Jordy Blog

A Moratorium on Reason

Well, they lied to us, and we believed them. Shame on them, and shame on us.

I’ve got a lot to say, but I’ll forbear for now.

Personally, I’m going to keep fighting for parents’ choice in education, although I don’t really know in what capacity. I hope you’re as angry as I am so that you will too. As a whole, we didn’t fight hard enough; but next time we’ll know better. We owe it to our children not to give up.

I’ll leave you for now with a selection of quotes, mostly from Conner’s blog.

“…A society that champions freedom of religion but at the same time countenances state regulation of education has a great deal of explaining to do.”

James R. Otteson, professor of philosophy. – The Independent Review, Spring 2000, “Freedom of Religion and Public Schooling”

“If the only motive was to help people who could not afford education, advocates of government involvement would have simply proposed tuition subsidies.”

Milton Friedman, Economist. Awarded 1976 Nobel Prize in economics.

“By preventing a free market in education, a handful of social engineers, backed by the industries that profit from compulsory schooling … has ensured that most of our children will not have an education, even though they may be thoroughly schooled.”

John Taylor Gatto, Source: Dumbing Us Down, p. 85

“In this matter of education, the law has only two alternatives: It can permit this transaction of teaching-and-learning to operate freely and without the use of force, or it can force human wills in this matter by taking from some of them enough to pay the teachers who are appointed by government to instruct others, without charge…In creating a monopoly of education, the government must answer to the hopes of the fathers of families who have thus been deprived of their liberty; and if these hopes are shattered whose fault is it? We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say we are opposed to any education.”

Frederic Bastiat, The Law , 1850

“Here I encounter the most popular fallacy of our times. It is not considered sufficient that the law should be just; it must be philanthropic. Nor is it sufficient that the law should guarantee to every citizen the free and inoffensive use of his faculties for physical, intellectual, and moral self-improvement. Instead, it is demanded that the law should directly extend welfare, education, and morality throughout the nation.

“This is the seductive lure of socialism.”

Frederic Bastiat, Source: The Law, p. 25

“I am opposed to free education as much as I am opposed to taking property from one man and giving it to another who knows not how to take care of it. I do not believe in allowing my charities to go through the hands of robbers who pocket nine-tenths themselves and give one tenth to the poor. Would I encourage free schools by taxation? No!”

Brigham Young, Source: Journal of Discourses Vol. 18, p. 357

“The education of all children, from the moment that they can get along without a mother’s care, shall be in state institutions at state expense.”

“ Karl Marx – Father of Communism (1848)

Anti-Voucher Myths Debunked

The following is a response to a comment made on an earlier blog post. I address it here partially because of it’s length, but mostly because I think it would be generally beneficial to lots of people who have doubts about Referendum 1.

@ Clint

Actually Referendum 1 will divert money away from public schools. The money being allocated may not be in the budget but it should be and that is the point. We could use this money to help fix our public schools.

Referendum 1 will not divert money from public schools. Even if it did, it would amount to .0025% of the education budget. That’s nothing, and putting so little money directly into public schools would solve nothing. This is not about the money, no matter how badly voucher haters want you think it is.

It seriously makes no sense to give up on our public school system.

Who’s giving up? Public schools will certainly have their place. Public and private schools are not mutually exclusive.

This money could be going to increase teacher’s pay. If we increased what teacher’s made it would be more of an incentive to go into the education field. We would get brighter and more qualified teachers.

Oh yes, if that .0025% raise goes directly to the teachers (which it wouldn’t), people will be absolutely clamoring for those jobs.

Here’s a real idea: why not create a market for those jobs so great teachers can choose whomever pays the best. A bigger market means more competition among employers, more competition among employers means increased teacher pay, and increased teacher pay together with increased competition means better teachers. Those are economic facts; it’s as simple as that.

If that were the case [that "we would get brighter and more qualified teachers"], we would also be able to reduce class sizes.

This bill will reduce class sizes, and it’ll do it for much cheaper.

Our children do not deserve to just be a number on a roll. We need to emphasize more one on one education and more time being spent on each child.

No kidding. Do you think anyone in the world disagrees with those arguments? Those are not points of differentiation, but as long as you’re trying to differentiate on points that everybody and their dog agrees on, you might think of adding: “No child should be force-fed summer sausages for mere amusement.”

I would argue that Referendum 1 protects your axioms better than the status quo: If any child really isn’t getting enough teacher face time, their parent will have reasonable alternatives so they can vote with their feet. Think about it.

Everyone who is for referendum one wants parents and kids to have a choice. The fact is they already do have a choice.

Exactly, one choice. As Henry Ford said: “The customer can have any color [Model T] he wants so long as it’s black”.

