Florida Voucher Money Scam is Another Republican Train Wreck Waiting to Happen

What looks, sounds and feels good to the public now about vouchers savings, is really a taxpayer scam, and nothing more. Why people don’t see the obvious manipulation of public opinion regarding voucher funding is still a mystery to me. It doesn’t take a genius to dissect the Republican scheme: Shift education to the private sector; advance a less educated and more easily manipulated electorate; all the while fulfilling their quest to cut taxes. Power, not public good, is the driving force in Florida. Sarasota’s Harold Tribune featured this simple explanation of the flawed thinking of voucher advocates.

A report … says a recently created school voucher program is saving the state millions. Logically, that means it could save more if the program is expanded.

I long ago called the corporate tax-credit voucher program a money-laundering scheme. Since it would be illegal to use tax money to fund private schools that don't have to meet anything even close to the state standards imposed on public school systems, this program dodges the law by using money that, technically, isn't tax money … The corporations get a dollar-for-dollar reduction in their state tax bill. That's the scammy part.

But those doing the study for the Legislature's Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability understand all that. Their report concludes that the voucher program still saved the state almost $40 million last year. Private schools got $3,750 per student as tuition and agree not to charge the students more. The public school's annual cost per student is about $7,000.

The state could save more if it told public schools they could act like private schools and not be required to hire teachers the state considers qualified, or hit any marks whatsoever in standardized test scores for reading, writing, math and science. Their students don't even take the FCATs, the tests that we are told are the measure of a school's success. The state's obsession with measuring performance disappears entirely for private schools, even when they take voucher money. Meanwhile, the public schools have to provide bus service to make sure all kids have a way to get to school. Private schools don't.

With the voucher foot now well in the door, supporters will no doubt try to increase them, year by year.

Yes, that would wipe out the savings, but those who love vouchers were never in it to save us money. They are in it to make taxpayers pay for private and church schools.

It’s the redistribution of education upward, with no questions asked by the gullible public. But this isn’t the only area of attack. Feel good results often obscure actual academic performance while demonstrating the real reasons students don’t perform well. According to the University of Arkansas:

Researchers with the School Choice Demonstration Project based at the University of Arkansas report that having a choice of where to send their children to school boosts their satisfaction with and involvement in schools in Washington, D.C..

That’s right, parents are more satisfied. Are kids more educated? Three quarters of the voucher parents don’t care. Is it a double standard for public schools over private? You bet.

“The greatest source of satisfaction reported by parents was simply in being able to choose their child’s school,” added Patrick Wolf, director of the School Choice Demonstration Project and holder of the Twenty-First Century Chair in School Choice in the department of education reform at the University of Arkansas. “Even D.C. parents whose children ended up returning to public schools tended to say that they were happy that they at least had a choice.” Some of the other findings: The factors these parents considered most important in making a choice included smaller class sizes, school safety, religious or values-based environment and rigorous academic curriculum; By the third year of focus groups, class size remained a crucial characteristic while school safety was less of an issue; Many parents placed greater emphasis on attitudes and behavior of their children, rather than test scores, as a basis for evaluating their progress. None of the parents polled considered standardized test scores to be the predominant measure when
assessing their children’s progress

I wonder where voucher parents got the idea that public schools were more unresponsive then their favored private couterparts?

Gov. Chris Christie's Plan to Union Bash, Destroy Public Education. Goodbye Coded Rhetoric.

Take a look at this revealing speech by NJ Gov. Chris Christie. Odd isn't it how Christie is so focused on the teachers unions health care, pay grade and what he insinuates is a "fained" concern teachers have over a child's education.

It's not vouchers on Christie's mind. The one thing on the GOP's list of potential accomplishments; weakening the teachers union. Unfortunately, Christie fails to mention how the voucher program in DC went wrong, didn't succeed, and how the same results could have been gleaned from helping the public school system improve their reading results.

But union bashing sells to the base, the low information voter, the bad parent who "knows more about education" than teachers. It not only sounds crazy, it is crazy.



