public Ed

[TomCADem]

I guess the new bit of internet hysteria being spread is that President Obama is going to do away with public education. Of course, no real evidence is offered for this off repeated talking point, except for a few isolated remarks offered out of context Fox News style. Now, maybe the RI firing was not justified contrary to President Obama's opinion, but to argue that President Obama wants to turn to the private sector? Wasn't President Obama being attacked by the right wing not too long ago for killing private school vouchers?

Please.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/11/martin.vouchers/index.html

(CNN) -- When President Obama signs the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, there will be shouts of joy from both sides as Republicans and Democrats get their cherished earmarks.

Yet tucked into that bill is an amendment pushed by the president's former colleague in the Senate, Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin, who used his influence to essentially kill the District of Columbia school vouchers program.

Oh sure, it will be portrayed that the Democrats aren't killing the program, but the initiative calls for no new students to be allowed entry, unless approved by Congress and the District of Columbia City Council.

And considering that the teachers union has such a death grip on both Democratic-controlled institutions, you can forget about that happening.

[MadHound]

1. You have heard of the Race to the Top funding program that Obama has unleashed, haven't you?

It is the one where the states have to do away with all limits on charter schools in order to receive a pittance of federal money that is desperately needed in this time of recession and falling tax revenues.
Basically Obama is forcing school districts to allow charters in.

This is not the action of one who wants a strong public school system. And this is but one of several actions and statements that the administration has made that show he doesn't like public schools. This was evident when he was a candidate and became even more so once he appointed Duncan.

What need of vouchers when the government simply shuts down a public school and reopens it as a private charter school? Hell, that's the nuke of all vouchers, public school one day, private school the next, boom.

Sorry, nice try, but fail.

[TomCADem]

2. Charter Schools, At Least In California, Are Not Private. In Fact...

California has severely restricted the role of private consultants in the operation of private schools. These restrictions were passed with the strong support of Teacher unions. So, maybe charter schools means something different in other states, because in California, Charter Schools are public and must be run under the supervision of an existing public school district within that district's jurisdictional boundaries.

[Jakes Progress]

3. Nose in the tent. nt

[MadHound]

4. They are not required to take in every student,

They operate for a profit. They are owned by a private group. About the only thing "public" about them is the polite fig leaf that requires that their charter be approved by the Department of Education.

You want to see the real sordid side of California charter schools, go look up California Charter Academy.

Sorry, but charter schools are private, for profit entities. Not just in California, or outside of California, but everywhere.

[TomCADem]

6. So, You Are Relying On California Charter Academy, A Defunct Charter School...

...to make your entire argument? That is Fox logic. Guilt by association? Are you saying that all charter schools offer no benefits whatsoever? Or, that all charter schools are the same as that school you reference? Are you suggesting that there is only one way to educate kids? One size fits all?

I fully support public schools, but I also support alternative approaches to education. And, in California, Charter Schools are "

ublic schools that may provide instruction in any of grades K-12 that are created or organized by a group of teachers, parents, community leaders or a community-based organization."

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/cs/

[MadHound]

10. Again, they are operated for a profit

They are owned by a private entity, they are not required to take in all students, like a public school has to.

That is a private school, no matter what you call it, no matter how you dress it up.

And you don't like my using CCA as an example, oh well. I'm not using it to make my entire argument, but it is rather sad that those sort of things happen with charter schools.

Oh, here's a little something for you to chew on:
"According to a study conducted by Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes in June 2009, only 17 percent of the country’s charter schools performed better than public schools, while more than twice that number underperformed when compared with traditional schools. Evidently, charter schools are not the silver bullet that politicians make them out to be."

<http://stuyspectator.com/2010/02/13/charter-schools-not-a-silver-bullet/>

Charter schools are nothing but a money making operation. They have the bottom line, not student progress, first and foremost as their objective.

[w4rma]

5. You had to go back to early 2009, and pre-Arnie Duncan, to find something positive that Obama has

done for public education.

[TomCADem]

7. Not really, the stimulus was and is enourmously helpful for public education...

Thousands of public teachers would have been laid off, but for the stimulus. I seriously can't believe I am having this argument with so-called Democrats who are minimizing the effects of the stimulus. I guess I can expect some Eric Cantor type arguments that the stimulus did not save a single job next. I guess it easy to miss billions upon billions of dollars devoted to education.

[w4rma]

8. The stimulus is being used to force states to sell their public education to private charters. (nt)

[boston bean]

12. Yep, Deval Patrick here in Mass is salivating over 1/2 billion we will get to reform

our public education. Charter Charter Charter Schools, Rah Rah Rah!

[TomCADem]

13. That's A Lie ...Shame On You

Once again, the completely fabricated argument that all the education money is going to private schools. Does anyone have any shame in pushing this BS? Are we going to start spreading death panel rumors next?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/30/campbell.brown.duncan/index.html#cnnSTCText

DUNCAN: This is an extraordinary opportunity and if we want to become a strong economy again, the best thing we can do is have an educated work force. So this is a huge, huge opportunity to make things dramatically better for schools and for school children around the country and at the higher Ed level as well.

So the stimulus package is going to do a number of things. It's going to help us a tremendous unmet capital needs and so it's really going to be a huge opportunity to invest in infrastructure and several ready projects that we want to get to work on very early on, late spring and through the summer.

We want to save literally hundreds of thousands of teaching jobs. We're very, very worried about tremendous cuts, devastating cuts in school districts and states around the country. We want to stay those off going into the fall. We want to continue to raise the bar academically, raise standards, raise expectations, and there's opportunities in the stimulus package to do that.

There's a huge emphasis on college access and affordability, and at a time when going to college has never been more expensive, we have to help out. And it's so desperate a point that we have more of our high school graduates going on to college. So for the first time ever, we hope Pell grants will go above the $5,000 mark and give many, many more students a chance to go onto some form of higher education.

And finally, the significant investment in the early childhood level as well. So this is an extraordinary comprehensive thoughtful package that the president's put together and it's a chance to take public education, higher education to another level.

[bamacrat]

9. If we properly funded public education we wouldn't need charter schools.

Obama has increased education spending by almost 100 billion over Bush. Not sure if that will mean anything.

[LWolf]

11. They don't need a vouchers program to

spend public money privately. Now all they have to do is "turn around" the school Duncan-style, firing everyone, union-busting, and making charter schools--privatizing.

The charter movement was a counter to the failure of vouchers to catch fire.

[anonymous171]

14. Ahh yes, delicious centrist bias from the corporate media.

"Cherished earmarks" are democracy in action and should not be scorned.