A recent article in our local newspaper stated that our district commissioners had voted to urge our state government not to pass a bill that would establish school vouchers for private schools, citing that the taxpayers would have to pay for those vouchers. Since we, the taxpayers, already pay for the schooling of each child, what difference does it make if we are paying for private or public education. Are public schools afraid that the competition of private schools would lower their share of the education pie and might affect their retirement funds? Are the unions afraid that they might lose members? Are the liberals of the school afraid that the competition might force them to teach educational fundamentals and be forced to cut back on their anti-social studies? I would really like to know. Saying that the taxpayers will have to foot the bill, implies that we are not paying the bill already, or that the public school’s cut in the education fund would not be cut if students chose to use vouchers for private schools. It seems that public schools have a monopoly that they are not willing to share. The saying, “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” seems to be true. Many of our public schools have assumed dictatorial powers over students. teachers and parents. More than one has stated that the children belong to the government and not to the parents who gave birth to them. I think that the competition will do public schools good. Perhaps pulling their feet back to the ground will get their heads out of the clouds. I’m sure that the many good teachers in public schools will agree. They’ve been hogtied and intimidated just like the parents.
The Harvest Principle
Posts By Date
Top Posts & Pages
Supernatural Power Through One Law, by Andy Mealer
The Harvest Principle: It’s Not A Coincidence