November 20, 2014

"Nevertheless, the Justice Department suggests that the choice schools discriminate because they do not do something they do not have the resources to do."

"That is, they do not offer the panoply of services that public schools, with ample state and federal funding, offer to children with special needs. With sanctimony commensurate with their hypocrisy, school choice opponents borrow language from the era of Brown v. Board of Education to accuse Wisconsin of sanctioning a 'dual school system.' The federal government is attempting to order the state to require the choice schools to choose between the impossible and the fatal — between offering services they cannot afford or leaving the voucher program. Closing the voucher program is the obvious objective of the teachers unions and hence of the Obama administration. Herding children from the choice schools back into government schools would swell the ranks of unionized teachers, whose union dues fund the Democratic Party as it professes devotion to 'diversity' and the downtrodden."

Writes George Will in "The Justice Department becomes a schoolyard bully in Wisconsin."

147 comments:

Renee said...

Charters can dismiss students in ways public schools can't. Why are public monies funding these schools?

Don't parents want the neighborhood school to on par, rather then commuting their children?

Peter said...

This reminds me of when New York City tried to offer public toilets. They were sued because they were not fully handicapped accessible.

So the toilets went away. Because it was better for no one to be able to use them then for less than 100% to be able to use them.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/21/nyregion/in-new-york-few-public-toilets-and-many-rules.html

Laslo Spatula said...

You're losing your focus on cheese, Wisconsin.

Tank said...

Neighbors goat, too, must die.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

Althouse commenters become the schoolyard bullies of blogs. Film at 11.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Renee said...Don't parents want the neighborhood school to on par, rather then commuting their children?

I'm sure they'd love that. The problem is they can't see a way to get their neighborhood school up to par (partly for reasons the Dem/Union alliance will never fix, partly because the neighborhood school includes less-interested/motivated parents), and so their best option for actually making a positive change (making a school better) and getting their kid a good school experience is through charters (or, of course, private schools most parents can't afford).

Mark said...

Yes, their best bet is to get away from those special needs kids and their less motivated parents.

Its discrimination by another name, clothed in the terminology of choice and educational excellence. Keep our special butterflies away from 'those kids' by sending them to schools that won't accept or support kids that dont fit our desired group.

garage mahal said...

Interesting: no citation [again] that Will is on the Board of Directors at the Bradley Foundation, which has pumped millions of dollars into school choice propaganda. It's a massive scam.

kcom said...

"Don't parents want the neighborhood school to on par, rather then commuting their children?"

Please provide evidence that pouring vast gobs of money into schools for 50 years has ever brought them up to par? If it had, the charter system would never have been born.

Sebastian said...

Progressivism = bullying.

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
Interesting: no citation [again] that Will is on the Board of Directors at the Bradley Foundation, which has pumped millions of dollars into school choice propaganda. It's a massive scam."

How does this "massive scam" compare to the hundreds of millions...billions?...that the Teachers Unions have pumped into the Democratic Party?

buwaya said...

The problem with many public schools isn't the teachers, resources, curriculum, or even the administrators. These can all be inadequate and limit effectiveness, but all these effects are ultimately minor. The most important factor in both group and personal performance in school outcomes are the kids. Peer effects are extremely powerful.
Bad peers are very bad news.
This is a fact and unavoidable. Everyone in education knows it in their bones, and there is very little that can be done about it other than to rescue the talented, or at least the potentially well behaved and motivatable tenth, or third, or half, by some sort of tracking or transfer. Therefore all of Ed reform from whatever ideological direction is a mass of euphemisms and smokescreens. Charters are really an escape mechanism from the mass. So are honors, magnet and other programs. Everyone is a hypocrite because no-one wants to handle the truth.
The general culture is sick, which manifests itself most powerfully in the loss of ability to educate, or even civilize, kids. I think every parent knows this on a deep level, though many are too brutalized to care much. I have met many such where it is clear it is a sore point but haven't the willpower to escape it.

Renee said...

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/11/13/many-black-latino-males-falling-through-cracks-boston-schools-report-says/QUs2KeokZZmyk8V7ojSArJ/story.html


How will charters change this?

Original Mike said...

"Bad peers are very bad news."

This. My step-daughter was headed in a very bad direction. Put her in a parochial high school and she changed overnight. It was breathtaking. Fortunately, we had the wherewithal to do it. My heart breaks for the parents who do not.

Carol said...

all of Ed reform from whatever ideological direction is a mass of euphemisms and smokescreens.

Toujours la politesse.

Known Unknown said...

Keep our special butterflies away from 'those kids' by sending them to schools that won't accept or support kids that dont fit our desired group.

Or, conversely, in the real world, I want my money to help educate my kids, not pad levels of administration's retirement plans.

buwaya said...

Renee,
Charters will save a few of them, or even a large fraction if done well and in sufficient scale.
That is much better than nothing.

garage mahal said...

Speaking of Bradley funded hack tanks: Retirement benefits are next up.

buwaya said...

"Hack"?
Have you personally tried to tutor the kids we are discussing?
Have you had children in "urban" schools?
Have you been in a KIPP?
People who know much more than you do are reading what you write. Be careful or you will seem a fool.

Anonymous said...

To be sure, the average Washington Post reader might not be able to figure out on his own that a school-choice advocate is allied with other school-choice advocates.

garage mahal said...

Allied with = paid propagandist

Bryan C said...

"Why are public monies funding these schools?"

I'm sure most parents would prefer to use their own private money. Unfortunately someone insists on taking it away from them before they can even make that choice.

"Don't parents want the neighborhood school to on par, rather then commuting their children?"

"Neighborhood school" being defined as the school your betters decide your child belongs to after a deep, holistic pedagogical analysis of the numbers in your ZIP code.

Yeah, why can't these parents put the good of the School ahead of their own selfish child-rearing priorities?