From and earlier post:

The DC school voucher program grades are out, and they closely mirror the recent report examining the Milwaukee voucher system. Can you say little or no improvement. It's interesting to note that nearly 60 percent of voucher recipients either did not use the funding or used only part of it before dropping out. Here's the quick summary:

The DC School Choice Incentive Act of 2003 established the first federally funded private school voucher program in the United States, providing scholarships of up to $7,500 for low-income residents of the District of Columbia to send their children to local participating private schools.

The law also mandated that the Department conduct an independent, rigorous impact evaluation of what is now called the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP). The study's latest report, Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Impacts After Three Years, measures the effects of the Program on student achievement in reading and math, and on student and parent perceptions of school satisfaction and safety.

The evaluation found that the OSP improved reading, but not math, achievement overall and for 5 of 10 subgroups of students examined. The group designated as the highest priority by Congress — students applying from "schools in need of improvement" (SINI) — did not experience achievement impacts. Students offered scholarships did not report being more satisfied or feeling safer than those who were not offered scholarships, however the OSP did have a positive impact on parent satisfaction and perceptions of school safety.

You'll notice parent satisfaction is positive. This is the overarching, feel good message delivered by the pro-voucher crowd. Parents feel like their in control and are likely to think they have made the right decision in their schools choice. The kids are apparently not impressed or fooled. And their grade show that. Sadly, this "voucher diversion" keeps real reform of our public schools on the back burner to some extent, offering up an empty "debate" of the issues.

DC Vouchers Study's Bad News for Privateers of Public Education

The DC school voucher program grades are out, and they closely mirror the recent report examining the Milwaukee voucher system. Can you say little or no improvement. It's interesting to note that nearly 60 percent of voucher recipients either did not use the funding or used only part of it before dropping out. Here's the quick summary:

The DC School Choice Incentive Act of 2003 established the first federally funded private school voucher program in the United States, providing scholarships of up to $7,500 for low-income residents of the District of Columbia to send their children to local participating private schools. The law also mandated that the Department conduct an independent, rigorous impact evaluation of what is now called the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP). The study's latest report, Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Impacts After Three Years, measures the effects of the Program on student achievement in reading and math, and on student and parent perceptions of school satisfaction and safety.

The evaluation found that the OSP improved reading, but not math, achievement overall and for 5 of 10 subgroups of students examined. The group designated as the highest priority by Congress — students applying from "schools in need of improvement" (SINI) — did not experience achievement impacts. Students offered scholarships did not report being more satisfied or feeling safer than those who were not offered scholarships, however the OSP did have a positive impact on parent satisfaction and perceptions of school safety.

You'll notice parent satisfaction is positive. This is the overarching, feel good message delivered by the pro-voucher crowd. Parents feel like their in control and are likely to think they have made the right decision in their schools choice. The kids are apparently not impressed or fooled. And their grade show that. Sadly, this "voucher diversion" keeps real reform of our public schools on the back burner to some extent, offering up an empty "debate" of the issues.

Just for fun, listen to the Republican politicians calling for a "debate" on just about everything they oppose. They want a debate, filled with opinion and false statements, with fictions imagined and re-enforced over time to obscured and muddy the issue. A villification period if you will.

I'm surprised many in the press or blogosphere haven't notice this over used excuse not to do anything. Remember the line: "We need to debate..."

Rep. Boehner Likes Feel Good Voucher Program. The Hell with Results

Here’s a story making the rounds about school vouchers.

CBN News White House Correspondent David Brody wrote:

Look over there in the corner! It's House Minority Leader John Boehner raising the red flag. On that flag is a big sign that says:
DC SCHOOL VOUCHERS PHASED OUT. Read below from Boehner:

"The D.C. school choice program has provided hope for thousands of low-income children in the District of Columbia since it was established, and has been demonstrating results when it comes to parental satisfaction and increased parental involvement. Eliminating this program would represent an irresponsible and shameful act on the part of the Democratic leadership in Congress, and the children of the District of Columbia deserve better.

