Category: School Choice

Stories about school choice, vouchers and Pennsylvania Improvement Educational Tax Credit or IETC

Part II: Catholic School Closings Rooted In ‘Paper Tiger’ Church Policy

What does it tell you when private Notre Dame
Academy in Villanova has 101 students in its freshman class – at $20,000
per year – and Archbishop Prendergast in Drexel Hill, an Archdiocesan
high school, has … 82? Yes –eighty two.

That the economy is
booming because folks can shell out 20K a pop? That the gap between rich
and poor is widening, with more people in the “have” category? Not
quite.

It tells us, in no uncertain terms, two things:

1. Over the last several decades, too many leaders in the Catholic Church
have strayed from their Godly mission, trying to be all things to all
people, destroying the Catholic identity, and, worst of all, covering-up
the child sex scandal and protecting pedophile priests (See Jan. 11 column).
The result has been, and continues to be, apathy for most, anger for
many, and an exodus from the church for thousands of others. The church
has reaped what it has sown, and nowhere is that more evident that the
30 percent decrease in Catholic school enrollment in Archdiocesan
schools.

2. The Catholic Church, for all its money, muscle and
might, has been a political paper tiger in fighting for its beliefs,
most notably school choice. For the last 15 years, it either didn’t do
its job to ensure passage of legislation that would provide a voucher to
parents (their own tax money) to send their children to the school of
their choice, or it backed meaningless and ineffective bills. Either
way, if the church had done its job effectively without cowering at the
sight of its own shadow, only a handful of the 49 schools that closed
recently and the scores – that everyone seems to be forgetting – that
have been shuttered over the last decade, would be out of business. In
fact, most would be thriving.

The Prendie situation tells it all.
While officially having “open enrollment” where physical or church
boundaries are not criteria for admission, Prendie still traditionally
draws from Catholic “feeder schools,” as does its brother school,
Monsignor Bonner (119 in its freshman class). Do the math. If we
conservatively estimate that there are 22 elementary schools serving
those high schools, that’s fewer than four girls per school going to
Prendie, and just six attending Bonner. No wonder they’re to be closed!

(Though
a strong case can be made to consolidate the two schools, many believe
the Archdiocese will not do so because a nearby hospital may be eyeing
the land. With potentially millions more in abuse settlements, the
church may need the proceeds of that sale to pay those large amounts –
just as the Boston Archdiocese sold 99 acres of prime real estate to
Boston College to pay settlements. Closing schools to pay sex scandal
settlements just infuriates Catholics that much more, leading to a
vicious circle of yanking students from Catholic schools altogether).

And
why are the elementary schools not sending more students? Two reasons.
Many parents are choosing public schools because they don’t feel the
value of Catholic high school is justified by a $6,000 price tag. And of
course, there aren’t many students left in Catholic elementary schools
in the first place. Take Annunciation BVM in Irish Catholic Havertown.
It is slated to close, allegedly because there aren’t enough students in
attendance (though they hit the attendance number the diocese mandated
and are one of a handful of schools with a parish surplus). But a drive
through the town will instinctively tell you what any demographic
statistician already knows: the Catholic population is more than healthy
enough to see Annunciation at 80 percent capacity – or even more.

The
proof? In 1911, there were 68,000 students in Archdiocesan schools, out
of 525,000 Catholics (in a diocese, by the way, that was considerably
larger in size than the one today). A century later, we are back at the
same level of 68,000 (down from a peak of 250,000 in the 1960’s), yet
the smaller-sized Archdiocese now has almost 1.5 million Catholics.
Those numbers clearly show that, for most areas (inner city Philadelphia
being an exception), the Catholic population is absolutely large enough
to support most of the schools that closed.

Taking out of the equation those
parents who are angry or disenfranchised with the church (and its
schools), there still remains a substantial number of families that
would love nothing better than to enroll their children, but simply
cannot afford to do so.