Gahrie said...

Its discrimination by another name, clothed in the terminology of choice and educational excellence. Keep our special butterflies away from 'those kids' by sending them to schools that won't accept or support kids that dont fit our desired group.

The average voucher or charter supporter is not a rich White person. They are already sending their kids to private schools. The average voucher and charter supporter is a poor inner city minority desperately trying to provide a better life for their children.

Mark said...

Gabriel, 80% of Wisconsin voucher students already went to the private school they got a voucher for.

The Wisconsin voucher program is for white kids, plain and simple.

Drago said...

Mark: "Yes, their best bet is to get away from those special needs kids and their less motivated parents."

Special needs kids have less motivated parents?

Links please.

Drago said...

Mark: "The Wisconsin voucher program is for white kids, plain and simple."

Wow.

Blacks are not allowed to participate in the WI voucher program?

Links please.

Drago said...

garage mahal said...
Allied with = paid propagandist

There are plenty of other threads about Jonathan Gruber if you want to talk about paid propagandists.

Anonymous said...

Will, then, is a paid propagandist in the same sense that the Post's own editorialists are paid propagandists. "No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money."

Drago said...

buwaya puti (to garage): "People who know much more than you do are reading what you write. Be careful or you will seem a fool."

Ooops.

As Marty Feldman said in "Young Frankenstein": "Too late."

Hagar said...

Iirc, 40-50 years ago, the DoJ used this kind of reasoning to compel all institutions of higher learning - private or not - to comply with affirmative action, etc., and Federal reporting requirements on the theory that students might apply for Federal assistance programs on their own, independent of the institutions, and if such assistance was received, it would make the institutions fall under these laws - and regulations, let us not forget the regulations.

Drago said...

Mark: " Keep our special butterflies away from 'those kids' by sending them to schools that won't accept or support kids that dont fit our desired group."

Enough about garage mahal and where he lives (away from all the "blacky's").

Gahrie said...

The Wisconsin voucher program is for white kids, plain and simple.

If the voucher program is dominated by White people, I'm sure that's due entirely to White, Rightwing racism, and has nothing to do with the teacher's unions, Democratic hacks and special interests doing their best to kill the program or restrict access to it.

garage mahal said...

Gabriel, 80% of Wisconsin voucher students already went to the private school they got a voucher for.

Monticello school district will close next year if they don't come up with 1 million dollars on a referendum. As they say, thanks suckers.

ems4019 said...

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Act, children with disabilities are entitled to a free appropriate public education at public expense. Charter schools are public schools and cannot discriminate against students with disabilities. As for vouchers, if there are federal funds, then Section 504 prohibits discrimination. Section 504 does apply to religious organizations (which are exempt from the ADA). So if federal funds are used for the vouchers, then the schools are prohibited from discriminating. And I believe that if stores accept food stamps, they are subject to Section 504 as well as the ADA.

Anonymous said...

100% of food-stamp recipients were already eating food. Food stamps are for white people, plain and simple.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"Gabriel, 80% of Wisconsin voucher students already went to the private school they got a voucher for.

The Wisconsin voucher program is for white kids, plain and simple."

Well, that gives non-white students that much more access to the resources of all those excellent public schools. Unless you're suggesting that public schools aren't all that excellent.

K in Texas said...

A lot of Section 504 accommodations are those things that any school, public or private, could provide: extra time on tests, testing taking in another room, and so on. Others that might be more difficult: ASL interpreter, computers with enhanced visible aids.

paminwi said...

There are 426 school districts in Wisconsin. The school district that garage mentions that needs $1M has 370 students. WI needs to address that issue. Imagine the administrative costs associated with such a small school
district.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...


Mark: "Yes, their best bet is to get away from those special needs kids and their less motivated parents."

Drago: "Special needs kids have less motivated parents?

Links please."

I taught Special kids 10 years in a poor, gang-infested area in Southern California. It was heart-breaking to see how little many parents cared about their child's education. We had a legal obligation to meet with them 2X per year and many still wouldn't show up or answer their door when I visited the home. Ans most kids were shuffled into Spec-Ed because of behavioral issues, not for any psyche or cognitive or learning disability. Simply for being repeatedly disruptive in the boring classrooms of teachers who didn't give a damn. I liked science and math and taught a lot to kids who other teachers simply "babysat" with rote work, color-in-the-picture "lessons" and other crap.

By the way, about 60% of the teachers at the schools I worked at sent their children to parochial schools or other private options. They also openly campaigned for Democrats and sent Spanish "notes" home instructing parents how to vote on initiatives. Sure it's illegal, but who's going to enforce such campaign violations in The People's Republic of California?

Mark, the unions have destroyed education and don't want anyone horning in on their monopoly. Who are you to judge choice schools by the color of their students? Isn't WI (where the multinational I now work for) over 80% white anyway?

Anonymous said...

If private schools are demanding public tax dollars be used to finance their business then they should be treated like public schools.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

You've inverted the "demand" there, Madisonfella. Parents are demanding the right to direct (some of) their education tax dollars to the school of their choice. It doesn't take anything away from the public schools except where ADA $$ are counted. Again, you're lobbying for a monopoly that provides suboptimal results to continue their dilatory ways. Not to mention the high rate of teacher-on-student rape, viewpoint discrimination and other hazards of sending one's precious children to the care of the State entails in public schools.

Tank said...

Madisonfella demands thar neighbor's goat too.

Drago said...

Mike: "I taught Special kids 10 years in a poor, gang-infested area in Southern California. It was heart-breaking to see how little many parents cared about their child's education."

Non-responsive.

Did the parent's care "little" because the kids were special needs or simply because parents in poor, gang-infested areas generally care "little" and some of those kids just happen to be "special needs"?

Drago said...

