Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Like I predicted, US Supreme Court Rules Vouchers Const

Recommended Posts

Well, SCOTUS (Supreme Court of The United States of Anmerica has ruled on the Constitutionality of School Vouchers.And the decision is 5-4 in FAVOR of vouchers. Public money can be used for private or religious school as long as parents have a CHOICE among a range of religious and secular schools.Thank You, scotus for using Common Sense, and upholding the Proper Interpretation of Law in The United States.Regards,Joe :-wavehttp://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Well, it's a sad day in america when I wake up and find that the well to do will now be able to send their kids to private religious schools at the expense of the public schools. No common american will be able to afford a private school for their kid yet the well to do that can afford to pay the balance of the tuition can now use the public school money to to subsidize their costs. It's also a said day in america when I wake up and find that my daughter will now have to pee in a jar if she wants to play an instrument in the band.It was a really sad day in america last year, when the supreme court decided they would be the ones who decided who the next president would be rather than letting the issue be decided by the House of Representatives or the State of Florida as the constitution so clearly stated.This court is no different than the conservative Supreme Court was in the 1920s when they decided that "separate but equal" was constitutional. They just said it again. Why is it that I feel more threatened by this court than I would by a burglar standing in my living room with a gun pointed at me?????? Same applies to people like Pat Buchanan. He's more of a threat to the average american than Osama ever will be. Enough said. Things will right themselves with time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a Great Day for My Country and I respectfully disagree with everything you just said.My viewpoint wins, yours loses. Get over it, and move on with your life and accept the law of this land.It is views like those that were expressed in this suit that is part of the donwfall of values in this country.Now all we need is for the Teachers and other unions to allow their members to choose where their dues money goes instead of being forced to only support one parties ideals.I found it interesting that some of the largest holders of Worldcom Stock as reported by CNBC yesterday were Tia-creff, Teachers pensions and unions. I wonder what kind of political money was paid to those unions by worldcom.And this comes from a guy wondering where the investigation is on Global Crossing.SoMGD, respect the decisions as they are no final, and get over it. Do you not think that high school kids are nor using steroids. Drugs are illegal and they can test me or my kids until the cows come home if they are illegal.Regards,Joe :-wave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Joe; I respect your views just like everyone elses. Don't have to agree with em' but hey; we're all entitled to our views. Since this is now law, some good will come out of it. Moslem schools can now be established for areas of predominantly moslem populations and will be paid for with tax payer monies. Same with the jewish communities and the budist communities and all the other great religions. On another note, if I were a betting man, I'd say this court just lost the election for the conservatives this fall. People in general are pretty smart. They are quick to distinguish between political agendas and the law of the land as it should be and has been for so long. My bet would be that the democrats just won the House of Representatives and likely increased their majority in the Senate. The 2004 presidential election will also be much more interesting when considering the possible make up of a future supreme court. The people have a way of letting all these politicians and judges know what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mgd,Again, I have to ask if you even bothered reading the Opinion. This allows Parent Choice, not government paid private schools. It only allows the money that would have been used to educate that child in a public school to now be used in a school that a parent chooses.So parents win.Should Muslims or any other religion be allowed to use this program. Absolutely YES.This is about choices and especially in terrivle school districts.I am a firm believer in that Education, especially in economically distressed areas should be at the forefront of educational rights.The Supreme Court has now given all parents a choice in this matter. Surely you do not have problem with that analogy, or do you?Joe.http://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

''The Supreme Court has now given all parents a choice in this matter. Surely you do not have problem with that analogy, or do you?''I absolutely have a major problem with this. It's not a parents choice matter as espoused by the conservatives. That position is a fraud. Parents already have a choice. It's an assault against the public schools so that some well to do parents can use monies targeted for the public schools to send their kids to private schools. This is not going to do anything but damage to all the schools in america. It's gonna substantially damage the public schools in the upscale areas and totally devastate the schools in the poorer areas. Vouchers are a FRAUD. This court is smart enough to recognize this. There are five Justices who'd rather follow their political agenda than the law of the land. That's all I'm gonna say about the matter. Other than that us american voters are a lot smarter than the conservatives give us credit for. hehehe. And to think, I was actually gonna vote for a couple republicans this fall. Not a chance, now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sonar, I agree with you, but I have to bring up one point. There is a simple solution that would bring MGDBottled and you together. When the legislation is finalized, or if it has been, then during the tweaking process, the legislatures need to install an income provision that either reduces the effective voucher amount