Unfortunately, those people get walloped
with a triple wammy. They slog through life paying some of the highest
tax rates in the entire world, funding wholly ineffective governments at
all levels while getting relatively little value in return. They live
in one of the few countries in the Western world that does not assist
parents with nonpublic school education. And they are scared to death
about receiving a pink slip in an economy that is tanking further by the
day, with many banking what they earn rather than paying for the
desired education for their children.

Enter school choice in Pennsylvania. Or lack thereof.

In
1995, a statewide, comprehensive school choice bill failed by a single
vote. And while the church played an active role in that fight, it
refused to do the things necessary that would have pushed the
legislation across the finish line. Priests should have been preaching
from the pulpit, educating parishioners on the merits of school choice
and rallying the troops to contact their legislators (which can clearly
be done without jeopardizing their nonprofit status). But overall, they
didn’t.

They could have placed pro-school choice cards addressed
to representatives and senators in each pew, to be filled out during
Mass and collected before exiting church. But they didn’t.

And
they could have tied all of it together by playing hardball with
wishy-washy politicians, informing them in no uncertain terms that
school choice would be the one and only issue that many Catholics would
be voting on – and Catholics vote – in the next election. But they
didn’t.

Instead, too many left the battle to the “insiders,” and
guess what? Choice failed, and schools closed. A lot of them, most of
which would be open today had school choice passed.

Fast forward
to 2011. What did the church do? Support the weakest, most meaningless
education reform bill that would have neither helped educate nor reform
anything (Senate Bill 1). It was so restrictive that it would not have
affected one middle class family, but the final version (which bombed)
seemed to cater only to those Capricorns in the inner city who promised
to wear plaid pants on Tuesdays.

The Catholic Conference’s
rationale for supporting such a bad bill? Incrementalism was the only
way to go, and, after all, that was the only bill out there. Talk about a
losing mentality. Maybe if the Catholic leaders in their ivory towers
had the foresight to see what was coming down the pike with school
closings, they would have made a broad-based bill a reality and went
full-bore to accomplish passage. And since the 1995 bill was run with a
somewhat hostile legislature and still almost passed, it should have
been a no-brainer to aggressively push for a bill this time that would
also help the middle class, since the Governor and legislature were
infinitely more amenable to such a bill.

But they didn’t.



And they didn’t even push for an
expansion of the educational improvement tax credit (EITC) after school
choice failed, which, while not a panacea, would certainly help.

Senate
Bill 1, even had it passed, would not have saved one Catholic school.
But that was simply an alien concept to the Church’s political
braintrust, and the results speak for themselves.

As a result,
all people suffer the financial consequences. Of the over 24,000
students displaced, a significant number will now attend public school.
And since it costs over $15,000 per student, per year to educate a
public school student, property taxes are about to go through the roof,
which could not come at a worse time. Not only will more textbooks and
buses have to be purchased, but more teachers, more modular classrooms,
and, quite soon, more capital projects to accommodate the influx of
Catholic school students.

Some claim that school choice is a
bailout of the Catholic schools. Wrong. Since the money is directed to
the parent, not the school, it clearly isn’t. But it will be interesting
to see the reaction from critics of school choice (and Catholicism in
general) when they can no longer afford to pay their property taxes. As
the saying goes, what goes around comes around.

Where do we go from here?

There is a passage from a book written in the 1987 book, God’s Children, that best sums up why Catholic education must be saved:

“The
Catholic Church must forget its inferiority complex. No other religion
is reluctant to ask for what it wants. If we don’t ask, if we don’t
stand up and fight for what we believe in, we can’t expect to win. Life
is a street fight. We can roll up our sleeves and jump in, not certain
whether we’ll win or lose, or walk away, allowing a huge part of our
heritage to disappear ….

