School Voucher Plans: Who benefits more: the students or the holders of ideological beliefs?

This is a reposting of an 11/27/16 blog posting

Betsy DeVos has been tapped as Donald Trump's Education Secretary. She is an ardent supporter of charter schools and vouchers for private education but she is reported to be also in favor of testing which may or may not mean Common Core (which Donald Trump wants to trash). She is getting hit from both the left and the right.  

 Ideology should not be the basis for providing education that is good for our children. .The goal of some is to get religious based education paid for by taxpayer money.  They have had to buck numerous court decisions that upheld the Constitution's separation of church and state.  However, there are two questions involved:  One is the Constitutionality of a voucher program that can fund religious-based education. The other is it good public policy that improves educational outcome for all.   Will education teach kids to read, write, at least calculate using math, have critical thinking, understand history, its lessons and, yes civics?

 From the public policy perspective, will students' education benefit?  We do have some experience with vouchers and the results are contrary to expectations of many. advocates of vouchers.  From the public policy perspective, Students using vouchers to attend private schools in Ohio performed significantly worse on state tests than their peers who remained in public schools, according to a new study. In Wisconsin, a study finds little or no indication that pupils in those Milwaukee public schools that have more school choice possibilities nearby made significantly greater year-to-year gains in primary school tests than pupils in other Milwaukee public schools. (http://www.epi.org/publication/book_vouchers/)

So what is wrong about those who support using taxpayer money vouchers in support of "religious education".  What is at issue is the separation of church and state in the Constitution and if funding religious schools violates that. provision. 

There was an attempt in a Denver suburb, Douglas County, to allow vouchers to be used for religious based schools.   The effort failed in a federal court.  http://www.denverpost.com/2016/06/09/attorneys-battle-it-out-in-federal-court-on-douglas-county-voucher-program/

On the other hand, the Supreme Court in a 5 to 4 split ruled in favor of a voucher program in Ohio if it went to parents, not to schools, had a secular purpose and did not fund religious education.  The Private Choice Test developed by the Court, for a voucher program to be constitutional was that  it must meet all of the following criteria:

• the program must have a valid secular purpose
• aid must go to parents and not to the schools
• a broad class of beneficiaries must be covered
• the program must be neutral with respect to religion
• there must be adequate nonreligious options

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zelman_v._Simmons-Harris
However, the results have had mixed performance on student tests. From a public policy viewpoint, it has not been a great success.
." http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/charterschoice/2016/07/ohio_vouchers_have_mixed_impact_on_student_performance_study_finds.html

The conclusion from these experiences is that vouchers do not benefit the students so much as it satisfies ideological and political beliefs that choice that includes private schools is the most important criteria or that anything private is better than that which is government funded...

Posted on Facebook in the comment section of the posing of this was a very well expressed comment: by Maggie Orth.
"The problem with vouchers is that they create a baseline cost for education. Those who can only afford the vouchers will get crap. Those who can supplement will get more. Moreover, vouchers assume that working parents have the resources and time to weed through a complex marketplace-- just as Medicare vouchers do with seniors. I shudder to think of my poor parents who are struggling with my father's Alzheimer's trying to sort through "market-based Medicare options." The only thing education vouchers guarantee is a parent's right to indoctrinate their children and deny them access to ideas the parents don't like. There are facts in the world- like geology and science. If people think the US can be a world-class stable democracy and economy when people can teach their children whatever facts they want, they are very wrong."

• www.privateschoolreview.com
•  

The private elementary school average is $8,522 per year and the private high school averages $12,953.   ..

Michigan has gone from a middle-of-the-pack state to the bottom tier in just 12 years. The state's NAEP ranking on fourth-grade reading has dropped from 28th in 2003 to 41st in 2015, the latest results. The fourth-grade math ranking has dropped from 27th in 2003 to 42nd, writes Ravitch. The Detroit Free Press runs down the numbers here.  http://www.prwatch.org/news/2017/01/13206/devos-math-reading-scores-tanking-michigan

Gen. Michael T Flynn's anti Muslim rhetoric. He needs to tone it down.

