Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Democrats Love Failing Schools: Because Unions Pay Them To ^ | August 27, 2013 | Michael Schaus

Posted on 08/27/2013 6:58:56 AM PDT by Kaslin

It is now official. For all their talk about education’s failings, and all their feigned interest in bettering the educational system, liberals once again have proven that they hate giving the disadvantaged the same opportunities as the privileged. According to Fox News, the Justice Department is trying to stop a school vouchers program in Louisiana that attempts to place children in independent schools instead of under-performing public schools. So, apparently it’s all about “the kids”. . . Unless Teacher’s Unions are set to lose a dollar.

Louisiana is one of a few states that have implemented a very limited voucher program. Vouchers, on their own merit, should be a championed idea for underprivileged minorities and low income families. With educational dollars meant to better the learning process for students throughout the state, vouchers were given to 570 public school students so that children in impoverished and underperforming schools might reap the same benefited education as some of the most privileged in the state. However, in papers filed in US District Court, the Justice Department said that the vouchers “impeded the desegregation process."

Right. Imagine the horror on Martin Luther King Jr.’s face when he learned that low-income students were given the opportunity to attend some of the most exclusive and impressive academies in the state. The federal government is arguing that allowing students to attend independent schools under the voucher system “could create a racial imbalance in public school systems protected by desegregation orders.”

Anyone else find it ironic that the first black President’s administration is blocking a reform effort that is poised to dis-proportionately benefit minority communities?

According to Fox News: The Louisiana Governor, Bobby Jindal -- who last year expanded the program that started in 2008 -- said this weekend that the department's action is "shameful" and said President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder "are trying to keep kids trapped in failing public schools against the wishes of their parents."

Tough words. . . And accurate.

The Louisiana Supreme Court already found, earlier this year, that the state could not use the allotted voucher money. As a result the Republican governor had to find the $40 million in other public funds to move the project forward and help the 8,000 students already enrolled in the program.

The objection by the DOJ is just one more case where Democrats and Liberal groups have tried to limit the ability of minorities to move out of failing schools. A hypocritical maneuver for a group that claims the mantel of moral superiority on the issue.

The reason is far more simple, and insidious, than most would think. The Liberal/ Democratic agenda is closely aligned with Teacher’s unions. And like all unions, they are working to protect due paying positions above all else. And yes: That means the Unions would rather preserve their jobs than work for the betterment of your child’s educational experience. After all, over 95 percent of political donations from Teacher’s Unions went to Democrats; and based off of Democrat run cities like Chicago, New York, LA, and Detroit, that’s a horrible investment. On a purely economic analysis, it would seem the Democrat Party is far more dedicated to keeping the Union happy, than honestly improving student education. As a consequence, the lobbying arm of the union is not focused on the interests of students. . . But don’t take my word for it:

Teachers Union Bigshot Not About Kids, It's About Power

So. . . Apparently losing a teacher’s tenure is “too high a price to pay” for a more effective educational system for our youth. And to think they act like it’s “all for the children.”

The most terrifying part of the story: The case is scheduled to be heard by a judge who has already ruled that parts of Jindal's 2012 expansion were unconstitutional. So, we have a Judge who is opposed to using public education monies for the purpose of educating the public (as opposed to feeding Teacher’s Unions), about to rule on a law that runs contrary to the fundamental concerns of the Obama Administration. If the Judge, or the DOJ, were actually interested in improving education, they would applaud any attempt to move students from failing schools. They, instead, seem far more interested in preserving the failing status quo.

After all, our ruling elite don’t send their kids to underperforming schools. So, really, why should they promote opportunities for the rest of America’s youth without first bowing to politically connected Unions? 

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: educationspending; teachersunions; unions; vouchers

1 posted on 08/27/2013 6:58:56 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
shocking? not really
2 posted on 08/27/2013 7:02:03 AM PDT by Drawn7979
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drawn7979

This could easily change. If you work in a public school, your child must go to a public school in the district you teach.

If the union screams, you know they re full of crap. See how fast the teachers would want vouchers.

3 posted on 08/27/2013 7:13:57 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Make today a great day. Insult a liberal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
If your community has genuinely fantastic schools -- and the superintendent goes to the voters and asks for $20M for a new school, what will happen? Easy: voters will turn the request down. They have great schools. Everything is beautiful. Why spend $20M when they don't have to?

If your community has absolutely terrible schools -- and the superintendent goes to the voters and asks for $20M for a new school, what will happen? Easy: voters will throw money at that problem. They need better schools. The kids deserve a quality education. Spending $20M is just a small price to pay.

Failure is rewarded. So the schools fail.

4 posted on 08/27/2013 7:18:21 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (21st century. I'm not a fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The federal government is arguing that allowing students to attend independent schools under the voucher system “could create a racial imbalance in public school systems protected by desegregation orders.”

This statement is absolutely ridiculous. This imbalance has existed for as long as I can remember. The reason that it does is because white families have opted to pay for private tuition rather than send their kids to some of these horrendous public schools. If you take most of the white kids out of a particular school system, what do you have left? Denying these poor black children vouchers is never going to advance this imaginary goal of desegregation.

5 posted on 08/27/2013 7:41:54 AM PDT by Malone LaVeigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Malone LaVeigh
What they are really afraid of here is that the most motivated black parents will use the vouchers to move their kids to predominately white schools and, as a result, the prey to predator ratio in the publik skools will further deteriorate.

Sort of like birds deciding to fly off and abandon a snake-infested island.

6 posted on 08/27/2013 7:54:41 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

I have to disagree.

They don’t want the regular people of any color to get well-educated. A well-educated populace will want to make their own decisions and will be able to fulfill their own goals without government help.

They want low-information people who are hopeless and helpless as captive voters.

7 posted on 08/27/2013 8:45:18 AM PDT by No.6 (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: No.6

Yes, there were “captive nations” of the 1950s and 1960s, a term since dropped, but the “captive voters” remain and see little wrong with the status quo, unlike the real “captive nations”.

8 posted on 08/27/2013 4:35:00 PM PDT by Theodore R. (The grand pooh-bahs have spoken: "It's Jebbie's turn!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson