Republicans Disagree on Vouchers and K-12 Funding
Ah… the smell of sausage being made.
Senate Republicans won’t back Gov. Scott Walker’s proposal to expand private school voucher programs or freeze public school spending, GOP leaders told the Associated Press on Wednesday.
The dissension within his party over key elements of Walker’s budget comes as a blow to the Republican governor less than two weeks after he released a plan intended to serve as the cornerstone of his legislative agenda for the next two years.
Senators remain committed to a voucher school expansion but are working on alternatives to what Walker proposed, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald told AP in an interview. He also said there is “no doubt at all” that public schools will be allowed to increase per-pupil spending even though Walker called for a freeze to help keep property taxes in check.
Most Republican senators won’t back Walker’s voucher plan, his proposal to give charter schools more autonomy or to give vouchers to special needs students, said Senate President Mike Ellis. He said Walker’s proposals will need to be “drastically changed.”
Right now there aren’t actual alternatives being proposed - just some pre-negotiation posturing.
For-profit education will always fail. Sad we have to prove it like Jindal has the past few years. Backwards !
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 07, 2013 at 0013 hrs
This should be one clear indication to republicans that they cannot continue to listen to only SE Wisconsin whether it is radio idiots or whoever is making the most noise. The small towns outstate see this as taking away their community identity. If the schools close in a town with a population of 50-4000 then the town essentially has no center. it loses its identity. many of the people that live in towns that size are life long members of the community and have great civic pride. If Walker defunds the schools in those towns it will essentially end literally generations of tradition and community pride.
That is a recipe for Democrats to take over the mansion and capital at the next election. Outstate republicans know it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 07, 2013 at 1307 hrs
@Kris,
This only applies to districts with more than 4000 students. No small, rural districts would be impacted. Furthermore, parental rights in education and access to quality schools vs. a systemic funding of the status quo will not cost anyone a legislative seat.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 07, 2013 at 1316 hrs
That may be for now, but the entire process started with just the Milwaukee schools and is now expanding. This will bleed over into other districts and will affect the smaller towns in the state. Don’t kid yourself about that. The small towns around bigger districts are already losing students and thus funding due to open enrollment. This will just make the ball roll faster.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 07, 2013 at 1438 hrs
T.I., you are just looking at the voucher expansion angle as proposed in the current budget. In the current budget proposal, the voucher provision applies statewide to all districts regardless of size. However, in districts that either have less than two schools in the lower two report card tiers or have enrollment less than 4,000 the district has a veto. I think the GOP senators believe that the veto exception might be removed in the future.
More significantly, the combination of a revenue cap freeze and increased consolidation aids as proposed in the budget makes it likely that some rural communities will see their schools close. As Kris has noted, this is a dealbreaker outstate.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 07, 2013 at 2156 hrs
Unless Kris you are from a community with a big bad name like the Indians. Then civic pride be damned…must…change…name…to…save…indian…feelings.
Are you saying that what the libs did there when they abolished community identity by forcing districts to change their name because a couple of folks feelings were hurt is a good thing but vouchers are not?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 0907 hrs
Opposing vouchers is nothing more than trading off children’s education for teacher union jobs, once the smokescreen is removed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 0941 hrs
Opposing vouchers is nothing more than trading off children’s education for teacher union jobs, once the smokescreen is removed.
Overall, I am pro-voucher, but to say a change like that has only two effects (good for students, bad for teacher unions) is extremely myopic. It may well have serious negative effects in small towns that are not present in the larger cities. I admit I don’t know enough to make a good judgment, can you Smeety?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 1001 hrs
No Smeety cannot make a good judgement on this. he is incapable of rational thought when it comes to teachers unions and public education.
Fishaddict,
I went to a school that uses the warriors as its mascot and uses an indian as its logo. they were not forced to change.
It is a small district with only about 100 kids in the HS. If vouchers are expanded this is a prime place that will be forced to close due to lower enrollment. there are two privates less than 20 miles away along with two larger school districts. Its not that they do a bad job there, but if you take 10 kids out of a 100 kid HS it will have a dramatic affect and once that ball starts rolling it will keep going until it is not economically feasible to stay open.
If schools close in small towns the community identity effectively disappears. In those small towns the school is what draws people together. That is there common love. In that same town there are four churches. the town is divided on religion, but it is united in its support for the Warriors.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 1259 hrs
TQ, the vast majority a oppostion to vouchers comes from public school teachers, with the remainder coming from their politically aligned sympathizers. There are almost ZERO exceptions to this. That alone should be a huge red flag. This is only about money. Whether it is a blue-fisted, crazy-eyed teacher with a picket sign or it’s a sniveling Kris Beaver, diatribing to Glenn Grothman… This union has shown it’s selfish motives.
Put this to the test…ask your average, unaffiliated, working class, private sector parent if he/she thinks more opportunities for their kids’ education is generally a good thing.