Michael Flynn, Donald Trump's national security advisor, has a tendency to make comments that warm the cockles of those who have a bad case of Muslimphobia.  He has called the religion of Islam a "cancer" .  Lately  taken out of context to some extent he  has called Islam not a religion but a political system. (He was referring to "radical Islam"  in context but often the captions of his remarks left out that qualifying  nuance).  What  these not carefully  parsed words has done is to cause comments in Facebook postings I have seen  that reveal how widespread is anti-Islamic  bigotry in the United States.

Flynn is already under attack for his hard line approach to Islam and Donald Trump's appointment to his White House in a very sensitive position.  Let us hope his future pronouncements are more sensitively  parsed and the advice he gives Pres. Elect Trump behind the scenes is more reflective of  the complexities of the Muslim world.  If he does not, he may actually harm US national security and create more problems with terrorism than we have now.

What I learned  from  on line media discussions is there are those who do believe that the religion of Islam is not a religion but  a political system. To them it justifies their  blanket indictment of Muslims and Islam in general .They seized on Flynn's words, leaving out any qualifying statements that he was referring to "radical Islam" (referring to ISIS or other of such ilk)  which is even held in contempt  by the overwhelming number of  world's Muslims as being heretical    Here is the reality:  It is not the religion that is at fault; it is  some of the practitioners who use the religion for their own purposes. . What those who took his remarks as validating their indictment of  all Muslims  are doing  is creating a strategic military  problem, too. It will turn off the very allies who consider ISIS and its kind as as heretics. Those Muslims who do not follow ISIS are the very ones we need to fight ISIS,and we might find ourselves going it alone if the Trump administration continues to condone such anti-Islamic bigotry.

What is true is that there are those who use religion to get and keep power and that is a  fact of life in our world's history.  It has happened with some frequency.  It can be countered. Sometimes greater understanding can come from personal contacts or becoming more knowledgeable about the religion. How many Muslims do you know anyway or ever met or talked with them? How much of the theology of Islam or its origins (based on the same Abrahamic beliefs of Christianity and Judaism) do you know?To say Islam is not a religion is sheer ignorance and is disrespectful   of  the  over 1.5 billion Muslims in the world who practice it peacefully.

What is particularly  disturbing is the effect of anti Muslim bigotry on  our own security.  There are those who are already here who have been  radicalized on line.  So far, to intercept theim from carrying out Jihad in the US or abroad,  law enforcement has relied on cooperation with the Muslim community and their good will to intercept them before they act.  Now, what I hear is fear in that community, that the Trump administration is hostile and suspicious of all followers of Islam in the US.  Whether good will and cooperation in the future will continue is not helped by the bigoted comments found on line or expressed openly. Those bigoted remarks can only work to increase the alienation of members  of our own  Muslim community.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzh9b_vo4vshttp://www.jewsnews.co.il/2016/11/24/mike-flynn-trumps-new-national-security-advisor-says-islam-is-not-a-religion-but-a-political-system-based-on-religion-used-to-control-people.html

Defining racism and bigotry

Sometimes in the battle of words and name calling, we throw around terms that sound awful but we fail to look at the meaning:  There are two hurled often:  One is racism and the other is bigotry.  I ran to Websters' dictionary for defintion:
"Racism:1.  a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race2a :  a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principlesb :  a political or social system founded on racism"

1. By that definition the KKK or Neo Nazi groups fit that definition to a tee. Inclusion and belief that all men are created equal are the opposite terms.