If we fail, what do we tell the ghosts?
The nuns and priests who for two centuries devoted their lives to the
cause? The men and women, like our parents, who broke their backs to
support their families yet somehow found a way to support our schools?
Do we tell them that it’s over, that their legacy has disappeared
forever? That we couldn’t hold on to what they gave us?”

And most haunting:

“I don’t want to tell my children and grandchildren that I was around when time ran out on Catholic education.”



Is it that time? Put it this way.
Anyone who believes that the closings are done is simply deluding
himself, for shutting down schools is a band-aid solution to a gaping
wound that will continue to hemorrage.

That is, unless the
Archdiocese of Philadelphia somehow finds a leader with the courage of
his convictions, someone willing to “roll up his sleeves” and fight for
what is right.

Archbishop Chaput, your 15 minutes are upon you, and the floor is yours. Godspeed!

A Simple Solution For Chester Upland

The Chester Upland School District — through bald mismanagement — is out of money and about to close.

Meanwhile, 49 Catholic schools in the Philadelphia area — including some near Chester-Upland — will be closing in June due to declining enrollment.

Hmmmm. What to do?

How about we take  that $18.7 million the state is scheduled to give Chester-Upland in June and divvy it up among the district’s students in the form of scholarships? The students can then use that money to attend whatever school they want which will likely include  St.
Gabriel in Norwood; Holy Savior-St. John Fisher in Lower Chichester; 
St. Francis de Sales in Aston and St. John Chrysostom in Nether
Providence, and of course the high schools Archbishop Prendergast and Monsignor Bonner. And some of these schools will  be saved.

A win-win for everybody.

But won’t Chester-Upland die? As I said, a win-win for everybody.

Somebody will say that’s unfair because it excludes “middle class” students. OK. Any community that wants to close it’s district and use state vouchers  to educate its children should get the same chance.

Now, it’s fair.

 

Do Vouchers Right Or Not At All



There is an age-old adage: if you’re going to do something, do it right – or don’t do it at all.

Based
on poll results exclusively obtained first by Freindly Fire, nowhere is
that more applicable than in the fight for school vouchers in
Pennsylvania. According to the Pulse Opinion Research poll conducted on
behalf of UNITE PA, which surveyed 500 likely voters across the state,
the majority of Pennsylvanians prefer that any school choice program be
open to all students (or at least most of the middle class), as opposed
to just low income, predominantly inner city students. This result is
not surprising on any level, and, undeniably, leads to five rock solid
conclusions:

1) The middle class realizes that ALL schools need
improvement, and competition through choice is the best way to achieve
that objective;

2) Pennsylvanians, by a whopping 78 to 9 margin, favor a broad-based choice program;

3)
If a comprehensive choice program isn’t offered, citizens would prefer
an expansion of the EITC educational tax credit — by a 3 to 1 ratio;

4)
The reason voucher legislation failed in the spring, and in all
likelihood won’t pass now, isn’t due to opposition to school choice, but
because the senate refuses to consider a broader, more inclusive bill,
and therefore:

5) If a suburban or rural legislator supports
vouchers only for low income families, while their constituents would be
left out in the cold without receiving a penny, they do so at their own
peril. A full 40 percent of likely voters stated that they will be
“less likely” to support that lawmaker in his or her next election based
on that vote.

The message of this poll is clear: do vouchers the
right way, or don’t do them at all. And since the senate has already
passed a low income version by the slimmest of margins, with its leaders
stating that’s all they will do, expect the voucher bill to die what
may be its final political death, and look for the EITC expansion to
pass as a stand-alone bill (which it did in the Spring by a virtually
unanimous 190-7 bipartisan vote on Rep. Tom Quigley’s House Bill 1330).

Failure
to act responsibly will leave the GOP politically vulnerable, and,
infinitely more important, abandon yet another generation of
Pennsylvania’s future.