OK, I know you didn’t mean only one choice, but let’s face it: when the public school system limits you to any of its schools, that’s somewhat analogous to Del Taco saying you can eat anything in the world you want as long as you buy it from Del Taco’s dollar menu. That’s not choice.

Why do tax payers have to pay for someone else’s child to go to a private school?

On that note, why do taxpayers have to pay for any child to go to public school? The reason we subsidize education is that a educated populace is in everybody’s best interests. Granting a monopoly the exclusive right to those subsidies, on the other hand, is in almost nobody’s best interests.

But as long as we’re subsidizing, why not do it efficiently by offering smaller subsidies to children whose parents decide their needs are better served elsewhere? It really is that simple. For every poor kid that leaves a public school with a $3000 voucher, Utah taxpayers save about $4500.

Also, why should taxpayers who choose an alternative school have to pay twice? That’s a terrible price to pay to opt out of a system that (nationally) ranks 25th in the modernized world.

But something tells me the labor unions that are out to kill Referendum 1 aren’t really worried about tax increases. Indeed, their true interests lie in protecting their monopoly so as to continue to “own” education in America. This is much to the detriment of any parent who wants anything that’s not on their menu.

But in case it really is taxes you’re worried about, why don’t you take the Utah Taxpayer Association‘s word for it? Referendum 1 save you money.

If you want your kid to go to a private school because you think public schools are failing our children then send them.

OK, but that option is currently only realistic to the rich because they’re the only ones who can afford to pay twice. Referendum 1 aims to give poor kids (like the 45 or so percent of Utah minorities that drop out of some disadvantaged Utah schools) the same freedom and flexibility that rich folks have –all by spending less. Would you deny them that right?

Charter’s schools are also a very affordable option for low income families who have given up on public schools.

Yes, but charter schools are not for everyone either. Even if they were for everyone, charter schools are very limited and many have very long waiting lists –so much so, in fact, that many charter schools have adopted a lottery system to determine the lucky few who get in. Are you seriously calling that a choice? If charter schools were already meeting current demand, whence all the outcry for more options?

Furthermore, the very labor union that fought tooth and nail to kill charter schools is now fighting tooth and nail to kill vouchers. In fact, they fight just about every new innovation that might ruffle the feathers of their educational Monopoly. Why climb in bed with them now? Is it because they’ve already begrudgingly conceded a little?

If you like charter schools now, chances are you’ll also like voucher schools: each takes the real decision-making power one step closer to its rightful owner, the parents.

I think the problem with public schools in Utah is they are poorly funded.

Then let’s increase their funding! Nobody is saying we don’t want to invest more in public schools, but let’s also make sure we’re spending our money wisely! If we invest in the entire market rather than just the monopoly, the entire market will be more responsive. But if we invest solely in the monopoly, it’s likely that nobody will be more responsive. Same ‘ol, same ‘ol.

We are taking money away from public schools just by not using this money to improve them.

Again it’s .0025% –almost 0. Even if you could fix the problem by throwing money at it (which you can’t –especially in a Government monopoly) that amount would do virtually nothing. I’ll be happy to put more money into everybody’s education, but I want to see that money create significant change.

The best way to help schools improve is to introduce real competition into the system. When FedEx came along, the Post Office improved dramatically: shorter lines, faster shipping, taller socks –the works. When email started to take off the USPS lowered rates. (But they were going to lower rates anyway, right? Isn’t it always in the nature of a monopoly to “give you the most value for money”? [Sarcasm added.])

Bottom line: increased competition is good for customers. Have you noticed you can buy any color of car you want these days? Education should operate on the same principle, but instead of getting adjustable cup holders and a built in CD player, we’ll get kids who can compete in a global market. Now that’s a sweet deal.

I understand the choice argument you are making. I just think it is misguided. Right now even with the poor funding we get in public schools, our kids can graduate from high school with an associate’s degree. Right now even with the poor funding we get in public schools, our kids can take Advanced Placement courses taught by teachers who are certified through local Universities. Right now even with the poor funding we get in public schools, our kids have every oppurtunity to succeed in our public schools through hard work and study.

Those are all great programs, but what about the 45% of minority students in Utah who never graduate from high school? Think about that number for a minute. Your school in Utah Valley might have served you well, but their schools in West Salt Lake have failed them; and now what is their outlook on life? Certainly something could be done to help those kids, and the answer is not more of the same.

Many of those minority kids would love to get into private school, but who can afford that? Why must the poor kids –the very ones that “free” public schools are meant to help– remain stuck in a system that is failing, especially when we can get them out of that system at no cost to us?

And what about kids who want do go directly into high-paying tech jobs? What about kids who need a dedicated “scholarship counselor” to have any chance at paying for the university of their choice? What about potential nightschool kids who never see their single moms because mommy has to work at night? What about kids who want to excel at anything that is not offered in our public schools?

