Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

HeadPen5724 t1_jacnty5 wrote

I love how a “school choice” bill actually is limiting school choice. As long as a school agrees to the anti-discrimination policies they should be able to accept students and taxpayer funds. But in this bill we are even limiting public dollars to public schools. Currently, as a sending town my kids can go to any public school (actually all Vt students have this option), this bill would limit them to 3 options… for what purpose? Seems like a lack of thought and reasoning on Rep Hardy’s part.

7

Human802 t1_jad2o53 wrote

I thought a Supreme Court decision last year made it so the State has to fund all private school or none? Isn’t that the point of this bill?

5

HappilyhiketheHump t1_jad83vg wrote

Kinda. They still wanna fund 4 traditional private academies but exclude the other private schools.

5

HeadPen5724 t1_jae27pj wrote

The court did say public dollars can go to private schools, but that doesn’t give them free reign. For example, I can start a school up and not teach anything other than PE. The state still has a way over curriculum and presumably they also have a say over discrimination, there’s certainly a legal argument to be made that a school that doesn’t meet a minimum curriculum standard, or discriminates against students would not be entitled to funding. Honestly I’m not sure what the point of this bill is… it seems to be trying to pick only certain private schools while simultaneously restricting school choice for sending towns. The bill itself doesn’t appear to pass muster with the courts ruling and seems to be Ill thought out.

2

JodaUSA t1_jadjq94 wrote

It’s pretty simple. Private schools are all operated for profit, not for education. They, like all private companies exclusively care about their profits. It is simply in their best interest to profit more.

The aim of public schools is solely to educate. They cannot make a profit. They’re public assets. Yes, corrupt officials can steal public funds, but stealing public funds isn’t part of the schools business model; because public schools don’t have a business model.

As a result of this, funding private schools with public money is horrendously inefficient. It necessary would be. The two institutions have diametrically opposed aims.

This bill is good. It supports the efficient allocation of our resources. If you need more school options around you, fight for increasing the public school budget; not throwing that budget into a burning pit of money so some wealthy private school owner can steal it for themself.

3

Real-Pierre-Delecto2 t1_jadp8ce wrote

> Private schools are all operated for profit, not for education

Get out more guy. Many many small schools do NOT make a profit at all. Many are in operation because the operators are really into education and making lives better for our kids. My kid is in a private school that takes tuition funds and we constantly need to fund raise. Us parents get together to help with building maintenance. Painting, scrapping, pluming, building wheelchair ramps etc. Not sure what places you are thinking of but most private schools in Vermont are not raking in the dough and paying huge salaries. That high pay is for the bloated admin in all the districts around the state.

Also if you have noticed religious schools often cost way less than public. For example the Christian school near us is about 5,000 a year compared to about 18,000. I don't think anyone is getting rich there but if they are on a quarter the cost well more power to em.

1

HeadPen5724 t1_jadmsx9 wrote

I’m not sure if you meant to reply to me, but if so I think you misread my post. The bill is limiting school choice between public schools. My point was specifically about public schools, not private schools.

1