What are the successful elements of the voucher program, according to Boehner?; parental satisfaction and increased parental involvement. That’s it? You couldn’t get that same parental involvement in public schools? What about grades? Test scores? Graduation rates? This has been the underlying problem with the whole voucher argument. Supporters stress “feel good” results, as if that in someway changes the above measurable improvements, which it hasn’t. In fact, one study found that students weren’t impressed at all in the voucher school program and didn’t notice any difference from their public schools experience.

But was Rep. Boehner telling the truth?

Brendan Daly, one of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's top aide's tells The Brody File the following:

"The Republicans' claims are misfounded. We fund this program in 2009 but the bills says it must be authorized before we fund it in the future."

Vouchers, the darling Republican wedge issue and union buster, is a funnel for taxpayer dollars to forever disappear with little or no accountability into the private school black hole. As we have seen from our painful economic collapse, private business can be trusted to do just the right thing with the peoples money.

D.C Voucher School Final Report: Failed!

The D.C voucher program failed! Oh, but you'd never know that if you read the breaking news story in the Washington Post: "The U.S. Department of Education issued its final evaluation of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program -- aka school vouchers."

So will the study move the ball? Here's what it found: (a) "There is no conclusive evidence that the [voucher program] affected student achievement." (b) The program "significantly improved students' chances of graduating from high school" -- by 12 percent. And (c), the program "raised parents', but not students', ratings of school safety and satisfaction."

But something was missing from point (b). Check out the actual language:

The Program significantly improved students' chances of graduating from high school, "according to parent reports."

There's more:

"Graduation rates are as reported by parents during telephone surveys … about 500 of the 2,300 students in the study were old enough to have graduated from high school. Parents of these students were surveyed about their child’s progress through school.

If that didn't raise a few red flags, check out this additional caveat:

Based on parents who responded, the offer of an OSP scholarship increased students’ probability of completing high school by 12 percentage points overall.

But what is the actual number when ALL students who completed high school were counted, and not just what was reported from the "parents who responded?"

In an attempt to spin the final report in a positive way, the Washington Post article took the "parents who responded" "parent reports" section of the summary, and flipped reality on its ear.

But how to explain the essential dilemma of the findings? How can there be such a dramatic rise in graduation rates with so little change in test scores?

Patrick Wolf, the University of Arkansas researcher who led the study, tells me the phenomenon isn't unheard of. As far back as the 1980s, he says, famed sociologist James S. Coleman had theorized that, when it came to disadvantaged students, private schools "had a stronger effect on their persistence in the education system rather than their performance." In other words, they may not do better, but they stay longer" … And then there's this point: "I think the question to ask is, Where's the harm?" Wolf says. "What's the harm of extending this program? There's no evidence that anyone was harmed. And there is some evidence that this helped students."

Wow, what a great program huh? For a lousy final report on the D.C. voucher program, it was mission accomplished for voucher advocates.

Vouchers Satisfy Parents, play to their Insecurities!

It's funny and deceptive the way Republicans like Rep. Jeremy Thiesfeldt, a former teacher, steer clear of the 25 year substandard private voucher school record, by touting how "satisfied" parents are with the program.

The old cliche "parents know what's best for their children," is getting a lot of mileage, and is patently ridiculous. Really, parents somehow have an innate insight into the latest teaching techniques and course work they feel is best for their kids?

From WPR audio this morning, Thiesfeldt did the old switcheroo, shifting from a callers question about private school accountability to the magical "satisfaction" levels of voucher parents. And he thought I wouldn't notice:



Republicans have always played on the fears and insecurities of parents who want to do what's right for their kids. Giving them "a choice" is nothing but manipulative pandering. Thiesfeldt pointed to studies of satisfied parents. I just happen to remember that study:

According to the University of Arkansas: Researchers with the School Choice Demonstration Project report that having a choice of where to send their children to school boosts their satisfaction with and involvement in schools (in Washington, D.C.). 