Mike: "Again, you're lobbying for a monopoly that provides suboptimal results to continue their dilatory ways."

Actually, madisonfella does not want poorer parents to have an opportunity to escape the eduational hell-holes the left has created.

Because more $$ flow to democrats if those kids stay imprisoned.

garage mahal said...

Wisconsin's deficit pegged at 2 billion.

Thanks again suckers. That means you won't be getting any aid for public schools that was previously cut. Oh well!

Krumhorn said...

Yes, their best bet is to get away from those special needs kids and their less motivated parents.

Its discrimination by another name, clothed in the terminology of choice and educational excellence. Keep our special butterflies away from 'those kids' by sending them to schools that won't accept or support kids that dont fit our desired group.


One of the significant achievements of charter schools and private schools receiving vouchers is that they often specialize in providing services to just the kids who need the most attention and care. By no means is it just white kids trying to fund a private education.

And that drives the unions NUTS.

The other aspect of vouchers that seldom is addressed is that the vouchers are for less money than it would cost to educate that child in the public school. The difference in costs is available to the public school for other uses.

Finally, charter schools and privates funded with vouchers provide a clearly (not marginally) superior education to what would have been received at the public schools. It's unexplained why the lefties think this is a bad idea.

Their only solution has been to throw yet more money to the unions so that they can fund more democrats in their campaigns.

- Krumhorn

Anonymous said...

Parents are demanding the right to direct (some of) their education tax dollars to the school of their choice.

Not just theirs, but they want my tax dollars as well. But they don't want me to have a vote on how MY money is spent, instead they tell me to shut the fuck up after they reach into my wallet.

At least the liberals allow me to vote for a school board member to direct how the money they take from me is being spent. The conservatives don't even allow for that basic consideration.

And unless Wisconsin has outlawed homeschooling, open enrollment, and private schools, all this talk of a "monopoly" is nothing more than partisan bullshit. Public schools don't have a monopoly on education anymore than public buses have a monopoly on transportation.

Anonymous said...

Actually, madisonfella does not want poorer parents to have an opportunity to escape the eduational hell-holes the left has created.

You are constantly saying complete bullshit and utter lies like this latest statement and yet you wonder why so many of your comments get deleted.

Bryan C said...

"Not just theirs, but they want my tax dollars as well. "

I agree with you. We should just let them keep their money.

garage mahal said...

Finally, charter schools and privates funded with vouchers provide a clearly (not marginally) superior education to what would have been received at the public schools

Not in Wisconsin they aren't.

SGT Ted said...

The tax money being spent belongs to the child. Not the unions. Opposition to school vouchers is racist as it keeps black kids trapped in crappy schools to guarantee money to teachers unions who then funnel it to Democrats exclusively. It's corrupt as hell and the leftists here never address.

Oh and the "it's the law" whining is utter bullshit with all you tools supporting the dictator Obama ignoring the law when it suites your policy goals.

SGT Ted said...

What's the matter Inga you hate children getting a better education using money that would be spent on the kids schooling anyways? What kind of stupid shit is that?

Drago said...

madisonfella: "You are constantly saying complete bullshit and utter lies like this latest statement and yet you wonder why so many of your comments get deleted."

You are on the record (unless you want to try a little "grubering") as being against vouchers for private schools.

Allowing vouchers to poorer parents allow some of them to escape the educational hell-holes run and controlled by the left.

Allowing vouchers to poorer parents also results in fewer dollars flowing to democrat interest groups.

Again, you are on the record as opposing that.

Difficult to understand how it can be misinterpreted.

garage mahal said...

What's so laughable is conservatives pretending they care about the welfare of poor inner city kids.

Anonymous said...

You are on the record (unless you want to try a little "grubering") as being against vouchers for private schools

It isn't the vouchers I am against, but rather the lack of accountability with that policy. If the private schools want my tax dollars to finance their business then I need to have a vote on how that money is being spent.

You're on the record for not only wanting to greatly expand welfare but also you're on the record for being in favor of taxation without representation.

Drago said...

Garage takes time out from speaking out against poor inner city kids escaping public school hell holes to complain about conservatives who want to provide funding for those poor students to do exactly that.

LOL

buwaya said...

You know, this whole business brings out the worst in too many people. The facts and best current information live somewhere in the controversial and rather depressing middle.

- Public schools are not generally badly run, or deliberate mechanisms for fraud. There is fraud, there is inefficiency (lots of it), and some are much better than others, but in the end the various bureaucratic idiocies and mismanagement have a limited effect on overall outcomes.
- Private/charter schools are more efficient even using proper comparisons (same kinds of students, same levels of services, etc., such as netting out special ed), however they aren't THAT much more efficient. 10-20 % maybe.
- Charter schools, at least, generate better outcomes from only one sort of population - poor minorities. In those cases the benefits seem unambiguous. Charter schools for wealthier white/Asian populations seem not to deliver better results than comparable public schools. There isn't enough data on vouchers for proper comparisons but it is likely that the same applies.
- Reorganizing the governance of schools (switching from public to charter or vouchers) isn't going to solve most educational problems. NOTHING will fix them. They can't be fixed by schools, or governments. Nobody, after 50 years of a vast variety of experiments and programs, knows how to do it. Nothing, no matter how expensive, has worked. There are a lot of snake oil salesmen from all parts of the ideological compass, but they are all liars.
- Improvements can be made around the edges. SOME kids (those that would benefit from being removed from their peers, most probably won't) can be rescued from their negative milieu through charters or vouchers, and cheaply too. Partly because taking kids out of the regular public schools is easiest this way, because it bypasses a lot of the bureaucratic-legal-political constraints of the public schools, such as an unwillingness to track. Charters and vouchers cut this Gordian knot. This is the best argument for them.
- School Boards are, in large urban districts, and in many states, essentially powerless. They don't control most funding, cannot set tax rates, and cannot really direct hiring, curriculum, and most policies such as special ed service delivery. All these decisions are taken at the state and federal level, or are constrained by masses of laws, regulations, legal decisions such as consent decrees, etc. Most urban school boards are just a playpen for baby politicians being groomed by the local political machines, the real decisions are made by bureaucrats working by very restrictive templates. These school boards are utterly useless and serve no purpose in providing oversight over spending of public funds or to express the will of the people. Consumer choice, in this case, is a far more legitimate way to direct funding.