Since last January, Republican Senator
Jeff Piccola has been trying to pass legislation offering school
vouchers only to students in underperforming schools who meet low income
requirements. Despite crafting Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) during the Rendell
Administration (when there was a Democratic State House and an
anti-choice governor), Piccola never bothered to broaden the bill to
reflect the new ten-seat Republican majority in the House, and
pro-school choice Governor Tom Corbett.

Piccola, along with
Democratic co-sponsor Senator Tony Williams, ran the bus over anyone who
dared question why SB 1 was being treated as hallowed legislation,
scoffing at — but not answering — queries as to why no attempt was
made to broaden the bill, given the favorable legislative climate. In
the process, many SB 1 proponents demonized long-time political allies
for their “brazen” attempt to improve a badly flawed education reform
bill that would neither educate nor reform.

That intransigence
directly led to vouchers dying on the vine in June. Despite repeated
assurances that it would pass the Senate, it was never brought to the
floor for a vote. Piccola’s excuse for not running the bill was that the
House wasn’t embracing SB 1 with the same fervor, yet the truth is that
he didn’t even have the votes in his own chamber.

Last month, a
watered-down version of SB 1 finally passed the senate after much
arm-twisting, but as the poll shows, it’s back to Square One, meaning
that SB 1 faces a tough road ahead. Many folks in Pennsylvania view
vouchers favorably, but when they learn that the only voucher bill being
considered is one that will never impact them, their support plummets.

Many
traditional supporters of school choice have had SB 1 sold to them as
the be-all-and-end-all. But the huge irony is that these people in turn
become the biggest detractors of SB 1 upon learning what the legislation
does, and, more importantly, doesn’t do. From Catholic school advocates
to Tea Partiers to everyday parents, the majority of those who favor
school choice become irritated, if not downright angry, after
discovering that in SB 1, a full seven years after enactment, middle
income students would still be excluded. Because of this, many look at
SB 1 as nothing more than yet another targeted entitlement program for
Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

The results of the Pulse Opinion
Poll are so clear cut that it’s a good bet many House members on the
fence will now be moved to oppose the voucher aspect, instead calling
for other educational reform measures to be considered individually
rather than part of an SB 1 package. Charter school reforms, teacher
evaluations, and the EITC should be debated on their merits and not held
hostage by certain senators hell-bent on ramming an ineffectual voucher
bill down the House’s throat — or all-else be damned.

And if
the House decides to eliminate the voucher and significantly expand the
EITC, what then? Will Piccola once again call that legislation “dead on
arrival” and kill it upon its return to the senate?

And if so,
will the House leaders do the right thing and relegate Piccola to the
dustbin of irrelevancy by simply mandating that the EITC expansion be
part of the 2012 budget?

It’s time to stop playing games.
Pennsylvania students are 42nd in SAT scores, ranking low in literacy,
graduation rates and those attending college. Their performance on the
National Assessment of Education Progress exam has not improved. And
most startling, nearly HALF of all 11th graders are not proficient in
math and reading. This cannot be attributed to just the poor-performing
urban schools pulling down scores, but is testament to an
across-the-board educational failure.

Advocating school choice
for only low-income students results in the default perception that
education is adequate everywhere else, which is not remotely accurate.
We cannot afford to waste another decade, forsaking our children — our
future — because some choose to ignore the widespread failure
occurring on a daily basis.

The poll clearly shows what common
sense already dictates: only competition can begin to reverse decades of
educational failure. Comprehensive school choice provides that
free-market solution, and, if passed, would be a model for the nation.
But since stubbornness, personal agendas and lack of political will are
still prevalent in the Senate, let’s hope the House of Representatives
acts responsibly and does the right thing for our children.

As Voltaire said, “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

And jettisoning a bad voucher program while passing other meaningful reforms is a very good start.

Pa. Senate Passes School Choice Bill

The Pennsylvania State Senate, yesterday, Oct. 26, passed SB 1, 27-22 sending it to the State House.