as income increases, so that a family that makes $300k in the household, and never wanted to to send their kids to public schools in the first place, does not in essence get a gift (when compared to the $30k household with two kids). To put this in perspective, I am a BIG proponent of the flat tax. I am a moderate Republican that believes in "survival of the fittest" and entreprenurial drive. But, this superficially does seem to help out the wealthy perhaps more than it should. The parental choice issue is excellent, particularly with the state of many public schools today. (Side note: I went to public schools until attending Vanderbilt, a $35k/yr private university, and I turned out pretty good. College was funded by the family - no loans - so is law school- so if anyone should be for the vouchers it would be me.) But, I think that the funding aspect is a little lopsided. To make it more effective, let's look at it from a less controversial angle. In order to gain public approval, (i.e. let's put a spin on it), let's take that money and offer it to the private schools (which wouldn't work b/c the gov't would be giving money to religious institutions..but barring this complication...) with the mandate that they have to use it for scholarships which recognize applicants with high academic credentials or that recognize talent (music, sports, etc.) That way, there is no real tie (although it is argued that family income and test scores are related) between the vouchers and wealthy families over a low-income family.This seems somewhat fair, b/c parents can still make a choice to send their kids to a private school, whether rich or poor, and b/c the children are not gauranteed admittance in the first place, let alone after vouchers are considered (as there are tests and interviews), everyone is evaluated on a level playing field. Need more time to develop the argument, but that's a startChristopherP4 1.8768 ram 80 gig hardriveVisiontek Ti4 4600CH yoke/pedals19" inch monitor-Soundblaster PCI 512Win XPPrivate PilotAOPALawyerPilots Bar Association"Men without dreams are never free, twas thus this way and thus will ever be."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mgd,You said:"And to think, I was actually gonna vote for a couple republicans this fall. Not a chance, now."Hey, you made a funny.. :-lol :-lolSo people who you were considering voting for will not get your votes because they belong to a certain political affiliation.Wow, that is scary stuff. I don't mind revealing that I am not a straight party voter. I judge individuals on their records and their platforms, regardless of affiliation.If that is the definer for you, I honestly feel sorry for you.I also find it interesting with your above comments. Did you read the majority opinion by Rehnquist. If you did, you would see the relevant cases leading up to that decision bound in case law and common sense.You completely go over the fact that this program was in a school district that was failing.Did you read where none of the Public Schools subscribed to the program which would allow parents to participate in Tutor reimbursed programs.No, The Cleveland school district knowas all right. Well, there are a lot of school districts that no longer have a monopoly on my tax money, and that is a good thing, since it will require them to clean up their act and teach our kids.So, again, My view wins, yours loses, get over it and respect the law that took an oath to defend.Let me know if you ever run for office somewhere so I can contribute to your adversary, after I of course make researched opinion. Or I'll just vote against you since you disagreed with this decision. Isn't that waht you stated you would do above :-)Best of luck to you,Joe..http://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just agree to disagree. As far as public office; yes, I served on the local public school board for four years. Then it was someone elses turn. In Michigan, if I want to send my kid to the district that I live in, I can. If I choose to send my kid to another district, I can. It doesn't cost anything extra. I just have to provide the transportation. I'm lucky in that there are three separate school districts in my area with grades K-12 and all within 10 miles of my house. Also, Schools in Michigan are funded on a per pupil basis. Schools get a fixed dollar amount per pupil (currently something like $6000 per head) so they already have to compete for students. The higher the enrollment, the more money they have to operate. There is no operating millages anymore. So, I as a parent have always had a choice of which school my kid was going to attend. After this decision, there will likely be a dozen or more schools within 10 miles of my house. Since the private schools don't fund extra curricular activities, they can operate with a much smaller budget. Many parents will likely send their kids to these private schools now. That's the end of football, basketball, volleyball, baseball, softball, tennis, soccer, etc. The public schools won't be able to afford these necessary programs anymore. The public schools are barely making their budgets the way it is. Mark my word. The only thing between this court and the above reality is the wisdom of the various state legislatures. Let's hope those politicians are smarter than this supreme court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"My viewpoint wins, yours loses. Get over it, and move on with your life and accept the law of this land."Joe, with a viewpoint like that I would argue every single thing you ever say just to shoot you down off your silly high horse - even if I completely agreed with whatever thing you were arguing.Maybe you're having a bad day. I sure hope so... Because you've always been a fairly reasonable fellow from what I've read to date. This side of you does *not* put a good face on any issue you argue.I personally will not "get over it" and "move on with my life" to accept the current law of the land. There are bad laws Joe... Because they are passed by the political appointees of the times. I thought we established that bad laws exist already?Its absolutely my right to NOT get over it and to do something about it instead. And its your right to oppose my efforts if