Drago said...

When proponents of forced public school participation start lecturing others about "accountability", you just have to laugh.

Anonymous said...

Is Drago in favor of using tax dollars to purchase new homes for every poor person in America (with no strings attached to the money) or is he against allowing them the opportunity to escape the hell-holes they currently live in?

Anonymous said...

Is Drago in favor of giving everyone in America a new car or is he against allowing some of them the opportunity to escape the hell-hole that is public transportation?

buwaya said...

Section 8 is the currently standard method of providing public housing.
That is a voucher for renting a house or apartment from a private owner.
So its very similar to a school voucher.

Anonymous said...

When proponents of forced public school participation start lecturing others about "accountability", you just have to laugh.


Not sure how it is where you live, but nobody in WI is forced to send their children to public schools.

Despite what the conservative-owned media will have you believe, there are other choices available.

buwaya said...

Medicare and Medicaid (or the various names it goes by in the states) are essentially payment vouchers for medical services provided by private vendors.

EBT's are essentially vouchers for food and other goods purchased from private vendors.

Etc.

Check also the reality of school boards.

Anonymous said...

That is a voucher for renting a house or apartment from a private owner. So its very similar to a school voucher

That system has far more oversight and accountability that the voucher program, yet it is still rife with fraud and abuse.

Reasonable people would say that program, like most welfare programs, needs to be overhauled and re-evaluated yet Drago and his grifter pals instead want to emulate and expand it.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

There's no better accountability than parents deciding where to send their children and switching schools if they determine the child would do better elsewhere. If you think "electing a school board" gives you accountability then you're delusional. The school boards do what the unions want. And public schools do have a monopoly in most places, but for argument's sake let's say they only have a 80% share in WI. Show me a private enterprise that accrues 80% market share without liberals screaming Monopoly!"

Garage, you're beyond hope as usual. I AM a conservative and I cared enough to teach poor inner city school kids. In my free time I went to Mexico as a missionary and taught those poor kids in the Mexicali Valley. What did you do besides bitch about straw-man conservatives who aren't anything like the people you imagine?

Drago, I admit my answer did not exactly answer your question. The parents who didn't care enough to participate came from a wide swath, but mostly poor, a mix of hispanic, black and white. The lack of care had nothing, in my opinion, over the ten years I spent there, to do with their childeren being tagged "special." The pity is that they could have easily "mainstreamed" their kids if they were involved and called "bullshit" on the paper-shufflers and Title II admins who craved the extra $$ from inflating spec-ed programs. A bigger pity is that too many parents of "normal" students don't get involved either, which is why lousy schools persist and the unions rule the roost. Which is exactly why so many brown- and black-skinned students and their parents are vying for the limited charter and voucher slots so they -- who care -- can escape the madness of public ed.

Anonymous said...

Medicare and Medicaid (or the various names it goes by in the states) are essentially payment vouchers for medical services provided by private vendors

Given how much fraud and waste is associated with both of those I am puzzled as to why so many conservatives want to not only expand welfare even further, but with even less accountability.

buwaya said...

There are "grifter pals" on every side.

The private schools themselves, and the public ones too, are rarely "grifters".

Best not to call people names, and deal with reality.

There is a place for charters and vouchers. They will solve a few problems, for a few people. They aren't more corrupt than the public schools already are. They aren't a solution to the main problems of public education either and will not displace public schools.

That is the supportable and sane position. You should adopt it.

Drago said...

Without vouchers or a like mechanism, poor inner city kids are trapped in their garage-approved educational hell holes.

Which is also where madisonfella wants them and he/she doesnt care a whit what the parents of those kids desire.

'Cuz mo money for the dems!

Anonymous said...

There's no better accountability than parents deciding where to send their children and switching schools if they determine the child would do better elsewhere.

Right. Because people on food stamps always buy healthy and nutritious food and never ever load the grocery cart up with soda, candy, and chips. The choices that people on welfare make, with the money that is taken out of my wallet, is always in the best interest of their children.

If you think "electing a school board" gives you accountability then you're delusional.

If you think not having a school board provides more accountability, then you're the delusional one.

Are you going on the record as saying public schools shouldn't have a school board either?

buwaya said...

I don't think madisonfella wants them there.
I think he just doesn't understand the problem.
I think a lot of people don't really understand the problem. And some don't want to, because its very depressing, as there is no real solution.

Diane Ravitch is a good example of someone of goodwill from the other side that eventually figured out that governance changes are not a solution. She went too far over, but still, there is a lot of middle ground.

buwaya said...

Most school boards could disappear with no loss to the public.
Yes I'm saying that because its true. They have no useful input on school governance or even school finances.
Most US states already operate virtual "Ministry of Education" systems like European countries. School boards are generally redundant.

Drago said...

Madisonfella, like all lefties, knows what is best for the people and by gosh he/she will not put up with any opposing viewpoints.

Well madisonfella, it looks like you were up for a little grubering after all.

Anonymous said...

Which is also where madisonfella wants them and he/she doesnt care a whit what the parents of those kids desire.


Again with the blatant lies and utter bullshit.

People, be they poor or not, can do what they whatever they desire and I'm not against that at all. But if they are using my money to fulfill those desires then I have a say in how that money is spent.

