Voter Respect

Over the past 6 months, there have been many platitudes about the importance of placing the referendum before the public and respecting the will of Utah's voters.  Which of these statements actually shows respect for those voters?

• Voucher supporter Gov. Jon Huntsman:  I support vouchers.  Here are my reasons.  Get educated and be an informed voter.

Or...

• Voucher opponent Pat Rusk (past president, UEA):  I oppose vouchers.  Utahns 'should expect immediate constitutional challenges [in court] should voters pass the referendum.'  (KCPW: Debaters Raise Question of Voucher Constitutionality)

As an aside: The Utah Supreme Court has already reviewed the voucher program.  If there was any remaining question about its constitutionality, that could have been raised prior to the referendum vote (if the intended purpose was to really give the voters a meaningful voice in this decision).

Comments

[Jesse Harris]

The referendum route was always one of two things to me: an attempt to embarrass the legislature or an admission that the legal challenges weren't as ironclad as portrayed.

[Curt]

While I whole-heartedly applaud your demand that Utah voters be respected, I would add that it seems a little late in the game for players to be switching sides.

[John Dougall]

I think the Gov has been consistent in his statements from day 1.

The UEA isn't switching sides either. It continues to be disingenuous, finally publicly stating what many of us already knew -- it will use any and all means to preserve union power, regardless of the learning needs of students and parents. It's continued protection of ineffective and abusive teachers punishes our many valuable public educators and harms Utah's students.

[Curt]

I absolutely agree that the UEA actions with regard to abusive teachers (they have got to stop protecting people who have clearly gone down the wrong path) are a major problem, but I take issue with the rest of your comment/tone.

If teachers believe (and many of them do) that vouchers will do more harm than good, they SHOULD do anything they can to stop their implementation. They may, of course, be wrong in their assertion but so may you. Furthermore, if they (or any responsible organization) feel that the constitution is being sidestepped, they should point it out and take action.

Finally, with regard to “ineffective teachers”, we don’t have enough teachers to just start throwing them out. Many teachers in your category may just need some help with revitalizing their classroom or updating their skills. The union should help acquire that assistance and I think they have tried to do that. That is a good thing. There are, of course, some teachers that can not or will not be helped in this regard (fortunately for all of us the number is not large) and this is where a well structured union would help them move on to something else.

It seems to me that when you (and your cohorts) talk about the union, you focus on the bad that they do rather than pointing out the good that they do. You also seem bent on eliminating them rather than helping them become a stronger more appropriate tool for their important members.

[Jeremy]

If the legislature had put together a law that was as flawed as the current one we wouldn't be facing this mess.

You can whine about UEA all you want but very reasonable non-union people who have looked at the particulars of this law realize that it is a bad deal. School choice is a good goal but you've failed to give Utahns a decent law.

Maybe Republicans should humble themselves a little bit (Jesse complains about this effect of the referendum but I think it is a feature)...address the shortcomings of this legislation...and then try again next year.

[John Dougall]

Jeremy,

One person's flaw is another person's feature. Part of the act of compromise is bring together a little of this and a little of that. No one agrees with every component, but you arrive at majority agreement. Given the opponents argument, the entire public ed statute, should be repeals since it is full of flaws and fails many Utah families (but I digress).

What do you consider as the shortcomings of the current legislation? How would you recommending addressing those? It's taken at least 8 years just to get the legislation to this part of the process.

Also, don't think the UEA wouldn't work to oppose any and all versions of a universal voucher and/or tax credit bill, just as they have opposed various forms of school choice over the years (regardless of structure, accountability, hold harmless, etc.). From the UEA's perspective, parental choice and voluntary competition are fundamental flaws (although it generally won't state it as clearly in public). For me, those are strengths.

[John Dougall]

Curt,

If teachers believe that vouchers will do more harm than good, then they should vote to approve vouchers and then work to convince parents, on an individual basis, why they shouldn't choose to use a voucher. That would be a great solution.

Instead, when opponents block the implementation of vouchers, they also cripple choice and preserve the status quo. The result is the tyranny of the majority trampling minority rights while simultaneously eliminating the voluntary marketplace of ideas.

The status quo is what allows districts to keep ineffective teachers in the classroom. Either (1) train them, (2) find a better fit for them, or (3) send them to find a better career. It is unfair to both the students and the teachers, that an ineffective teacher is left in the classroom year after year, decade after decade. It is also unfair to the ineffective teacher to be left with, perhaps, the false impression that he is effective when the reality is otherwise.

It has been my experience that unions provide much harm and little benefit (that may have been different 100 years ago). Great innovations and improvements flow through increased freedom and competition, not through stagnation and regulation (whether union caused or government caused).

I think some of the greatest dangers to personal freedom and liberty arise from the collusion of (1) big business, (2) big labor, and (3) big government. I understand I am part of the government and as a result I am part of the problem. I am pro consumer. That is why I work to reduce big government and it's ability to grant perferential treatment, foster corruption, and eliminate agency. I believe that the voucher legislation is a small step in that direction, but it is still just a baby step within a much larger journey.

[John Dougall]

I should also add, I am very concerned about the direction of the Republican party. The Democratic party (since the 1930's) has stood for big government and big labor. Over the past 10 years, the Republican party has become the party of big government and big business. I believe that society, in general, and citizens, in particular, have suffered as a result.

[Jesse Harris]

Jeremy: I wouldn't take as much issue with that aspect if it wasn't 1) a publicity stunt and 2) being mis-used as a vote on the concept of vouchers rather than this specific implementation. It's good to have a check on elected officials other than ballot and jury boxes, but I can't stand mis-using those vehicles for expensive and low-brow posturing.

[dramos]

As a parent with children in Utah public schools, I am frustrated at the poor education my children are getting. The elementary school my children have attended in Orem has been acceptable. However, the school has done poorly with math and science. Educators don’t grasp that if a teacher dislikes or does not understand math and science, that teachers passes that bias on to their students.

At the High School level the teachers are inconsistent. Quite a few of my daughter’s teachers at the high school were lax. They did not demand reasonable work. Many encouraged sloppy work and sloppy thinking. It is difficult for parents to convince a child to be better when the teachers won’t back them up. Then, when your child gets a teacher that DOES require good work, that teacher just thinks your child is lazy and bad because you’re a bad parent. Believe me, my wife and I have had to fight both situations. It is not fun to be called a bad parent by educators.

Of course, they never really say “you are a bad parent.” They are always very polite, but clear – it is your fault, and your child is just lazy. The fact that you have been trying to undo the damage caused by bad teachers for years is irrelevant to them.

What a great system we have. The schools are never wrong – just parents. Or the legislature. Or the kids.

I’d love to simply change our schools, but how do you change any organization that can’t see its own faults? Maybe you could get some laws passed? Maybe you would just hear cries of “Unconstitutional!” or “It’s flawed!” if you tried.

Allowing vouchers is an attempt to introduce competition into education. Maybe we can embarrass the public school into doing better. Maybe vouchers will have no effect. I don’t know if it will or not. What I do know is that it won’t hurt.

I hear a lot of noise about how flawed the voucher laws are. I’d like to know exactly what the supposed flaws are. The law is available online. If one claims it is flawed, one could perhaps describe each flaw and show were in the text of the law the flaw exists.

If the vouchers will do more harm than good, then perhaps one could show what harm will occur and where in the text of the law that flaw exists.

Those of us who support vouchers are basically tired of the excuses the public schools give for poor performance. In particular, we are tired of being told it is our fault.