If you’re saying that every conceivable innovation that might benefit Utah children has already happened in our public schools, you’re dead wrong. There is much more that can be done, and the innovations that will best serve Utah families will take root in an education market that is allowed to flourish because parents have a feasible opportunity to pay for the education that’s best for their kids.

Besides poor funding, another major problem is poor parenting. Having parents involved in a child’s education is crucial. If parents think they can just send their kid to a private school and assume their kid is doing well this is a mistake. Regardless of the school your child attends parents need to be involved and committed to their child’s education

That’s another non-differentiating point that nobody will argue with. Also, “Children can stay more focused when their study environment is kept hornet-free.”

But here’s a though, don’t you think that parents who can choose where their children are educated might be more involved in the system? It’s easy to disengage when you have virtually no choice in the matter.

Plus, I repeat, private schools are no better then public schools in this state.

No better for whom? Can you presume to know what is best for each child in Utah? I think parents know what’s best for their children –not bureaucrats, not teachers unions, and definitely not you.

Furthermore, if private schools and public schools really do test equally, where is the opposition to substituting a $7500 public school expense with a $500-$3000 private school expense. If both give equal results but one costs less, one of them really is better, isn’t it?

But there are many metrics good parents may use to measure up their schools; and although many metrics are academic, many more are not. The night school example was based on a family time metric. The high tech training school example was based on a job placement metric.

But let me push this further since I think it needs to be said. If your kid’s school starts handing out condoms without so much as advising you, might that also be some kind of metric?

Bottom line: Let parents decide what’s best for their kids. We know and love our own kids a hell of a lot more than you or anyone else does, and we are best equipped to make the decisions that will affect their entire lives. It’s a parent’s right to determine how, where, and what their children learn. Denying parents that right is a disservice to everyone, especially the kids.

If even one precious dollar is diverted from our public school system, which is broke down as it is, we have failed the overwhelming majority of Utah children. Yes, taking tax payer’s money to fund private schools instead of public schools is diverting money that could be used to fund our school system.

Its .0025 percent, dude. Freedom is priceless.

Good Night and Good Luck,
Clint.

You too bud. Tell Aaron I say hi.

—–

For more myth-busting goodness, please download this stellar doc. Remember, the polls results are tight, so please get out and vote on Tuesday.

Best Pro-Voucher Ad Ever

It’s easy for normal folks to get lost in an issue with so much rhetoric.

That’s why I was thrilled to get this ad in the mail:

This ad makes it easy for people like my mother-in-law to feel safe in a Parents’ Choice vote, despite claims from voucher opponents that

The real “bureaucrats and liberals” are the subsidy advocates and out-of-state voucher pushers looking for Utah to save their faltering national movement.

and

The issue isn’t about choice, is a liberal subsidized entitlement program that competes for scarce resources.

(Both those quotes come right out of the “against” portions of the 2007 Utah Voter Information Pamphlet, with my emphasis added.)

So, wait a minute… Sean Hannity, Mitt Romney, & Focus on the Family are liberal? What does that make Hillary, Atheists United, and the Rainbow Coalition? Can you ever be so far left that you actually wrap around? Voucher smearers, I think you may have a beam in your eye.

I only wish the pro-vouchers list had included the Utah Taxpayers Association and the late, Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman, from whose stellar essays the voucher bill is based. I think a lot of questions on the fiscal and tax impacts of Referendum 1 could have easily been answered by their inclusion.

BTW, I think that perhaps the dumbest statement I heard at Provo High School’s voucher debate was when an anti-voucher lady (whose name I don’t know) declared that she thought it was offensive that the Choice in Education side was citing some economist when these were Utah’s kids we were talking about it.

Some Economist –> Milton Friedman, arguably one of the greatest thinkers of our time.

Utah’s Kids –> Your Kids

Utah School Voucher Amounts: Dissecting the FUD

Opponents of Utah’s school voucher bill have ads that denounce the proposed voucher system as flawed because most of Utah’s low-income families would still not be able to afford attendance. But here’s a non-socialistic idea: why not let parents make their own financial decisions?

Even if this proposed voucher amounts weren’t enough at this very moment, I am 100% confident that the market would respond to the influx of potential cash made available by this program by lowing prices.

But the current amount is enough. The average K-8 schools is already around $4000, and Parents for Choice in Education reports that the median cost of private schools in Utah is around $4500. Beyond that, most private schools will already quietly make exceptions to their advertised prices to allow low-income families to attend, thereby subsidizing education for low-income families even further.