The fact that you have to constantly be dishonest while defending your opinion speaks volumes. Both about you as a person as well as the validity of your stance.

garage mahal said...

Garage, you're beyond hope as usual.

Facts are that after 23 years publicly funded voucher schools in Milwaukee & Racine, and the hundreds of millions attached to them, have very little to show for it.

It's all a giant scam and everyone knows it.

buwaya said...

" then I have a say in how that money is spent."

But you don't.

Nearly all discretionary funds administered by US school districts are tied up by regulatory and statutory requirements on the state and federal level. I one did an analysis of the San Francisco USD budget and concluded that they had some degree of control of less than 20% of their budget, if that. Most are in the same boat. And that was over ten years ago, its gotten worse since.

Anonymous said...

I don't think madisonfella wants them there.
I think he just doesn't understand the problem.


The problem I have is taxation without representation. The problem I have is expanding unaccountable and wasteful welfare programs.

It truly is an upside down world when so-called conservatives are demanding more welfare dollars be spewed out across the state with very little to no oversight on how those monies are spent.

Anonymous said...

Without free cars or a like mechanism, poor inner city kids are trapped in their Drago-approved public transportation hell holes.

Which is also where Drago wants them and he/she doesnt care a whit what the parents of those kids desire.

Anonymous said...

Without free homes in a nice suburban development, poor inner city kids are trapped in their Drago-approved public housing hell holes.

Which is also where Drago wants them and he/she doesnt care a whit what the parents of those kids desire.

buwaya said...

There is no effective oversight over how this money is spent now. You are not in charge. Giving some of the money out in vouchers changes nothing. At least the clients have some control, in a way they don't now.

Anonymous said...

Drago, who is far more to the left than I am, knows what is best for the people and by gosh he/she will not put up with any opposing viewpoints.

Drago said...

LOL

"Taxation without representation!!!"

Apparently madisonfella lives in the twilight zone and is without political representation.

Amazing.

Pray tell madisonfella, what "non district" do you live in?

Dishonest indeed.

Anonymous said...

There is no effective oversight over how this money is spent now. You are not in charge

Never said I am "in charge", but I do have far more of a voice in the public schools than the private ones.

Drago said...

If only madisonfella had political representation. Then those politicians could vote in more money for public housing.

Alas, madisonfella is without political representation.

Anonymous said...

madisonfella is without political representation

You really have no idea at all of what is being talked about. These private schools you want me to fund don't have public elections, and whoever told you they do is lying to you.

buwaya said...

"but I do have far more of a voice in the public schools than the private ones."

No, you don't. You can "elect" a school board member and even show up at public meetings, but in a big city district at least you have zero influence with the true powers. The board members can't make any substantial changes; at best they can play around with symbolic foolishness. They can't even properly audit their own spending, this usually being a state function.

And if you are a parent of a kid in a public school you have way less power than you would if he were in a private school.

I have been there, I know this situation very well.

Drago said...

Madisonfella apparently believes she is entitled to a seat at the decision table wherever taxes are being dispensed.

Fascinating.

And anything less than that is "taxation without representation".

I would bet even garage took a civics class at some point.

Anonymous said...

No, you don't. You can "elect" a school board member and even show up at public meetings, but in a big city district at least you have zero influence with the true powers.

Are you one of those guys who don't bother to vote? Seriously, that is how you're coming across.

And the fact remains that an elected school board will be far more accountable to the public than a private school will be. Even a little voice is better than no voice.

Drago said...

Buwaya is correct regarding relative parental influence in a private vs public school setting.

That parental and individual empowerment is another facet of vouchers the left despises.

I just hope that madisonfella can find her way to a polling place so that she to can be taxed while being represented.

God speed madisonfella and good hunting!

Anonymous said...

Drago apparently believes she is entitled to all the welfare money she can get her hands on and the people who are actually paying for her lifestyle should have zero say in how that money is used.

Because that is the conservative way now.

buwaya said...

A school board in the USA, November 2014, in a big city, in most states, can do little or nothing for you either individually or collectively, even if you manage to elect all your friends to it.
They don't control their own operational funding or spending and very little of their hiring. They can't borrow money for school construction or renovation as this is generally controlled by the municipality or above.
They cant change curriculum, programs or, usually, even select contractors.
This is the plain truth.
Some of this stuff is, or could be controlled by state-level politicians. Maybe. Generally not, because they would have to get into the weeds with the bureaucrats, the unions, and all the various people with the iron rice bowls.
Really you have to give up your naivete.

Drago said...

Madisonfella goes the "welfare card" route!

Yeah, that'll work. LOL

Drago said...

But madisonfella, regardless of how much of that sweet sweet welfare loot i can get my hands on, how will that help you in your quest to discover political representation?

Anonymous said...

Really you have to give up your naivete

So all this talk about "Liberals have taken over the school boards and are destroying our public schools" is just poppycock? Because, according to your theory, school boards are completely and utterly powerless.

And as I asked before, do you vote in elections? Obviously you sit out the school board races, but what you say could also apply to other levels of government as well. So do you waste your time by going to the polls or not?

Drago said...

Buwaya, you may have noticed that madisonfella has basically given up in the relentless onslaught of the reality you've outlined.

Anonymous said...

Drago seems far more interested in talking about me personally rather than the topic at hand. Even when she talks to someone else it is about me rather than the issues being raised.

This seems to be a pattern, stretched across many different threads, for her.

buwaya said...

"So all this talk about "Liberals have taken over the school boards and are destroying our public schools" is just poppycock? "

Yes it is poppycock. Liberals have taken over the bureaucracies where the real power is. Its now a very complex series of interlocking systems. Get a copy of your district budget and have a look at the range of funding sources, who they come from, etc. They may even be categorized as restricted (very strict rules on what you can do with them) or unrestricted (almost as strict rules, etc.). If you have an in with the school district people where you live try to get a rundown on the reporting they have to do on each of these. Really, do that. It will be a revelation.