That’s right, parents are more satisfied simply because they got to choose. But are kids more educated? Three quarters of the voucher parents didn't care. Public schools aren't held to that same standard: 

Patrick Wolf, director of the School Choice Demonstration Project said, “Even D.C. parents whose children ended up returning to public schools tended to say that they were happy that they at least had a choice.” 

After decades of bashing, even laughing at the idea of smaller class sizes, Republican backed vouchers schools can't play it up enough, finding a very receptive audience of appreciative parents. Still, it's all about touchy feely stuff and not about better academic outcomes:

The factors these parents considered most important in making a choice included smaller class sizes, school safety, religious or values-based environment and rigorous academic curriculum ... Many parents placed greater emphasis on attitudes and behavior of their children, rather than test scores, as a basis for evaluating their progress. None of the parents polled considered standardized test scores when assessing their children’s progress.

President George W. Bush's NCLB's testing extravaganza emphasized testing as a way to fail most schools, so they could be turned into private religious schools. Testing went into overdrive and that's why we have what we have today. But for vouchers, testing isn't important:

Most parents measure their children’s progress almost exclusively by the level of enthusiasm the students express ... Actual grades and test scores are secondary concerns. By this standard, the vast majority of families reported that their children are succeeding or progressing in very important ways.

That same caller gave Thiesfeldt an example of how cutting education funding can actually hurting our kids. Of course, Thiesfeldt lamented the tight budget he and his band of plundering republican pirates have created.



Remember when everyone in the state paid taxes and supported education and infrastructure? Not anymore, since manufacturers and big ag got a $240 million tax cut and soon won't be paying any state tax at all. That's freeloading, sticking even conservative tightwad voters with the bill. And not a peep.  

DeLusional DeVos DeVoid of DeSmarts.

Well, I guess we can finally put the last nail in the coffin when it comes to the myth of “fiscal conservatism.” That’s just so much bullshit.

Trump’s education pick of Betsy DeVos proved that point beyond words. Oddly, it was Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski from Alaska that said it best last week when she announced her opposition:

“I have serious concerns about a nominee to be secretary of education who has been so involved in one side of the equation, so immersed in the push for vouchers, that she may be unaware of what actually is successful within the public schools, and also what is broken and how to fix them.”

Ya think? What sane person, or even Trump voter, would back putting someone in a position this important, with absolutely no experience whatsoever? For all the years DeVos opposed public schools, you'd think she would have researched the topic:

She has never run, taught in, attended or sent a child to an American public school, and her confirmation hearings laid bare her ignorance of education policy and scorn for public education itself. 

In her Senate hearing, Ms. DeVos appeared largely ignorant of challenges facing college students, as well. She indicated that she was skeptical of Education Department policies to prevent fraud by for-profit colleges — a position favored, no doubt, by Mr. Trump, who just settled a fraud case against his so-called Trump University for $25 million. It was not clear that she understood how various student loan and aid programs worked, or could distinguish between them.

(DeVos) lobbied to shut down the troubled Detroit public school system and channel the money to charter, private or religious schools, regardless of their performance. She also favors online private schools, an alternative that most leading educators reject as destructive to younger children’s need to develop peer relationships, and an industry prone to scams.

Trump voters have exposed their own scam; it's not government they hate, they hate not having power. So now they're suddenly okay with taxpayers funding religious schools and throwing money into unaccountable private black holes because anecdotal stories affirm their agenda. I remember one survey that showed parental satisfaction wasn't based on grades, which were lower, but on the feeling they did something, their kids were safer, and their child happier. Their kids didn't feel that way in the survey at all, just the opposite.  

"Choice" is just another manipulation, to appeal to every parents insecurity over doing the right thing for their kid:

"Why School Vouchers Don't Matter" by Kevin Carey in the Chronicle Review laid out what I consider one of the best arguments against voucher schools:“The D.C. voucher program does none of these things. No new schools have been built as a result, no groundbreaking programs created, competition spurred, or innovators attracted…
 …there remains the point that some parents among the lower classes do not understand educational opportunities when they are presented to them. Nor would they be able to make informed choices on their children’s behalf. For instance, just tonight I had a heated discussion with my working class mother about my nephew being admitted into a program for gifted youngsters at his public elementary school. She thought it would be a waste of time.

