Trump signs order to expand school choice

[crazed_hoosier2]

If a private school is taking public money then they should get treated like a public school

This is an assertion, not an argument.

You could say "All schools that get public funds must have recognized accreditation and meet DoE curriculum and testing guidelines so that taxpayers can be assured that they aren't paying for quackery and kids are getting proper math, science, English, etc."

If schools aren't required to meet these guidelines, then paying them isn't just a waste of taxpayer funds, it's a terrible disservice to those kids, their families, and their communities.

That's a sound argument. I'm looking for a good argument why a school that accepts public funds shouldn't be allowed to deny admission to anybody. Saying "because that's what public schools have to do" isn't even an attempt to clear the bar.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

If a private school is taking public money then they should get treated like a public school

^^^
This.

Otherwise, I guess public schools should also be allowed to reject any students they want. It would sure be cheaper not to have to educate the Sp.Ed. students. Of course, Donny has taken care of the ESL kids, so maybe he can find a way to deport the handicapped students, too.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I would not have said that if the program had remained as it started.

Many critics made the same complaint then, too. I'm not saying you did. But it was already a common complaint.

However, now that the income limits are gone, I think the calculus has changed. The money going to private schools is coming straight from the public schools budget.

The lifting of income limits probably didn't have as much of an impact on that as the removal of the initial rule that students who were already in a private school weren't eligible.

But keep in mind that overall funding levels have grown with the removal of that requirement. The whole idea is to move towards a funding formula where K12 funds are allocated for each K12 age kid.

I also think K-12 is fundamentally different than the examples you give. A public university can deny applicants, just like a private university that also gets public funds. The public K-12s can’t do that.

I understand the distinction. I just don't understand why it matters. If the state allocated K12 funds are attached to the kid (as opposed to a school system), what difference does it make if one school he would have to choose from has limited capacity and some other one has unlimited capacity?

Your argument makes it sound like the money belongs to the school system, rather than the taxpayer. But that isn't how this works.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

^^^
This.

Otherwise, I guess public schools should also be allowed to reject any students they want. It would sure be cheaper not to have to educate the Sp.Ed. students. Of course, Donny has taken care of the ESL kids, so maybe he can find a way to deport the handicapped students, too.

Well, in any event, school choice isn't going anywhere in Indiana. So the debate over whether or not we should have it is overwith -- at least for the foreseeable future -- and its roots have set in. That doesn't mean you have to like it, support it, or participate in it. But deciding these kinds of policies is the reason we have elections.

That being the case, families with school-aged children, schools both public and private, teachers, etc. have all had to make adjustments to the new paradigm.

 

[Cortez88]

Many critics made the same complaint then, too. I'm not saying you did. But it was already a common complaint.



The lifting of income limits probably didn't have as much of an impact on that as the removal of the initial rule that students who were already in a private school weren't eligible.

But keep in mind that overall funding levels have grown with the removal of that requirement. The whole idea is to move towards a funding formula where K12 funds are allocated for each K12 age kid.



I understand the distinction. I just don't understand why it matters. If the state allocated K12 funds are attached to the kid (as opposed to a school system), what difference does it make if one school he would have to choose from has limited capacity and some other one has unlimited capacity?

Your argument makes it sound like the money belongs to the school system, rather than the taxpayer. But that isn't how this works.

The argument for vouchers is that the money should go with the kids. But it only goes with the kids the private schools take.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

The argument for vouchers is that the money should go with the kids. But it only goes with the kids the private schools take.

Has it been an actual problem for kids who wanted to use Ed Choice to go to a private school, but were unable to find any to go to? Or is this just a hypothetical "problem" like the story about Voter ID leading to the suppression of millions of voters that nobody can name?

As I said, I can't speak for any private school other than the one my kids and I went to. But I can speak for it: they haven't denied admission to anybody, as far as I'm aware. In fact, the enrollment is about 200 below what they can accommodate and where they want to be.

If there's some kind of an epidemic of Hoosier kids who want to use their public K12 allotment to attend a private school, but have been turned away everywhere they've tried, I haven't heard anything about it.

 

[jsig]

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/29/politics/executive-actions-trump-school-choice/index.html

Regardless of your opinion on school choice, how does this align with Republicans longstanding opinion that more power should be given to states? Based on past complaining, shouldn't Republicans believe this should be left up to the states and not the feds?

I'm not a Republican and will probably never vote for a Democrat again but I think the DoE should be banished and public school decisions should be handled between parents and local governments (state or city).

I'd favor getting rid of federal taxes except for military to defend our country (not fund proxy wars that lead to the killings of innocent people abroad or engineer government coups). Ask any parent if they would rather spend Trillions to fund wars and kill innocent people or keep the money to make the local/state schools for their kids better, what would that answer be?