|
Post by Wildcat on Oct 12, 2011 13:37:03 GMT -5
The Gov better re-think this whole thing. If he is going to do this for the poor ONLY, he will get hit with a huge lawsuit on discrimination. If he tries to tell a hard working middle class family that their "bottom 5 percent of public schools" child doesn't have the same rights as a low income family, he better be ready for one heck of a fight! If this passes for any child in the bottom 5%, the PIAA might better throw out every rule they have on transfers. If this passes, people won't even have to move to transfer their child to anywhere in the state. Public or Private school!
|
|
d4man
Full Member
Posts: 134
|
Post by d4man on Oct 21, 2011 11:14:39 GMT -5
They have to describe what is poor. Are we talking about single mom welfare/disability poor? Then there is no excuse because you can receive welfare/disability almost anywhere, even in good school districts there are rent assisted apartment complexes. Easy move and no taxpayer assistance is required.
But then you have working poor that have either a more affordable mortgage or more affordable rent to fit their finances. That makes it a bit tougher because 90% of the time a good school district tends to be in higher cost of living areas which will mean higher mortgages and rent. Does the government do something to help with those people? That is a tough call but here is an idea that was presented years ago and was killed immediately by Democrats and the teacher unions.
If you own real estate and cannot afford to physically move so your child can go to a passing public school, then the years your child does attend a passing school, your school district taxes go to that passing school. Once your child graduates then you go back to paying taxes to the school you live in.
That is competition and competition will make all of our schools better. I have no problem with charter schools as long as our tax dollars stay out of it.
|
|
|
Post by lbgpop on Oct 22, 2011 19:38:41 GMT -5
Here is their description of poor, as in the original post: "Students in schools from households with incomes at or under 130 percent of the federal poverty level would be allowed to take the per-student state subsidy their district receives and apply it to tuition at another public or private school of their choice. Students from households with incomes of up to 185 percent of the poverty level - or $29,000 for a family of four - could tap 75 percent of the subsidy level to do the same, Corbett said." No one will stop anyone from transferring a child to a charter school, the kicker is how much of state public education tax money will be given to the person transferring. I wonder if a percentage of the "student state subsidy" would enable a "poor family" to send their child there. Personally, I think this is the first step toward establishing a voucher system for everyone. They have to start here to get phase one through. The GOP has long advocated giving anyone their share of the state student subsidy to send their child to a charter school. Honestly, its the people who can afford to send their kids to private schools who want part of their tax money back. I doubt "poor people" could afford it even with the state student subsidy. I doubt the PIAA would change anything. If a student goes to, or from, a private school, I don't think there is any 'transfer penalty'. Correct me if I am wrong.
|
|
|
Post by icmwblue on Nov 4, 2011 21:24:43 GMT -5
Instead of Gov. Corbett siding with Jeff Piccola of Susquehanna Twp in the hopes of getting their tuition voucher program passed, perhaps he should instead take a look a the rights that were afforded to every student in PA when No Child Left Behind was put into place several years ago. To be clear, I am not a supporter of NCLB, however that system is in place and instead of abandoning ship and wasting yet more taxpayer money to write yet another sure-fail program, perhaps we could just fix it. If a student (any income level) is in a school that does not meet AYP for two or more consecutive years, they have the option to transfer to a school of their choice. Priority is given to low income students, but it is not a requirement.
This new push is a back door way to get the voucher program passed..... A voucher program that will further strap the average taxpayer falling in the mid 50% income bracket. There are no concrete or feasible plans on how to fund the voucher program or school choice (which could just as well be synonymous). Funding has already been cut to public schools for the students they pay to educate that choose to attend cyber, charter or cyber charter. Students who are frankly too lazy to come to school and often choose to stay in their PJs all day and vegetate in front of the computer, born to parents that are afraid to tell their kids to "suck it up" and go to school like we all did......
All of this will do several things: 1. Further broaden the social and economical gap between students 2. Muddy the waters regarding athletic boundaries, districts and divisions 3. Further strap the public school system to cover transportation costs to bus these kids to their school "of choice"
|
|