Just want to say “Amen” to all what you and Dad have said here, as well as Jason’s comments. Exactly what I would say if given time to put it all in writing. Well done.

Jen

Trevor, I thought I should respond to your comments. Afterall, it wouldn’t be an intimate conversation if I didn’t. You’re right, for a “true” market to exist, you need to have the choice to withhold your purchase. Fortunately, a market doesn’t have to be a “true” market to be more efficient than a monopoly. Or I guess…unfortunate…since the bill didn’t pass and we’re stuck with the monopoly.

Also, your worries are founded about the poorest of the poor whose parents do not look out for the best interests of their children. That is one of the downfalls of Referendum 1 (and the concept of agency in general.) But, I personally believe that the increased choice and increased performance for the majority of children outweighs the negative effects on the [hopefully very small] minority. Each person’s opinion on that matter is closely tied to his/her opinion on the worth of one child’s potential decrease in education compared to the worth of another child’s potential increase in education…and how many children will be on each side. I can’t think of any bill that hasn’t hurt ANYONE; granted, a child’s education is more touchy than most because of the lack of that child’s control in the matter.

As for illegal immigrants. I probably take a radical approach on the matter, but for me it’s not a matter of “it’s not their fault they’re here” or “it does us no good to have [fill in the gap] in our country.” When it comes to being illegal, I believe they shouldn’t even be allowed to step inside public schools (just as they shouldn’t be allowed inside the country) let alone be considered for educational subsidy by our citizens’ taxes. Does that make me a bad person? I guess you decide. For me, I would rather take an economic loss and even have some people hurt (even if it was me–yes, even as a child) than know our government isn’t even abiding by its own laws…or at least respecting the principle of them.

As a related note, for every dollar that I pay to the government that isn’t spent on military, business infrastructure, law enforcement, or worthwhile legislation, I’d pay another dollar to get it back. I find there’s value in sticking to your principles, even if it comes at a cost.

Thanks for the link and the comments!

[20 minutes of thought later...]

According to my understanding, a true market exists (1) if sellers have to compete with each other for my dollar and (2) if I have the choice of withholding my dollar and my purchase altogether.

If I’m understanding your argument, and if you want to create a true market for public schools, then you’d also have to let people withhold their purchase from schools and put it toward another good or service in the market.

Forcing buyers to purchase (and violating market rule no. 2) distorts the normally favorable outcome of the true market and creates an artificial floor for the price of school. It’s possible that you’d have many sub-sub-par schools worth $2000 or $2500 asking the full voucher price of $3000.

I think that in general, vouchers are a good idea. But I worry for the poorest of the poor whose parents do not look out for the best interests of their children. They may be a small minority, but I don’t worry about those of us with good families and good faith as much as I worry about the poorer among us.

[Bit of a change of subject...]
How will this voucher thing help/hurt illegal immigrants? I know this is a touchy subject, but I’ve been giving it a lot of thought lately and I think that children of illegal imigrants should be educated in our public schools. Not their fault they’re here, and it does us no good to have an under-class of illiterate, poor mexicans in our country.

Regarding poor families, any market solution would certainly put them at a disadvantage. Politicians love to spot this type of inequality, but they don’t talk about the benefits of inequality (often subtle). Aaron has pointed some of them out.

1. Separation of church and state has been corrupted to the point that it is used for exactly the opposite of what the founding fathers intended. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Which, being interpreted means, we can pray and study religion in ANY school and government shall have nothing to say about it. Public schools no longer have that freedom. Private schools do.

2. Tenure is a racket. Any employee should be subject to performance review and consequences regardless of longevity. Opponents say private school teachers will not be held to standards. Helloooooo!!!

3. People like myself who have spent 35 years in a chosen field can teach in private schools without a “certificate” whereas we are unqualified to teach in public schools.

4. This is simply a personal opinion, but public schools waste far too much money on extra-curricular activities. The list is endless and obvious.

5. Public school discipline is so restricted we now have to hire security guards, etc. I really don’t know how this works in private schools, but I would guess they have more latitude to deal with disciplinary matters and at far lower cost.

Those are just a few examples and I may not be entirely right on those, but the main point is that I really can’t think of many reasons why public schools should be preferred over private. In fact, I don’t even understand why teachers are opposed to referendum 1. There will be just as many students to teach and a more competitive environment for well qualified teachers to improve their position and compensation - just like in any other career.