Bigotry is a bit more  subtle: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

"Full Definition of bigot. : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance."How we apply the definition and to whom are the stuff of which political discourse is made.  The key in that  definition  of bigotry is "intolerantly" as does the following clause. You may have strong views you hold dearly, but the difference is how you treat or speak to others, especially a racial or ethnic group.Example of Breitbart bigotry in the their own words: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/stephen-bannon-breitbart-words. “Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy” 

• “Bill Kristol: Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew” 

• “World Health Organization Report: Trannies 49 Xs Higher HIV Rate”

• “Roger Stone: Huma Abedin ‘Most Likely a Saudi Spy’ With ‘Deep, Inarguable Connections’ to ‘Global Terrorist Entity’” 

• “Lesbian Bridezillas Bully Bridal Shop Owner Over Religious Beliefs” 

• “The Solution to Online ‘Harassment’ Is Simple: Women Should Log Off”

Is Steve Bannon, formerly with Breitbart and now closest policy advisor to Donald Trump, himslef a bigot?  A case could be made either way. He admits to being a nationalist, but a white nationalist? Probably not, though he has provided the media forum for some of those holding such views to be an advocate. 

What  I am seeing  on Facebook regarding Muslims, are many postings painting their religion and their followers  as all being to be feared as a threat, is sheer bigotry since the remarks "treat the members of their group" with hatred and intolerance.  One of the tools used by those who are intolerant of Muslims is to gin up fear that their 1% of  the United States  population will impose Sharia law on us. That has been an ongoing theme in anti-Muslim bigotry since 2011.  Our forefathers had experienced "divine right of Kings' and wisely wrote an amendment to the Constitution that prohibits setting up a state religion. It is found in the First Amendment. "Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,....".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-trump-adviser-stephen-bannon-fiery-populism-followed-life-in-elite-circles/2016/11/19/de91ef40-ac57-11e6-977a-1030f822fc35_story.html?tid=a_inl

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_States

Populism is a fickle beast and therein lies the Democratic Party's hope

Populism is a fickle beast. The public mood can change quickly. Therein lies the Democratic Party's hope, but only if it can develop an appeal to those who voted for change in 2016 and Donald Trump fails to improve the lot of those who felt economic pain of being left behind in the economy.  

Donald Trump is laying a trap for himself by setting up an administratiion dominated by anti-populists. So far, Donald Trump's appointments to cabinet posts make his administration look like a team of billionaires.  While they are Washington outsiders, their orientation is 100% big business and it is doubtful they will promote protecting consumers from bad, unfair, harmful business practices or take the side of the working middle class when policy conflicts with the CEO s and the bottom line. Republicans propose removing regulations that are harmful to business interests and many of those regulations are consumer protection measures. Democrats should be ready to pounce when they see these inevitable GOP backed anti consumer, anti little guy policies.

What Democrats are debating is whether to stonewall Donald Trump so he fails or whether they join forces with him on issues and legislation which they would normally support because it benefits the working middle class .Those who support stonewalling argue that supporting Trump on some policy issues is helping Trump succeed and will hurt Democratic chances later.  Democrats have more to gain by tooting  their horns loudly that solving middle class  problems is better than blind partisanship.  Their measuring stick should be whether the middle class is helped in deciding  what legislation they support regardless who proposes it.  

Both Democrats and the Trump administration can join in common cause in providing more jobs through infrastructure projects. Greater emphasis on educational training for the new manufacturing economy will be something that may be of direct benefit.  

What would be harmful  to the struggling middle class would be yanking affordable health insurance from those in the lower income brackets without  effective, comparable replacement.  Privatizing Medicare and Social Security would not be helpful, because those who most rely on those programs for retirement security are the middle class and the near poor.  Democrats should  hold Donald Trump to his promises not to touch them. If lowering individual taxes on the wealthy does not stimulate the economy and lift all boats in four years,  Democrats can make the case trickle down economics are a demonstrated failure. To do so, they need to oppose massive tax cuts to wealthy individuals now even if it is a losing battle in Congress.

Promoters of  white supremacy such as the KKK  and bigotry forums like Breitbart News  tainted supporters of Donald Trump. Racists and bigots  think they have found a home in a GOP and believe they have a green light to be "politically incorrect" and shout hate speech. Donald Trump denounced bigotry in a post election rally in Cincinnati. Those were the right words, but whether his policies support civil and human rights will be the real test.  Expect Democrats to continue to speak out against racism and bigotry, and be a champion for civil and human rights. That is what will inevitably differentiate Democrats from the Trump wing of the GOP.