The vote was mostly along party-lines in the Republican-controlled institution with Democrat Daylin Leach (D-17) leading the opposition with claims that the bill will take money from poor school districts. He failed to note, however, that the money taken will then been given to the families of the poor children. He attempted to add an amendment prohibiting private schools from discriminating due to sexual orientation. It failed.

Democrat Sen. Anthony Hardy Williams, however, who represents the 8th District which consists of a large section of southwest Philadelphia and a large section of southeast Delaware County, made an impassioned defense of the bill

Republicans who voted against the bill were Stewart Greenleaf of the 12th District; Lisa Baker of the 20th District;  John Gordner of the 27th District; Pat Vance of the 31st District; and Elder Vogel of the 47th District.

Democrats who voted for the bill were Williams; LeAnna Washington of the 4th District; and Andy Dinniman of the 19th District.

Not voting was Republican John Pippy of the 37th District.

The bill offers vouchers ranging from $5,765 to $13,905 to families with incomes of $29,000 whose children attend the 5 percent worst performing schools in the state that would allow them to  transfer their children to private or parochial schools. In the second year, the vouchers would also be offered to low-income students already attending private schools.

The bill also raises of the limit on the Educational Improvement Tax Credit (E.I.T.C.) from $75 million to $100 million for next two school years to $125 million for  2014-2015. Children from middle class families in all school districts are eligible for  E.I.T.C. scholarships.

Gov. Tom Corbett will almost certainly sign the bill if the House should pass it.

 

School Choice Can Save Pa.’s Education System


As we all know, weather forecasters are wrong much of the time. But you can’t hold them responsible for that wholly unpredictable icy blast felt this week. After all, it was hell freezing over. That’s right. Seems Dante’s Inferno took a dip in the cold, not coincidentally, at the exact same time that former Philadelphia School District Superintendent Arlene Ackerman–a 43-year fixture in the public education establishment–called for comprehensive school choice as the primary means to improve education.

Calling access to a quality education “the civil rights battle of our generation,” Ackerman penned a column in the Inquirer in which she lamented that it took her entire career to realize that true reforms would never originate from inside the system. Her words describe the problem perfectly:

“Real reform will never come from within the system because too many powers that be (the teachers’ union, politicians, consultants, vendors, etc.) have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo that is failing our children.”

Ackerman then offered the solution that, while obvious to anyone with common sense, has been thus far impossible to achieve.

“Meaningful education reform must be forced upon the system from outside by giving parents of all income levels real choices about where their children go to school. That requires giving parents comprehensive school choice … ”

Ackerman also advocates the expansion of charter schools, which, while a good idea, is but a small part of the overall solution, since the waiting list for these successful institutions is 30,000 strong.

The major reason charters are light years ahead of regular public schools, as Ackerman correctly points out, is two-fold. They are not required to follow many of the burdensome and counterproductive regulations imposed upon public schools, and, more important, teachers are hired–and fired–based on merit.

Hmmm. Holding people accountable for their job performance. What a novel idea. If only we did that in other jobs. Oh wait. We do. In the private sector.

That’s right. Despite the comedy routine of certain folks who have nothing to “Occupy” their time other than railing against the evils of competition and free enterprise, the private sector is in fact what built America into the greatest, most benevolent power the world has ever known.

Without question, though, the United States is slipping backwards, being dragged into malaise and misery. And that decline, more than anything, can be traced to one thing: the demise of education.

For decades, all efforts to improve public education have been squashed by teachers’ union bosses, whose loyalty was to their fiefdoms and the almighty paycheck–both funded entirely by taxpayers who were duped into believing their children were receiving the best education possible.

Whenever questions were raised about the lack of accountability and stagnant or declining standardized test scores, the blame game began. “Parents don’t put in the time with their kids’ homework … It’s society’s fault …There are too many students in each class.” And, of course, the most common one of all: “We need more money.”