you so wish. That todays United States is ultra conservative and relishes ultra conservative laws doesn't mean tomorrows United States will (God, I can't wait for the next cycle that turns back my way - as it will and always does).That school vouchers have passed Constitutional muster in this court does NOT also mean they are good for the country. As such, I fervently hope Congress will strongly oppose implementing that section of Bush's 2003 budget. And will do what I can to ensure so.You have to love this quote from Sen. Charles Grassley, Republican of Iowa, on removing "under God" that was slipstreamed into the Pledge:"Any Congressman that voted to take it out would be putting his tenure in Congress in jeopardy at the next election".Politics as usual. Not whats best for our country you'll note. No, its whats best for the next election.Elrond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elrond,I was responding to Mgd's comments made above, and I stand by them.He should get over it and accept the law of the land.And yes, you have a right to challenge whatever you like, but guess what. Until this court changes, the law stands and everyone has to accept it, agree or disagree.I absolutely agree there are bad laws. One example is the Federal Governments refusals to enforce and PROSECUTE current gun laws on the books.I am one who believes that there are a lot of laws that we could do without, but that does not mean they cannot be challenged, and when one disagrees they can challenge.But short of a constitutional amendment, the buck stops at the Supreme Court Steps in My Country and yes, if people disagree, maybe they should take their own advice and leave.I am still waiting for that hypocritical lyar streisand to leave as she promised. :-)Regards,Joe :-)PS - I am having a great day, thank you very much.http://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just heard that $48 million dollars will now be diverted from the Cleveland Public School system and go through parents to the private schools who already have their kids in private schools. That's really gonna help the Public School System in Cleveland. That's just the beginning.I saw this happen once before. It was around 1980 when congress completely revamped the real estate tax laws under President Reagan. That move completely destroyed the Savings and Loan Industry and we all know the outcome of that blunder. Looks like it's gonna happen again. Will they never learn????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

48 million is a drop in the bucket for that district.My kids go to a private school and the public school system is regarded as excellant. I just disagree with some of what is being taught in those schools. And I am not alone.What I hope happens is this:I pray that this will FINALLY hold accountable the districts where the kids are getting sub-par performance out of their teachers and administrators.Tenure has kept many a lousy teacher teaching, IMHO, and if the public school population declines because of choices, I have no problem with that. Less kids means less costs, which may mean less of my overall taxes coming out of my and your pockets for a system that may be broken.This is nothing more than an EDUCATIONAL PRO-CHOICE PROGRAM. :-)I like that description.. :-lol :-lol :-lolThe fact that the majority of schools that this would apply to right now are religious does not mean that in the future it will remain that way. (public schools are a majority, but out of private schools only, the majority are religion based).In many large districts like Chicago, there are magnet schools which students get an opportunity to attend if they are lucky enough to get in.What I see happenning is many more of these types of schools will be opened where financing them was an issue in the past.This will open up the opportunity for students and parents to finally have an alternative to the public school system where they may not have been eligible before because of financial circumstances.If you take my analogy as a possibility, I am optimistic that this will be the result.I love education and wish a quality education for every CITIZEN, (not illegal alien) in this country. And especially in economically depressed areas.I hope you understand and at least look at how my small example can be worked to an advantage for our countries Citizen Children.Regards,Joe :-waveHere is what I hope happens. http://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're way to optimistic!! I don't see it that way. I see a group of extremists organizing private religious schools across the country called "Osamo Yo Mama High" and their curriculm consisting of bomb making course 101 and advanced bomb making course 102 followed up by "identifying your target course 103" followed up by the seventy virgins theory course 104. And the funniest part of the whole thing will be that your tax dollars will be funding those private religious schools. And there won't be a thing that you can do about it cause the supreme court has just said your tax dollars can be used for private religious school funding. And I better not hear anybody complain that that wasn't the intended outcome. Let's be real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just disagree with that analogy. I am not saying it is impossible, but I highly doubt that will happen.I am not sure that curriculum would be illegal or not, but I suspect that it would.My tax dollars already go to pay for that child so why should I care where he is educated as long as he/she gets a good education.Schools still have requirements by state law.Here is a link for Illinois School Code as published in the ILCS (Illinois Compile Statutes) which they will still have to follow.http://www.legis.state.il.us/ilcs/ch105/ch...act5artstoc.htmIf one child goes to another school and his allocated dollars follow them, then doesn't that school have less expenses in addition to less revenues since they don't have the expense any longer of educating that student.Your analogy is flawed that the school is losing something. They are not only losing the revenue, they are losing the expense. Simple balance sheet accounting.Regards,Joe :-wave.http://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this