Article states, "That is: Home-school students should be allowed to participate in any public school activity, as long as they pay taxes and live within the school district."
If this girl doesn't attend school then she is not among the head count for the district, meaining the school does NOT receive any money for her. I have nothing against home-schooling, but with it comes choices and sacrifices - this is one of those sacrifices.
In my state, the school DOES receive money for "supervising" the education of homeschoolers in their district (ie reviewing the portfolio at the end of the year). How much, I don't know, but they seem awfully content to let us continue to homeschool.
Not exactly. In many states, the homeschoolers are required to provide attendance records to the school district - so that the school district can claim the state and/or federal assistance money for that child. Further, the local school taxes paid by the family still go to the school district.
As far as choices and sacifices, the sacrifice is borne by the family - they pay TWICE for their child's education. First, through taxes. Second, through spending their own time and money to school at home. To now say that, barring state laws that preclude her participation (a whole other issue), her musical talents must be sacrificed on the altar of NEA control doesn't make sense.
"If this girl doesn't attend school then she is not among the head count for the district, meaining the school does NOT receive any money for her."
You have assumed that the school district gets money based on head count. We don't know that. Here in New Hampshire, the head count has nothing to do with the budget.
"If this girl doesn't attend school then she is not among the head count for the district, meaining the school does NOT receive any money for her."
Yes, they do. They receive the portion of the local and state taxes her parents pay that are applied to education. The only money they DON'T receive for her is the per pupil federal money.