Subsidized Ice Cream For The Fat Rich Kids!!! Yippy!!!
I walked out the door of the Davis County Court House on my way to lunch today and was confronted with these hideous ads promoting taxpayer funds for people who want to send their kids to private schools. The lobbyists from PCE have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars buying enough influence to get subsidies for private school attendees written into law and now they are spending more trying to convince us that the tax money spent on vouchers is as wonderful as a big drippy ice cream cone for a fat kid on a hot sunny day.
What they aren’t telling us is that the money spent on yummy school choice is money that has been forcefully taken out of all taxpayer pockets for the near exclusive benefit of the few kids with rich parents who can already afford to put their kids in private schools. The idea that we should subsidize these families is silly since there is little evidence that private schools in Utah will serve our kids any better than the public system we already have in place.
I’m not universally opposed to the idea of vouchers. They are a great idea in places where public schools are doing a terrible job educating kids. Utah isn’t one of those places. We do a great job educating kids through our public education system. We don’t need to dump tax payer funds into the pockets of those who want to “upgrade” from the excellent system we have to private schools which, in Utah, haven’t been shown to be any better than the schools in the public system.
Yummy school choice is a waste of my tax dollars…I’ll vote AGAINST HB148 taking effect when the referendum is up for a vote this November.
PCE’s ads do a good job describing what the battle over vouchers is really about…subsidized ice cream/private education for fat rich kids at tax payer expense. I couldn’t have come up with a better anti-voucher ad myself.
13 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Your adjective is exactly right…they’re hideous. You realize, of course, that they are also extremely effective…this is Utah, after all.
Comment by Part of the Plan — May 16, 2007 @ 3:13 pm
Sorry, this is the third time i’ve typed this comment– I keep forgetting to put in the code.
I’ve already made my own support for the vouchers system clear. And I still don’t understand, Jeremy– if you really are Libertarian-sympathetic, why you hate vouchers so much. You say “it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” and maybe for some schools, that’s true. I guess I just don’t understand why you wouldn’t consider de-governmentalizing educational systems as a good thing. Similarly, in making the current monopoly that is the education system into a more competitive market. I really can’t understand how anyone (save those who benefit from the current system, namely mediocre teachers and administrators who know they’d be out of a job if the market suddenly got competitive) would have a problem with giving parents a right to choice.
The current system (in a lot of places, maybe not where you live in Utah) is crap. I know, I grew up in it, and was hurt by it. It’s the primary reason why I have chosen not to put my kids in the system. I would consider it, however, if I saw that the market was growing competitive, growing more attentive to the desires and inputs of parents (who, after all, have their childrens’ best interests at heart), and less condescending to me, as the parent.
That’s my really strong opinion. Forgive me for it, please
Comment by nosurfgirl — May 16, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
Jeremy, your title is classic! I am still trying to stop laughing!
Well put.
I couldn’t agree with you more. Are the kids graduating from the local private schools smarter, more skilled, and more successful than the rest of us? Why do some people have the illusion that private schools provide a perfect education? I really think that kids who are taught well at home will take advantage of any opportunity to learn and can become successful no matter where they attend school. A good education cannot be determined by which curriculum is taught and how nice the classroom looks. A good education comes from a student who is persistent in learning the concepts and materials that will help them become successful adults. The individual student has far more to do with what is learned than the system of education. So why do we need to pay for kids to go to private schools when they can very well learn all that they need to learn at a public school?
Comment by Dignin — May 17, 2007 @ 10:23 am
If I were with the pro-voucher people, I’d say they need a new ad agency. But I’m not, so here’s hoping this campaign goes forward with TV and radio spots to keep us laughing all the way to the ballot box in November.
Hope the children are watching this and learning how our government works, behind closed doors and driven by whichever special interests have the most money to spend.
Comment by rmwarnick — May 17, 2007 @ 10:48 am
NoSurfgirl,
Never apologize for a strong opinion on my site
That said, I still think you are wrong. There may be schools that aren’t as good as others but creating a new government run multi-million dollar giveaway for people who want to send their kids to private schools instead of public isn’t the answer.
I do favor allowing parents to choose which public school they take their kids to no matter which district they live in. I also support the idea of homeschooling or parents paying for their kids private schooling with private scholarships or grants. These are all better solutions to localized problems than a new ginormous giveaway of tax dollars to everyone who wants to opt out of our public schools.
Comment by Jeremy Manning — May 17, 2007 @ 11:00 am
Thanks Dignan!
Comment by Jeremy Manning — May 17, 2007 @ 11:02 am
So, I guess my question is– are they taking tax dollars that are already allocated to public education and simply putting them in the hands of the parents, or are they redirecting new tax dollars, on top of what they spend currently for education, toward vouchers? I’d favor #1 but not #2.
Comment by nosurfgirl — May 17, 2007 @ 8:49 pm
Mmmmmmmmm…ice cream…..
Comment by Homer — May 17, 2007 @ 9:44 pm
Mmmmmmmmm….free gooo
Comment by Also Homer — May 18, 2007 @ 7:00 am
NoSurfGirl,
I believe #2 is accurate but it is really hard to get a straight answer from either side on how much money is going to be spent and where that money is coming from. The pro-voucher people argue #1 is correct but Craig Johnson from Utahns For Public Schools commented on this site that the long term (he didn’t say if that was 10 years or more) fiscal note for vouchers was $425,000,000 to come from the general fund…not school dollars.
In my opinion it doesn’t matter in Utah which of the two funding plans you mentioned is likely to be used. Utah’s schools are good enough that vouchers probably won’t end up being a fiscal plus for Utah. The parents of kids who are already going to private schools will get a great kickback…most of the rest of us will just keep our kids in the excellent schools they are currently experiencing.
Comment by Jeremy Manning — May 18, 2007 @ 7:25 am
If the public system is broken, taxpayer money should be spent to fix the public system, not distributed to private parties and private educations.
Greedy chubby kids with the ice cream cones say it all!
Comment by cody — May 18, 2007 @ 11:49 am
I haven’t been around lately, so I thought I’d pop in, and I am so glad I did. I couldn’t stop laughing and, even though my husband thinks I am crazy, you hit the nail right on the head!
Comment by Natalie — May 21, 2007 @ 9:29 pm
[…] Education Association Jeremy’s Jerimiad The Wall of Separation Utahns for Public Schools Singing Bravely zero comments so far […]
Pingback by Desultory Thoughts » My Opinion on Vouchers - Referendum 1 — August 27, 2007 @ 12:12 am