Democracy has become very weak. Think about it. What powers do politicians really have to change how the actual structure of government works ? Consider whether your municipality even has the ability to change the way business licenses are handled.

This is not good news maybe, but it is the truth.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Madisonfella, most charter or parochial schools have a very flat operational structure, often with no principal and the teachers themselves acting as admin. So YES there is far more accountability when you have local face-to-face interaction with the parents. When the teacher or a single admin is in charge then parents can effect much more control over their children's education. More importantly, a flat structure is able to respond and adapt to the local needs without permission from a board or worse, a union thug.

And if public union didn't act like goons I wouldn't call them thugs but they do and they are. But hey, if you like your moribund sclerotic school you can keep it. Just don't force everyone into your stupid system. Let them direct the taxes they pay to support education go where they feel it does the best good.

For the record, I don't care to tell people how they should feed, clothe, live and educate their children. That's one reason I'm conservative and think the less government involvement the better. You're obviously one of those who thinks government should only pay for the kind of education YOU think is "right" despite the obvious failure of that system, and the fact that liberals like you run it from top to bottom. And your comments about welfare and food stamps reveal the same controlling impulses. So you're in favor of reform where EBT cards are not useable at strip clubs nor for liquor, right? I could back that move.

Anonymous said...

Democracy has become very weak. Think about it. What powers do politicians really have to change how the actual structure of government works ? Consider whether your municipality even has the ability to change the way business licenses are handled

Sounds like you're saying that voting is a waste of time. Do you vote in elections or not?

buwaya said...

" are destroying our public schools"

This is also poppycock. The schools were never very good for a large fraction of the population and they generally haven't gotten worse. Or better. Historical NAEP scores dont support either conclusion. Whatever is wrong with them is not the fault of either the politicians or the bureaucrats or the teachers. All these people have their faults but ...

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Madison, listen to Buwaya if not to me. We've been on the inside and see how it runs. Electing someone to the school board is not exerting any control. Please tell me how you personally know that the people for whom you voted are affecting daily operations in your local schools. School boards rubber stamp the hires that principals submit (where that still happens) and they pay the lawyers that defend the district against all the lawsuits from parents of molested children. Sometimes, like in L.A. last year they get a huge grant and piss it away on a stupid idea like "an iPad in every class." Look it up if you want to know how effective that board move was. One billion $$ wasted. Gone. Not improving outcomes.

$1B! But Garage is gonna whine about a few million spent saving kids from a useless 12-year sentence to public institutions.

buwaya said...

I am a foreigner and so cannot vote in US elections. Consider me an Alexis de Tocqueville of the modern American bureaucratic state.

Voting does seem like it is becoming a waste of time, in most places and for most purposes. I can't be sure, I could be pleasantly surprised, but the downward spiral towards terminal paralysis seems very advanced.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Yes Buwaya and voting for a board member is a waste of anyone's time. Sitting with your local charter school staff is real influence. They know you care to be there and you know them after a few times seeing them work.

Anonymous said...

Madisonfella, most charter or parochial schools have a very flat operational structure, often with no principal and the teachers themselves acting as admin. So YES there is far more accountability when you have local face-to-face interaction with the parents

I understand that these businesses are accountable to the welfare recipients that are using their services; am not disputing that at all. What I don't see is the accountability to those of us who are actually footing the bill.

Just don't force everyone into your stupid system

I'm not in favor of mandatory public schooling and have spoken out in the past against outlawing homeschooling.

You're obviously one of those who thinks government should only pay for the kind of education YOU think is "right" despite the obvious failure of that system, and the fact that liberals like you run it from top to bottom.

Despite Drago and his pals constant attempts to paint me as such, I am not a "liberal".

And yes, I am very much in favor of reforming the EBT program, beyond even the little tweaks you proposed. And I don't think it is "controlling" to say that there should be limits and restrictions on how welfare money is used. You can spend your own money on all the soda and candy you desire, but if you're reaching into my wallet to feed your children then I'm going to insist that money be spent more wisely than that.

I swear, some folks see the chance to get on the government teat and all of a sudden they throw out all their entire moral code.

garage mahal said...

Conservatives get you sidetracked talking about "choice" and "poor kids" which hides the real issue: they want to destroy public education as it exists. And to profit from it with no accountability. Those are the only goals. I would not allow one more dollar to go to this boondoggle.

Anonymous said...

I would like to say "thank you" to Mike and buwaya for their very reasonable and respectful responses. And despite what Drago claimed earlier I hope you both realize that I do appreciate hearing opposing viewpoints, and I apologize if him getting my fur up has spilled over into my responses towards either of you.

Anonymous said...

(The last sentence on my 6:16 post wasn't directed at Mike, and shouldn't have been included in that post. Sorry about that)

buwaya said...

" they want to destroy public education as it exists."

This is so silly.
I am a conservative. I want well educated people, to serve even my own selfish interests. I want schools that serve my kids interests. No conservative I know wants to destroy public schools. Most conservatives are very frustrated by the output of public schools. Even liberals are frustrated by this - check out the education reform papers at Brookings. There is no question that this output is below our modern requirements, and both sides agree on this. You will find a lot of liberals as well as conservatives working all sorts of angles on school governance these days.

Real people who really have done work in this field are not your cartoon villains.

Anonymous said...

Conservatives get you sidetracked talking about "choice"

The fact that they have to frame it as a "choice" issue says a lot.

Since when is not being able to afford everything you desire means you have no choices available?

garage mahal said...

then madisonfella apologizes for partaking in this charade. Reform EBT? These pig fuckers fly around the country on our dime giving blowjobs to billionaire elites for their own campaigns, take hundreds of thousands of dollars under the table to pass legislation.....but reforming EBT and piss testing people is what is prioritized? GET THE FUCK OUT. Come on!

buwaya said...