If that’s not proof enough, many low-income families are already making tremendous sacrifices to allow their attend privates school, and thousands more are on waiting lists. As the VCs would say, the dog is already eating the dog food. There’s no question that these low-income families would be benefited by the passing of referendum 1.

Furthermore, if the amount of money that vouchers are to provide really is too low to make a significant difference, whose fault would that be? Most pro-voucher people would probably prefer to make the voucher value as close to the $7500 we pay per public school student as possible. Instead, the average voucher scholarship will be only about $2500, and nobody will get more that $3000.

To me this is insidious; the very people who required the scholarship amount to be reduced in order for the bill to make it through the through the Utah legislature now say it’s too low to make a difference. These are the same people who would have the amount be 0. Does that seem disingenuous to anyone else?

Finally, the question begs to be asked: if the voucher amount really is so insufficient that most Utah families would have no choice but to leave their students in public schools, then why are the anti-voucher folks so worked up anyway? After all, isn’t that exactly what they want: a continuation of the status quo? They would not be fighting tooth and nail to kill this legislation if it were a moot point.

The truth is that the amount vouchers will provide is enough to make a real difference. Frankly, I wish it were more so low-income families could have even more freedom and flexibility to education their children. I wish it were more because an increase in voucher value would facilitate the creation of even more good, viable private schools. I wish it were more because good families all over Utah deserve more.

If it weren’t for the anti-voucher crowd the amount would be more, so don’t let them cloud the issue by saying that it’s not enough. That’s a FUD campaign. It’s their mechanism of creating Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt in your mind so you vote the way they want –making the voucher value essentially $0. This is political rhetoric, and frankly, I think it’s dishonest.

Hopefully voucher values will increase when the program proves successful, but we’ve got to give it that chance. In the meantime, it’s enough for the thousands of poor kids who are already on waiting lists.

Please get out and vote FOR referendum 1 to give Utah’s low-income students at least a sporting chance at freedom in education. And if you really value your freedom, grab a friend or 2 to vote with you. Polling shows the 2 sides as being neck-and-neck, so every vote really does count.

Choice in Education Website

If you’re still researching Referendum 1, I highly recommend Utah’s choice in education website.

There are also a number of voucher debates being held (and broadcast) all over Utah.

Whichever your persuasion, please put in the time to do the research and become an informed voter.  If you’re just relying on what lands in your mailbox, you’re not getting the full picture.

School Vouchers: Getting out the Vote

I’m a big proponent of parents’ choice in education, so I was initially discouraged a few weeks ago when I saw a that a telephone survey showed a majority of Utahns opposed to Referendum 1.

Since then, however, I’ve become convinced that it can pass, partially because many of the people opposed to the legislation simply won’t vote. (Think about it –have you seen more signs FOR or AGAINST referendum 1? Those are voters.)

I was also encouraged to learned that normally standard questions like “Do you plan on voting this year?” and “Did you vote in municipal elections last year?” were not asked in the survey, possibly leading to a numbers bias as far as votes are concerned.

Lastly, I’ve also seen a TON of anti-voucher ads appearing in my mailbox. That’s a condition that would not occur if the opposition felt the cat was in the bag. Rather, they’ve done their research and know it’s dangerously close; and thus the deluge of expensive ads.

The question, therefor, is can we get out the vote? I think we can and will; but if we want to get the voters to the polls, you and I need to go a little outside of our comfort zone and talk to our friends, family, and neighbors. If we want to win (and win we must) we need to beat the ads by getting the word out on a very personal level.

So – I’m putting my mouth were my mouth is: from now until election day (just over a week from now) I will vary (as is my right) from my normal biz and tech format to blog exclusively about why I think Referendum 1 must pass –and what we can do to ensure that it does. I’ll outline its merits, debunk some common misconceptions, and hopefully I’ll win some of you over at the polls.

As a side note, I know that this is a hotly debated issue. It’s in my nature to avoid those, but to me (personally) this is just too important to ignore. I’ll try to keep a level head about it, and I hope you will too.

Please feel free to post your thoughts and comments –just know that I probably won’t be able to respond to them all. If you do comment, try not to be belligerent since I will be moderating every post, but do free to challenge my opinion as long as you’re nice about it. I welcome niceness regardless of its source! :)

And now, without further ado: let the posts begin!

TOMORROW: Cookies and Ice Cream FOR Utah’s Kids

For those of you who haven’t already read this on ConnectBlogs, my friend and fellow blogger Devin Thorpe is holding an event called
Cookies and Ice Cream FOR Utah’s Kids to discuss Utah’s Referendum 1. If you’re for school vouchers or are still on the fence and would like to learn more, please consider attending this event –just make sure you RSVP.

Patrick Burne (my former boss at Overstock) and Jordan Clements of Peterson Partners will be speaking.