Todd’s radio ad on schools

According to Buckeye State Blog, allowing parents to take their children (and tax dollars) and go to private, charter, religious, or suburban schools is the equivalent of busing them. Bill Todd advocates those options in a new radio ad (mp3). It’s a bit slimy to use the busing term, since that issue concerned mandatory busing, and what Todd (and others) are for is parental choice- precisely the opposite. By and large, Democrats oppose giving parents that choice, because the party puts teachers ahead of poor children. I know that sounds like over the top hyperbole but at the bottom line it has to be true. But there are also elements of limiting choice and maintaining the collective and dependence on the state.

It’s also fairly ridiculous that modernesquire tweaks Bill Todd for mentioning that Mayor Mike Coleman’s kids go to Catholic school, and then he questions whether Todd’s kids went to Columbus schools. But modern, only one of these two people wants to force poor kids to go to public schools.

Also at Right Angle Blog.

(Previous post: Charter school enrollment rising.)

Trackback | Posted by Brian | Sep 12, 2007 1:32 pm | Permalink | Bookmark
Categories: Columbus, Ohio, Politics, News

Posted by Mark Daniels | Sep 25, 2007 10:17 am

Brian:
I hope that all is well with you.

Mark Daniels

Posted by Modern Esquire | Sep 26, 2007 10:48 am

Bill Todd’s ad doesn’t talk about school choice, it talks about evacuating children from Columbus public schools and moving them into suburban districts and charter schools. You can whine about it all you want, the fact is that the characterization comes directly from the ad, not me.

You, of course, never mention the criticism that as Mayor, Todd has no jurisdiction over the schools like he is claiming in his ads. You also miss the point that its hypocritical to mention where Coleman’s children went to school while conveniently ignore the fact that Todd hasn’t been supporting the Columbus School District as he is a carpetbagger.

What good is choice if the alternatives are, in many ways, worse than what is offered? The charter school experiment in Ohio has been disasterous and has not materialized the benefits its advocates theorized it would. Meanwhile, while Columbus City Schools are making vast improvements, your candidate would rather pull the plug and take those children over to the whims of the unregulated, financially mismanaged charter school system.

Posted by Paul | Sep 30, 2007 7:04 pm

The Ohio experiment in charter schools is a disaster because the original concept (e.g. as described by Milton Friedman) has been politicized and bastardized to the point that failure is all but guaranteed.

What we need to do is eliminate the notion of school districts altogether and instead arm each kid with a state voucher that can be taken to any accredited school and pay full tuition. Conversely, to be an accredited school (which means authorized to submit vouchers to the state for reimbursement), all vouchers must be accepted as 100% tuition. All accredited schools must be not-for-profit organizations (at least until folks come to trust their ability to be good consumers of educational services).

Accredited schools can solicit additional funding from community foundations, and could be allowed to develop endowment foundations. But they can never reject a student for not having enough money to pay tuition, or contribute to the foundations - the state voucher is the only ticket a student needs.

The money saved by avoiding all the duplicated overhead would be used to fund a transportation system (presumably developed in cooperation with the regional transit authority) so that kids can get to the school building of their choice.

The “neighborhood school” concept that everyone touts is simply a way to substitute wealth segregation for racial segregation. I.E. I can keep the po folks out of my schools by making it expensive to live in my neighborhood.

Time to get radical if we want to fix this school performance and funding mess.

Posted by Robert B. | Oct 11, 2007 2:09 am

What happened to teaching kids by example, that they have a stake in their neighborhood?
We’re creating a world of disconnected “consumers” who don’t think they owe their neighbors anything.
Humans have always been group oriented. I think running schools like a competition is in conflict with what we are. That’s why neglected communities get worse; and schools get can only follow.

Posted by Uncle Raisin | Nov 13, 2007 9:39 am

Educating children is the responsibility of the parents. It is NOT the responsibility of the government (local, State or otherwise). That there are parents who do not and cannot educate their own children doesn’t change the fact that it is their responsibility. Instead of continually putting the lever of education under the government’s fulcrum point (far away from the object we are trying to move - the child), it should be placed under the parent (right next to the child, providing far more leverage potential). The result will be far better educated children.

Uncle Raisin
www.UncleRaisin.com
“Raisin” the Standard Against Injustice

5 comments on “Todd’s radio ad on schools”

Leave a comment

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Ohio

Akron

Bexley

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Columbus

Grandview Heights

Hilliard

Marietta

Toledo

The Feed