"Choice" is a last chance to save a lot of kids from a disastrous life.
Call it a political hobbyhorse, but its a real lifesaver too.

If public schools were not paralyzed by their own bureaucratic/political nature they could do this too. Simple tracking as is standard in most civilized countries could have the same effect.
In the US we are reduced to attempts at bypassing the whole system thats how screwed up school governance is. Charters/Vouchers cut that Gordian knot -look it up, its a useful concept.

There are socialist countries that are not so paralyzed by the meshed mess of bureaucracy and political mania as is the US. I would prefer that the Swedish socialists or Singaporean fascists ran US education, if it came to that. They are both more rational on this than the Americans.

Anonymous said...

Am not if favor of piss testing neither welfare nor insurance recipients as Walker has proposed. (Well, some welfare recipients - much like Act 10, the groups who tend to vote Republican will be exempt from these new requirements) And those pig fuckers you mentioned are definitely a problem, am not disputing that at all.

But yes, I think the food stamp program needs an overhaul. Are you saying the system is working just fine and nothing needs to be changed or adjusted at all?

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Nice discussion guys!

Except for Garage. Dude get a clue. There's a place for public schools but herding everyone into them is not the answer. JFK and FDR and the original WI plan had the right idea when they EXCLUDED public workers from unionizing. It is inherently corrupt to have the politicians that fund the unions sit across from the unions and negotiate and then pass the hat so the unions can elect them again.

None of that happens with private or hybrid charter schools (which your inane comments conveniently elide) that are accountable to the students. I think Madison misses the point that if the students are learning and the parents choose that school it is a better bet the place is using funding well than you'll ever get with the opaque structure of "public" education. Because the admin of said "public" school uses a myriad of tricks to hide where the $$ goes, what they spend it on, how much they pay in settled lawsuits etc. etc.

YOU CAN'T even know what "they" do with your tax dollars. If you want to know what the charter school is doing all you have to do is ask. It really is that simple. Many charters are incorporated, meaning the financials are open to inspection as a mandatory matter.

Drago said...

madisonfella: " And I don't think it is "controlling" to say that there should be limits and restrictions on how welfare money is used."

So now funds used to educate our kids is "welfare" money.

Hilarious.

Is it still "welfare" if the child attends a public school?

The fact that the lefties are now framing education funds provided for vouchers as "welfare" says a lot.

Drago said...

garage mahal: "Conservatives get you sidetracked talking about "choice" and "poor kids" which hides the real issue: they want to destroy public education as it exists."

If you are an example of public school "success", then public school cannot be destroyed fast enough.

Not to worry though, between homeschooling and Charter and parochial and private schools the pressure to reform the remaining public schools appropriately will continue to build.

Of course, it will mean a hit to your beloved union bosses salaries.

Anonymous said...

Nice discussion guys!

Except for Garage


That is the only guy you're calling out by name? You find Drago to be a reasonable voice in this discussion?

Wow. Simple wow. I truly am speechless.

Drago said...

madisonfella: " truly am speechless."

From your lips to Gods ear.

Anonymous said...

It is inherently corrupt to have the politicians that fund the unions sit across from the unions and negotiate and then pass the hat so the unions can elect them again.

Is it just workers you feel that way about, or should businesses that receive funds from the government also be banned from forming a collective (in the form of a corporation or an association) when negotiating with the State?

buwaya said...

Businesses that form associations generally are subject to laws against collusion, monopoly and restraint of trade. If they do so for the purpose of negotiating government contracts they would certainly be subject to these laws.

Drago said...

Madisonfella knows perfectly well we are talking about public sector unions.

Anonymous said...

Businesses that form associations generally are subject to laws against collusion, monopoly and restraint of trade.

As you said, generally. It all depends on the association. But you're right, that was a bad comparison. Labor unions are more akin to corporations, not associations.

buwaya said...

"between homeschooling and Charter and parochial and private schools the pressure to reform the remaining public schools appropriately will continue to build."

Doubtful. With the exception of homeschooling, which has some distance to go, the endgame of charters at least seems to be at maybe 10% market penetration. Ultimately that's about as far as they can go and show value added.

The limitation is not the ability to shift schools to charters, as there are several states where there is a willingness to do this. There is rather a limitation of public demand. On the one side the middle class has no real problem with their suburban schools. On the other, while charters are easiest to sell to poor urban parents, there are a limited number of these that would go out of their way to patronize charters. Or, probably, vouchers if it came to it.

There would have to be a rather fundamental shift to get the US into the position of, say, the Netherlands, where nearly all schools are independent or private, financed by the equivalent of vouchers, and sponsored by religious or other bodies (i.e., they are mostly (@ 70%) "voucher" or "charter" schools in US terms). It works pretty well for them. This shift is certainly feasible, but I don't see it happening here.

Anonymous said...

Labor gets together as a collective, and a union is formed. Capital gets together as a collective, and a corporation is formed. Why is a group of labor considered inherently corrupt when negotiating with the state but a group of capital is not?

buwaya said...

If a labor union was a sort of labor agency, which was in competition with other labor agencies (union A vs union B vs union C) then you would have something like companies biding for government contracts. However, unions insist on being the sole representative of all labor in the contract - i.e., a monopolist. This is a bad thing if you are the buyer. Since the buyer in this case is the public this arrangement is not in the public interest.

Drago said...

madisonfella: "Why is a group of labor considered inherently corrupt when negotiating with the state but a group of capital is not?"

buwaya helpfully explained the problem in comparing businesses and public sector unions in dealing with government.

For the specific problem with public sector unions, I'll let Franklin Delano Roosevelt explain it to you:http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15445

snip: "All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters."