And, Kris, if nobody were to want to attend your alma mater due to better services provided elsewhere… That is a good thing for our kids…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 1333 hrs
It is a small district with only about 100 kids in the HS. If vouchers are expanded this is a prime place that will be forced to close due to lower enrollment. there are two privates less than 20 miles away along with two larger school districts. Its not that they do a bad job there, but if you take 10 kids out of a 100 kid HS it will have a dramatic affect and once that ball starts rolling it will keep going until it is not economically feasible to stay open.
That makes no sense at all. That seems to imply that the school never opened until a minimum of 100 kids were ready to enroll. Things will be downsized, but closed???? NO.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 1420 hrs
Smeety,
The original point was simple. Outstate republicans won’t back something that is going to piss off their constituents. Closing the central focus of their community will piss them off. That is the point that I was making. In addition to that I predicted correctly that you are not capable of having a rational conversation when it comes to teachers unions and public education. Thank you for proving my point by being the first to resort to name calling.
If this discussion was confined to SE WI or Dane county i would say that the majority of opposition does come from teachers and those that back them, but that is not the case outstate. These are people that have lived in these small towns for most if not all of their lives. they have invested in the communities and do not want to see them change in the manner that this will change them.
jason,
the district is a declining enrollment district already, but the vouchers will speed that up. Again, the main point is politicians will not do something to make their constituents mad and closing schools in their districts will make people mad. People will accept that the school closes due to a natural lack of students, but they will be genuinely, and rightfully so, mad if someone creates a situation that only speeds up the process and forces the issue.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 1538 hrs
Central focus of their community?
Kris, West Bend voted and decided that you are the irrational one.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 1542 hrs
the district is a declining enrollment district already, but the vouchers will speed that up. Again, the main point is politicians will not do something to make their constituents mad and closing schools in their districts will make people mad. People will accept that the school closes due to a natural lack of students, but they will be genuinely, and rightfully so, mad if someone creates a situation that only speeds up the process and forces the issue.
Sorry, but you said “will be forced to close”. Then you based your diatribe of “community identity” on your false premise of “will be forced to close”. Sorry, you’re not making much logical sense today.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2013 at 1718 hrs
Well smeety I was elected three times and the very referendum that I was so criticized for supporting just passed was supported by the guy who supposedly replaced me.
Jason,
Schools are funded on a per student basis. If you reduce the number of students enough there will not be enough funds to run the school and then the school will be forced to close.As far as the community identity issue. If you are not from a small town it is difficult understand how important the school is to those small towns. In most small towns it is literally the only large venue for community activities, it is the place that 90% of the town goes on Friday night to watch football or basketball, it is where all of the kids gather for education and so on. In the very small town I grew up in there are four different denominations of religion and people argue which is best, but no one argues against the Warrior football team or basketball or wrestling team. The schools are very Important to the community.
So, if funding is reduced to that district because students leave to attend school in other schools then eventually the district will be forced to close because there will literally not be enough money to operate the basic functions that schools are required to provide.
Not sure what you don’t understand about that
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 10, 2013 at 0843 hrs
Do you have anything other than your “The sky is falling” prognostication? Anything concrete?
Do you have a hard and fast number as to the minimum number of students before your fantasy school is forced to close? Anything about the minimum amount of money needed to operate before “Chicken Little School” is forced to close?
Still not making logical sense Kris, please try again.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 10, 2013 at 1304 hrs
Jason,
To give you an exact number would require that I have access to a districts books. I don’t. I am going on what I was told about by a former classmate that is a board member in school district I grew up in. Their ten tear plan given enrollment projections has insolvency as its most likely conclusion. Given what they know about birth rates and the sizes of the classes already in school they will not have the money to operate the district within the next ten years. The caveat to thatt is that they do have the option to pass a referendum. That is unlikely because they have not been able to pass the last two that they attempted.If vouchers speed up the decline in student population that will move them closer to insolvency faster. That was my original point. Out state republicans don’t want to vote for that kind of thing because it gets them ousted from office. There are actually a number of districts in the state in a similar situation. They are very close to insolvency. For the record there is no current referendum debt in my home district. They have paid off their debt. Thy offer no AP classes and get the advanced classes taught via distance learning. Those two issues concern parents including my in laws that still live there greatly.
So, this is not fantasy school. This situation is real life. If you still don’t get the issue it’s because you aren’t capable or don’t want to.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 10, 2013 at 1419 hrs
While I appreciate your attachment to this district and understand that it would be sad to see it go, I’m struggling to understand your point.
As I read your comments, the taxpayers of the state should spend more money to prop up a district that will soon be unnecessary based on enrollment. For how long? If there aren’t enough kids to justify an independent district, then why shouldn’t we focus our resources on whatever district they will end up in? Is the purpose to educate kids or keep a school that we don’t need running?
It seems that introducing school choice into that district wouldn’t do anything other than hasten the inevitable. In the mean time, some kids will have the opportunity to get a great education elsewhere.
Posted by Owen on March 10, 2013 at 1451 hrs
Their ten tear plan given enrollment projections has insolvency as its most likely conclusion.
A very apropos typo, I think. All I can do is echo what Owen just said. On top of that, all you have presented here is 3rd hand heresy and no facts. It’s not what I want or what I’m capable of, is this is all you can bring to the table, maybe it’s time to move back to the kiddie table with your heart string tugging story.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 10, 2013 at 1506 hrs
Actually Kris, the major flaw I see in your example is that if the families are united in their school love, who will be sending their kid away? It is parent choice driven. If anything it might pull a few outliers in who appreciate the small town identity. If shrinking enrollment is already a(the) problem, vouchers will be unfairly blamed for closing the school, but if it hastens the demise, the fault is with all those loyal townspeople who moved their kid, not the school choice voucher system.
Smeety, because teachers hate it is not an automatic condemnation to me. While I agree that money is the major factor, there will be other repercussions to a law like this. If they are all ‘good’ I would be shocked. Publicly aligned sympathizers includes the vast majority of liberals. So your zero exceptions to this really amounts to support along party lines. Trying to obfuscate that raises red flags too. What is new here?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 11, 2013 at 1502 hrs
It’s taken me a while to get back to this…..
- - - -
12. Thank you for proving my point by being the first to resort to name calling.
Posted by Kris Beaver on March 08, 2013 at 1538 hrs
Really, Kristopher? Let’s go back a few comments…
9. No Smeety cannot make a good judgement on this. he is incapable of rational thought when it comes to teachers unions and public education.
Kristopher, do you know what a Six Sigma Master Black Belt is? I am one. It means my employer (one of the largest) pays me to travel the world and teach people how to analyze problems.
(TQ)With regard to vouchers, I promise you I have considered all inputs, and to quote Spock (or in the case of Barack Hussein Obama, Yoda....)
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
(Actually, as I researched this quote, it turns out that Sir Conan Doyle is the original source, which makes pretty good sense…)
Think about it… every single argument put forth by WEAC has been systematically debunked. Special needs kids, secularism…. now we are on to ‘the destruction of the small communities’... soon it’ll be something else.
And, I actually do have pretty good knowledge of small school districts. I grew up in a school district of roughly two thousand (with attendance of two thousand at football games).
Notwithstanding the big government mantra Kris speaks (implying that public schools have become some type of glue that holds a community together),I do believe Kris when he says that he thinks that giving parents a choice to send their kids to school will destroy the community. If you are a public school teacher in that district, your life will be turned upside down… just like if the West Bend Company loses customers, Amity loses customers, AO Smith loses customers, Harley-Davidson loses customers…. people move on and survive… The purpose of the public school system is to prepare our kids (intellectually) to go out and be productive members of society. The purpose is not to keep teachers employed.
I support vouchers primarily for two reasons: First, I want to see inner city kids succeed. Second, I want competition… I want to feel that the schools are not a fiefdom. I want to feel like a customer whom they are trying to meet the needs.
9. No Smeety cannot make a good judgement on this. he is incapable of rational thought when it comes to teachers unions and public education.
My property taxes on my rentals in Kewaskum pay a good month’s worth of Kris’ salary. Is he making me feel like a customer? Thank God I don’t have to deal with this guy teaching my kids.
Smeety, because teachers hate it is not an automatic condemnation to me. While I agree that money is the major factor, there will be other repercussions to a law like this. If they are all ‘good’ I would be shocked. Publicly aligned sympathizers includes the vast majority of liberals. So your zero exceptions to this really amounts to support along party lines. Trying to obfuscate that raises red flags too. What is new here?
Posted by Tuerqas on March 11, 2013 at 1502 hrs
My rhetoric on this may sound as though teachers hating it is a good thing, but that is not what I believe. No employee is happy with cuts, but that’s part of life. And if I imply ZERO exceptions, I mean very, very few exceptions.
Well smeety I was elected three times….
Posted by Kris Beaver on March 10, 2013 at 0843 hrs
Kris, you were an incumbent that was exposed and expunged. You can rationalize and project the rest… no one really cares…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 17, 2013 at 1120 hrs
Like I said, I am pro-voucher. Actually, since Obama is already working to give everyone free technology, I think a national online curriculum should not be far away for public school and of course the main obstruction will be teachers.
My rhetoric on this may sound as though teachers hating it is a good thing, but that is not what I believe.
Okay, but then I don’t know what you believe. Right now liberal thought has a stranglehold on education with a heavy emphasis on public school ed. Vouchers don’t really affect this that much because while some public schools are better, it also means they are better at indoctrination. However, when/if charter schools gain more traction, putting the power of indoctrination in a private citizen’s hand will have dangers as well. Greater or lesser? I don’t think so, just different…unless your only main goal is to lessen liberal power(in this case, maybe a worthy goal).
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 18, 2013 at 0948 hrs
Total Entries: 21059
Total Comments: 146944
Most Recent Entry: 05/17/2013 05:57 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/18/2013 05:31 am
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 50
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2013 11:12 am
The most visitors ever was 663 on 09/02/2012 05:13 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).