Undoubtedly, some parents don’t put in as much time as they should, and we live in an ever more complex society, but these simply cannot be used as excuses for inadequate teaching. In the private sector, when your job becomes tougher, you either meet the challenge, or hit the door. Adapt, improvise, overcome–or go home. Nowhere should that be more applicable than when teachers are entrusted with our children, indeed, our future.

And the “not enough money, too many kids” excuse is a myth. That’s not opinion, but cold, hard fact. Pennsylvania spends $26 billion per year (that’s billion, with a “b”) on education–more per student than 39 other states–an amount that has doubled since 1996. Despite a drop of 27,000 students over the last 10 years, the public school system has added 33,000 employees in that time. Therefore, by definition, increased funding, more personnel and decreased class size have not improved student achievement.

The results for all that money and smaller class size? Pennsylvania students are 42nd in SAT scores, and rank low in literacy, graduation rates and those going to college. Their performance on the National Assessment of Education Progress exam has not improved. And most startling, nearly half of all 11th graders are not proficient in math and reading (per PSSA standardized test scores). This cannot be attributed to just the poor-performing urban schools pulling down scores, but is testament to an across-the-board educational failure.

Bottom line: It’s not just that the status quo isn’t working. It has completely failed. Based on that dismal picture, Ackerman’s advocacy of school choice–the “change that must come from outside the school system”–couldn’t have been offered at a better time.

*****

There are two elements of Ackerman’s revelations that are worth noting.

1) The implementation of school choice, more than any other reform, is imperative if we are not to lose another generation. The way we did things in the past hasn’t worked, and what we continue to do isn’t having an impact. Unless we treat education the same way as we do every other successful institution in America–business, sports, entertainment, the military–then we might as well raise the white flag of defeat.

Most western nations have a form of school choice, and the results speak volumes. Compared to our 30 biggest global competitors, America’s students rank near the bottom of the pack in every category.

2) Isn’t it a shame that no one in the public education establishment has the courage to speak the truth while they are still on the inside? Don’t get me wrong. It is wonderfully refreshing to hear Ackerman’s sentiments, and to see that she has finally seen the light on what must be done to improve public education.

But it is a sad note that revelations like hers must come after her departure. Just imagine how different things could have been had the Philadelphia School Superintendent come out of the gate advocating school choice. While certainly not a slam dunk, it would have infinitely increased the chances for the adoption of choice, particularly since a majority of the legislature and Governor Tom Corbett also favor it.

A school choice victory is still possible, as we are told it is a top legislative priority. While it won’t be easy, especially given the teachers’ unions’ huge political war chests generated by forced union dues, maybe, just maybe, the conversion of Arlene Ackerman from the Dark Side of Public Education might be the spark needed to push across the finish line.

Only then will the dream of so many, including Ackerman, begin to come true: “all children having access to a quality public school education.”

Pennsylvania Public Schools Doomed, Doomed, Doomed Say Dems

Pennsylvania Public Schools Doomed, Doomed, Doomed Say Dems — A sparse crowd of about 200 heard a panel of Democrat state legislators from Delaware County, Oct. 13, at the Upper Darby Center For Performing Arts describe how public schools in Pennsylvania are doomed unless they get back in charge.

The event was sponsored by PA PASS, a public education advocacy group.

The initials stand for Parent Advocates for Public Education To Achieve Student Success.

On the panel were Sen. Daylin Leach (D-17), Rep. Greg Vitali (D-166), Rep. Margo L. Davidson (D-164), Rep. Maria P. Donatucci (D-185), and Rep. Ronald G. Waters (D-191) along with Michael Stoll, who is communications coordinator for State Rep. Bill Adolph (R-165) and Jeffrey S. Miller who is the Republican budget analyst for the Appropriations Committee for the State House, which Adolph chairs.

Leach started things off by saying that there was a “severe and existential threat to public education”.

He cited state budget cuts, proposed voucher and charter school bills, and Act 25‘s  removal of exemptions  in which school boards can hike budgets without a referendum.