Drago said...

garage: "These pig fuckers fly around the country on our dime giving blowjobs to billionaire elites for their own campaigns..."

Whoa there big fella!

Are you talking about Nancy Pelosi funneling money to her husband while she demanded multiple large military aircraft to be put at her beck and call when she was Speakerette of the House?

Anonymous said...

Any union can be replaced by another if the workers vote to make it so.

Anonymous said...

The only thing that libtards like Drago love more than expanding welfare is quoting that pig fucker FDR and bragging about the exploits of Princess Nancy.

Drago said...

madisonfella: "The only thing that libtards like Drago love more than expanding welfare is quoting that pig fucker FDR and bragging about the exploits of Princess Nancy."

Wow, do you kiss your sheep with that mouth?

And what is it with you and garage and the term "pig fucker"?

Oh, and the old nursery-school level double-reverso psychology bit with trying to label me a welfare liberal is going gang-busters for you! I would double down on that if I were you.

It's inspired.

Drago said...

It appears that madisonfella is approaching AReasonableMeltdown meltdown level.

Try to keep it civil buddy!

buwaya said...

IIRC it is illegal for multiple unions to bid against each other, with respect to the potential employer, in labor contracts.

Workers can choose another union, but the proper element of choice here, vis-a-vis a case of monopoly or collusion, is whether the buyer (the government, or the school district) has a choice among labor agencies.

Anonymous said...

Workers can choose another union, but the proper element of choice here, vis-a-vis a case of monopoly or collusion, is whether the buyer (the government, or the school district) has a choice among labor agencies

Unions aren't agencies hired by the employer in order to hire workers. Rather the employer hires the workers and the workers choose the union. Last year prison guards in WI voted out their current union and formed a new one.

buwaya said...

But the workers changing their union does not help the buyer. It is merely substituting one monopolist for another. Neither union competed for the custom of the state, or offered the state a better deal.

Anonymous said...

But the workers changing their union does not help the buyer

The employer isn't the "buyer", rather the workers are.

Birkel said...

madisonIngafella is melting down?
And this is the week I was trying to quit laughing and smiling?
I just can't catch a break!

buwaya said...

Yes, but their purchase is not the point here. It is the state that is buying labor and is being restricted in getting the best deal.
State=buyer
Union=seller

buwaya said...

And to expand, the union is the vendor in all senses of the word, as they would be applied to a non-union labor agency, because it sets the price and contract terms, not the individual worker, and this covers all the current and potential workers in the contract, usually even those not actually in the union.
It is a monopolist because it almost always blocks the buyer from seeking alternative suppliers even during negotiations.
This is all detrimental to the interests of the buyer, the public.

Michael K said...

"Its discrimination by another name, clothed in the terminology of choice and educational excellence. Keep our special butterflies away from 'those kids' by sending them to schools that won't accept or support kids that dont fit our desired group."

Thank you for providing me with a superb example of sanctimonious bullshit. I will save it in case I need another example some day.

Michael K said...

"If private schools are demanding public tax dollars be used to finance their business then they should be treated like public schools."

Inga, shouldn't the parents who are "demanding public tax dollars" be treated like Obama and allowed to fly around in Air Force One ?

Michael K said...

"You are constantly saying complete bullshit and utter lies like this latest statement and yet you wonder why so many of your comments get deleted."

Clever argument ! You are converting me ! I just don't want to say what to.

Mrs. X said...

For those of you complaining about the high number of whites in Wisconsin charter schools, the white percentage of charter schools is 51%. The white percentage of traditional schools is, wait for it, 74%.

http://www.publiccharters.org/get-the-facts/health-of-movement/states/wi/

Anonymous said...

The union does not sell labor to the state, but instead represent the workers who are providing the labor.

Also the union does not set "the price and contract terms", rather those are negotiated between representatives of the employer (usually an HR department) and representatives of the employees. (the union).

buwaya said...

Yes it does set the price and contract terms, in the same way any commercial vendor does. They propose price and terms and negotiate, and come to an agreement with the buyer. Even monopolists negotiate.
Or consider them the vendors agent, same thing.
As long as they insist on the buyer not entertaining other offers, and if they have the ability, legal or otherwise, to keep the buyer from entertaining other offers, the union is a monopolist.

Drago said...

Birkel: "madisonIngafella is melting down?
And this is the week I was trying to quit laughing and smiling?"

In madisonfella's defense, it appears her lapse was only momentary.

She has recovered sufficiently to continue her efforts in trying to conflate private and public sector unions while simultaneously feigning obtuseness regarding the obvious "truths" that buwaya puti is layin' down.

So all is normal.

Thank goodness.

It should be noted that garage made a brief and unnoteworthy appearance.

Bless his heart.

Achilles said...

garage mahal said...
"What's so laughable is conservatives pretending they care about the welfare of poor inner city kids."

At least they aren't trying to trap them in shitty schools merely so unions can funnel money to democrats. Their concern may be fake. But your mendacity is pure.

Achilles said...

madisonfella said...
"Actually, madisonfella does not want poorer parents to have an opportunity to escape the eduational hell-holes the left has created.

You are constantly saying complete bullshit and utter lies like this latest statement and yet you wonder why so many of your comments get deleted."

Notice Inga's complete inability to deal with the post.

Achilles said...

madisonfella said...

"The problem I have is taxation without representation. The problem I have is expanding unaccountable and wasteful welfare programs.

It truly is an upside down world when so-called conservatives are demanding more welfare dollars be spewed out across the state with very little to no oversight on how those monies are spent."

I agree. We should stop funneling money to teachers unions. I don't feel represented by public schools at all. I really feel I have no choice how my child is educated at a public school.

michal said...


I am working as a SEO Analyst.My blog gives information about latest technologies and IT Courses.
IT Education