 Some studies suggest that a similar attitude becomes more common the lower down the economic ladder we look. To ignore this obstacle, and pretend every parent has the capacity to make the same informed decision a college- or law school-educated person can make, remains one abiding problem with the voucher system. Choice does not automatically level the playing field if the choosers have different backgrounds informing those choices.— Cassandra

GOP trick to make Public Schools sound like Private Schools fails.

Republican lawmaker and former teacher Jeremy Thiesfeldt must think we’re stupid, and after taking a look at his plans for public education, he apparently wants to make our kids that way too.

Public Profit Bad, Private Profit Good: Thiesfeldt complained in his press release that the Fond du Lac School Districts made up for lost funding by increasing taxes and then having a surplus, what he oddly called “profit.” That’s rich coming from a guy pushing profit driven private schools:

Former disgruntled teacher!!!

The Fond du Lac School District (FDLSD) “increased its tax levy $379,407 due to private school voucher students.” A Fond du Lac Reporter article took advantage of that complexity to mislead the readers, whether intentional or not, to put the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program (WPCP) in a negative light. The districts levied beyond the costs of the WPCP, profiting from students that are no longer enrolled, or never were enrolled in district schools.

Profit is usually paid out to someone or something. The districts money will stay with the district and pay for schools. 

Below I’ve interpreted Thiesfeldt’s nonsensical list of talking points, with my comments in parenthesis:  

“Students are educated at a lower cost (education will be driven by cost, not outcomes) and access to more educational choices (the magical thinking that more choices makes things better) yields greater parent satisfaction (playing on the insecurities and fears of parents who want to do what's best for their kids) and improved outcomes (simply not factually true).” 

Thiesfeldt closes with meaningless, nonsensical assumptions:

In America today, people are demanding choices (no, Republican privateers are demanding choices). In order to efficiently provide for more educational choices, we must conclude all good schools are worthy of some level of public financial support ("we must? ... 'these aren't the droids you're looking for...sorry, just more insane claptrap beyond any Jedi mind trick). 

Good schools need adequate funding as they assist parents in educating their children (but not public schools, right?); dedicated teachers need fair compensation, good training and parental support; good parents need to be actively engaged in school governance; students need parents to hold them to high standards (yes, for public schools. Try "governance" of a private school sometime). 

Cooperation amongst all these entities (just give-in to profit driven private schools) will yield students that possess the skills our workforce requires, but, more importantly will sustain and advance the American tradition by passing the keys of freedom to coming generations (dripping nationalism, since when are private for profit schools traditional?).

Isn't it a little suspicious that a 21 year former religious school teacher wants to expand vouchers? Thiesfeldt's ultimate goal is like so many others in his party; a mass conversion to religious indoctrination and ultimately a more socially conservative society. Let's call it what it is, taxpayer supported Sunday school, 5 days a week.

Kewaskum’s Rep. Jesse Kremer came right out and said it, when he dragged his 3 Biblically named daughters into the debate:

An unapologetic social conservative with a deep Christian faith, Kremer enrolled his three daughters — Keturah, 12, Miriam, 10, and Michaiah, 6 — in a Lutheran school in West Bend. “I tell people who send their kids to public schools that I send my kids there because I know they are getting the beliefs that I want them to have.”

And since you don't have to test "beliefs," Thiesfeldt's opt out bill is starting to make sense:

Rep. Thiesfeldt's Test "Opt Out" Bill Passes Assembly: Rep. Thiesfeldt’s bill, guarantees parents of students in grades 3-12 the ability to receive, upon formal request, an exemption for their child from the statewide standardized test...

And magically, vouchers schools are as good as they say they are.