He said the referendums always lose since only 10 or 15 percent of voters have children in public schools.

Ms. Davidson, who had to leave early, said she agreed with Leach’s points.

“Ed Rendell would never have proposed such a thing,” she said.

Vitali echoed the despair.

“I truly believe it is a dire situation,” he said. He said the budget cuts were driven by “ideology not necessity.

“(Gov. Tom) Corbett put the interest of oil drillers over children,” he said referring to the reluctance of the governor to levy additional taxes on drilling in Marcellus Shale.

He also pined for the days of Gov. Rendell.

“Rendell was an aggressive fighter for public education,” he said.

He compared public schools to public libraries and said the 9.1 unemployment rate comes from layoffs in the public sector. Whatever it was he was smoking it would probably have been polite if he offered to share it.

Ms. Donatucci clearly feared for the children.

“It’s raining on our school children,” she said.  “. . .Our children aren’t going to get any money and they need to. . . An educational train wreck is going to happen and our children our tied to the tracks.”

Besides blaming Republicans she also blamed newspaper editors.

Waters was more philosophical.

“Elections have consequences,” he said. He noted Corbett said he was going to do the things he’s doing.

He claimed the state had a budget surplus and that money could have been used to keep education spending at the rates it had been the previous year.

Stoll pointed out, however, that there is no surplus and what Waters thought was a surplus is actually budgeted. He noted that 40 percent of state spending is for education. He explained that the reasons for the budget cuts were because federal stimulus money ran out.

After the comments by the panelists, parent representatives for the Radnor, Wallingford-Swarthmore, Interboro, Ridley, Southeast Delco, Haverford, Chichester, Springfield, Penn Delco, William Penn and Upper Darby school districts made presentations describing how excellent their districts were and how much harm the new changes in state policy are causing them.

A PA PASS moderator said that 173 teaching professionals, 148 para professionals, 11 security guards, 11 office support workers, nine maintenance workers, eight administrators and five social workers lost jobs in school districts in Delaware County due to budget cuts.

After parent presentations, PA PASS read to the panel questions submitted by the audience. The questions chosen by the moderator were generally along the lines of how can the vile Republicans  be stopped.

The unseen presence of the Tea Party was felt in the room most strongly it seems by Leach who made a Freudian slip of referring to legislative behavior as not being a “tea party” instead of a “garden party”.

He corrected himself.

Haverford School Director Larry Feinberg, who was one of the event’s organizers, ended things with some strange comments about the proposals for charter schools and vouchers being part of some conspiracy by “Main Line” millionaires looking to make money at the expense of innocent children.

Stoll several times during the night had to emphasize that 40 percent of the state money goes to public education and that there are no plans to end public schools.

The organizers of the event, the parents, and even the legislators all struck one as being sincere and even caring.

Leach and Ms. Donatucci both spoke out passionately against using the cruel residential property tax to fund schools as we now do.

The problem, however, was none of the Democrats or their supporters were able to face the big, fat grinning gorilla in the room, namely the 3 and 4 percent annual raises — which remember are on top of  automatic step raises — that the teachers always seem to get during contract negotiations because they have the right to strike and/or perform unsatisfactory work during their “work to rule” job actions.

The always growing salaries, of course, get the icing of very sweet pension and health plans.

And this is the reason why services are being cut, not because some greedy Republican hates children, as some implied.

Milk does not flow forever.

Pennsylvania Public Schools Doomed, Doomed, Doomed Say Dems

 

Pennsylvania Public Schools Doomed, Doomed, Doomed Say Dems

Signs Of Support For SB1

Signs of support for SB 1, the school choice bill pending in Harrisburg, have been popping up in Springfield and throughout Delaware County.

The bill has not been changed since April 11.

Many Tea Party activist feel it goes nowhere near far enough.


Poor Children Take Back Seat To Greedy Academics

Poor Children Take Back Seat To Greedy Academics
By Bob Guzzardi


UnitePa, an influential Tea Party organization, makes a valid point that the school choice bill SB 1 does not address the plight of those barely above the poverty line who are trapped in violent and educationally failed schools by leaving 30,000 children still trapped in them.

School choice vouchers of $5,000 as proposed by Rep. Curt Schroder’s HB 1678 and 1679 would save these children and cost $150 million if all took them.

The House Republicans, under the leadership of Majority Leader Mike Turzai and House Appropriations Chair Bill Adolph  fully  support  transferring $593 million to certain billionaire liberal Democratic tax exempt private corporations namely the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Pittsburgh, Temple University and Penn State.

If this transfer of tax money was redirected from these extremely rich institutions to struggling parents via an expanded voucher program, the children would be saved and there would be money to spare.

In fact, vouchers could be offered to 60,000 children and there would still be money left to give to the rich limo liberals if so desired, although it is still not clear as why such a desire would exist.

We should ask Penn President Amy Gutmann, who is paid $1,367,000, if she deny poor and lower middle class kids an opportunity to escape violent and educationally failed schools many in Penn’s own neighborhood?

I don’t think she would be that selfish, do you?

 

 

Poor Children Take Back Seat To Greedy Academics

Make Teachers Filthy Rich

It was described here months ago how to make good teachers filthy rich and so it shall be reiterated.

Per pupil spending in Pennsylvania in 2009 was $14,420.  Most school districts in Pennsylvania have a school year of about 190 days with the state mandate being 180 days.

To make Pennsylvania teachers filthy rich — and save taxpayers money:

End all local school spending so all the money comes from Harrisburg.

Give each person up to age 18 an educational voucher of $5,000 per school year to be spent on a standard, state-approved curriculum.

Cut the school year to 120 days which will allow teachers to reasonably teach two school years in a calendar year.

Allow a maximum class size of 30 pupils which those of us who grew up in the ’50s, ’60s and ’70s experienced and which can easily be handled by a competent teacher.

So with $5,000 x 2 school years x 30 pupils per school year teachers would be guaranteed $300,000 revenue per year. Of course, just as other professionals such doctors and lawyers, they would have to bear the cost of insurance,  building space and other expenses but it is very unlikely that that would exceed $50,000 per year.

So competent teachers could look forward to incomes of at least $250,000 per year under this plan and I for one would be quite happy for them.

Especially as it would mean more over all education –240 days vs 190 days — and an overall tax decrease –$10,000 per pupil vs $14,420 (2009).

Make Teachers Filthy Rich

 

Make Teachers Filthy Rich

Middle Class Parents Vs. Billionaire Corporations

Middle Class Parents Vs. Billionaire Corporations — The article is being published with the kind permission of Tea Party activist Bob Guzzardi.

The House Republicans are considering giving $ 603,543,000, in this year alone to billionaire private corporations. This is $181, 113,000 more than Governor Corbett proposed.

The entire cost of SB 1, Vouchers/EITC over four years, is: $ 734, 947, 772

SB 1 is designed to subsidize, as required by Article III, section 14 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, the education of children, particularly the poor caught in violent and educationally dysfunctional schools and middle class struggling economically.

In comparison consider the how the state subsidizes  education’s  Princes and Princesses:

UPENN’s president Amy Gutmann’s compensation: $1,367,000 and Penn State’s Graham( $800, 592 according to Journal of Higher Education) flies in one of Penn State’s three airplanes from its own airport. UPITT’s Chancellor;$600,045, Temple U President Anne Weaver Hart; $602, 403) UPITT Chancellor Mark Nordenberg received a 5.7% increase in 2010, $26,500, for a total annual salary of $486,000. This is base salary and not total compensation.

A change in course directing money away from billionaire private corporations to those who need it most may be an idea worth considering. Misallocating taxpayer resources is not in the public interest or advance the general welfare.

 

 

Middle Class Parents Vs. Billionaire Corporations