"You Must Not Ask Questions. It Is Imperative That You Continue Making Your Payments."

The Strib's institutional editorial this mornng gives its customarily-muted praise for the President's 2.6 billion dollar effort to help public schools educate the school-age refugees from Hurricane Katrina.

But only the right kind of help, mind you.

Can't be getting uppity, here:

Although the spirit is right, a major provision of the aid plan is questionable. The Bush administration wants $488 million of the aid package for private school vouchers of about $7,500 per student. That makes it appear that the administration is using this crisis to advance an idea it could not get through Congress under normal circumstances.

This is no time to sneak in a major policy change; the president and his majority party should not take advantage of a natural disaster to rush through such a plan.

On the contrary - this is the perfect time to try this. The public schools of the Gulf states were among the consistently lowest-achieving schools in the country; Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana's schools have been congenital disasters for decades - and the refugee children have been scattered hither and yon among schools largely in states that those who follow public school performance consistently deride. These are schools that were in trouble before the hurricanes.

So, in a rational world - why not give privatization and vouchers a shot? What could they possibly screw up?

That question, of course, is predicated on "the good of the students" being ones' primary motivation:

Though there are limited voucher experiments underway in a handful of U.S. cities, including Washington, both Congress and many public opinion polls reject the idea of a national voucher program. Any attempt to direct nearly a half-billion federal dollars to private and religious schools deserves full debate and discussion.

Remember this; the Strib wants a debate and discussion.

Both of those, by definition, require two side.

In terms of the Strib's discussion of school choice and privatization, that'd be a first.

An estimated 60,000 Katrina kids were private school students before the hurricane hit. But that doesn't mean they should now receive taxpayer dollars for educations they had financed themselves or through scholarships before.

Really?

Why not? What is it about their private-school status in and of itself that disqualifies them from assistance? Especially the kids from families without the means to continue paying for their private education - and a huge number of private school kids, especially in the inner city, are poor kids with very motivated families.

Look at that sentence backwards, and answer this: Why should the disaster be used to suck more kids into the public school morass?

Nor should public money be used for students and families who now want to give private school a try.

Which is the Strib's stock answer, always, to this issue...

Channeling millions to private programs would take much-needed federal help from many already financially strapped public schools. They are the schools equipped and required to accept all students.

Then why not use the vouchers to take some of the refugee load off of the most heavily-burdened public districts? And at a bargain rate, too - a $7500 voucher is about $3,000 a year cheaper than a year in a Saint Paul public school, for one example.

Private schools, on the other hand, can pick and choose students based on their ability, background or religion. To their credit, many private institutions (such as DeLaSalle in Minneapolis) have generously opened their doors to Katrina victims without the expectation of federal reimbursement.

So let me get this straight; big bad private schools - which are usually cheaper per year than public schools, are not to be supported because they can pick and choose students - but then we see a school that did exactly not that?

We're near the bottom of the editorial - which is where the real point lies:

Leaders of the National Education Association suggest a practical alternative to vouchers. Under current law, many public school districts provide services such as transportation or free and reduced-price lunches for low-income private students. Why not use that same program to assist evacuee students?

Aaaah.

That's right. Why not, indeed, increase the headcounts of the sorts of programs that cement dependence on public schools, and all other forms of public assistance?

Cynicism, thy name is Strib.

Posted by Mitch at October 10, 2005 12:57 PM | TrackBack