skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The Cap Times reports:
With the stroke of his veto pen, Walker could simply cross out the limits when the budget lands on his desk. Although the broad power of the Wisconsin gubernatorial veto has been curtailed somewhat in the past few decades, it remains an effective way to fundamentally rewrite legislation....
The cons are obvious: Reneging on the deal could infuriate Republican moderates in the Senate, including Olsen and Senate President Mike Ellis. Working with the moderate wing of his party in the future might become problematic for Walker. In the run-up to his re-election campaign in 2014, he doesn't need to lose GOP support.
The pros are simple: It would further endear Walker to the national conservative movement and put another feather in the cap he wears as a likely presidential candidate.
पोस्ट्स
६४ टिप्पण्या:
Trying to please the "national conservative movement"? Good luck with all that.
Oh, and a line item veto would also advance school choice and actually benefit students and their families. Funny how the Cap does not bother considering that as a result. On the Left, politics is all.
The real plus would be screwing the teacher unions, but I wasn't aware there was a "national conservative movement".
I thought Choom destroyed that in his thumpin' last Fall.
Are they telling us that was all a lie?
Communities don't want them, not one news editorial in the state came out in favor of vouchers, but a small segment of the population and Walker's voucher donors want them.
VOUCHERS IN YOUR FACE!
Just like Susan Rice?
Well those indictments will really put a damper on things...
Strange that the Cap Times doesn't consider the effect on schoolkids to be either a "pro" or "con".
Strange that the Cap Times doesn't consider the effect on schoolkids to be either a "pro" or "con".
When you live in the Madison political bubble it's all politics all the time, principles and real world effects be damned.
"Communities don't want them, not one news editorial in the state came out in favor of vouchers, but a small segment of the population and Walker's voucher donors want"
If what you are saying is true, then there wil be very little demand for vouchers. Of course, if it were true, then there would not be so strong opposition to vouchers, because why would anyone be upset if 1% of students were to use the vouchers and choose private schools.
What we arrived here, dear garage, is a contradiction. Your theory against vouchers is self-contradictory. Do you realize that?
The Cap Times has been pretty tame in its criticism of vouchers compared to other state editorial boards. For good reason, it's one giant scam on taxpayers.
Garage and speaking about "communities", certain communities did not want the blacks to move in, just as your certain community does not want to give the chance to poor kids to escape from the clatches of the government schools. But don't forget, comrade, it's a civil rights issue. Why should only king obama's children be allowed to "act white" and go to private schools?
I remember seeing a bumper sticker that said "Gun control is not about guns. It's about control."
The same can be said for education control.
garage mahal said...
Communities don't want them, not one news editorial in the state came out in favor of vouchers, but a small segment of the population and Walker's voucher donors want them.
Bullshit.
Of course, if it were true, then there would not be so strong opposition to vouchers, because why would anyone be upset if 1% of students were to use the vouchers and choose private schools.
Maybe read the topic of this post?
There is strong opposition to vouchers because people in Wisconsin like their public schools and they don't want to fund two school systems, one being fly by night scam artists.
they don't want to fund two school systems, one being fly by night scam artists.
Yeah, but then there are the voucher schools.
I suppose 'parents of children stuck in horrible public schools with unionized teachers who don't give a damn about anything except salaries and benefits' could be described as "a small segment of the population", but it's not all that small, and it does have a right to expect better.
Yeah, but then there are the voucher schools.
I wouldn't doubt you have shitty schools in the state you live in. But in Wisconsin we have good public schools. If you're so insistent on funding private schools in Wisconsin I'm sure they would accept your donations.
garage requires that all children obtain the pathetic education he received.
Fortunately for many of us, we have the means to flee the "garage-like" Stalinist education model and provide what is best for our kids.
Unfortunately for the poorer amongst us, they are still at the mercy of garage and his gangs.
garage: "There is strong opposition to vouchers because people in Wisconsin like their public schools and they don't want to fund two school systems, one being fly by night scam artists."
Garages arguments are self-refuting.
Nothing new there.
If you're so insistent on funding private schools in Wisconsin I'm sure they would accept your donations.
If you're a representative graduate of WI public schools, I'm not convinced that they're very good at all.
I'm not insisting on anything. I'm simply observing that the Cap Times is exclusively interested in how politicians are affected by vouchers instead of schoolkids. I even allowed that the Cap Times could argue for or against vouchers, depending on how it viewed the evidence.
But you are so invested in a simpleton's "good vs. evil" view of politics that you're blinded to the plain text of what people actually say.
But seriously, garage, please do provide links to the studies showing that voucher schools underperform public schools.
I'd really like to know what part of the literature on educational outcomes you're familiar with.
The Cap Times has been pretty tame in its criticism of vouchers compared to other state editorial boards. For good reason, it's one giant scam on taxpayers."
Now there you go again talking about the public schools and the teacher's unions. Speaking of out of state donations considering WI public schools get federal funding and that taxpayers from states with no state and local income taxes pay a disproportionate share of federal income taxes WI schools are getting out of state donations.
Vouchers help poorer students escape failing unionist schools. What's the big deal?
Oh that's right - as a pay back to the corrupt teacher's union, one of the first things Obama did was destroy the popular and helpful DC voucher program. We don't want African American kids to have a way out of failing schools.
We can't have choice, competition and vouchers.
"There is strong opposition to vouchers because people in Wisconsin like their public schools and they don't want to fund two school systems, one being fly by night scam artists."
If you are correct, and "people on Wisconsin" truly love their government schools, and don't want to use vouchers, then they will ignore the choice that vouchers gives them, and nothing will change. Of course, the only way for,vouchers to have a significant effect on government schools would be if significant number of people in Wisconsin would use the vouchers. Of course one should not forget that vouchers cost much less than what is spent per student, so even in this situation, the kids who will stay in government schools will see an increase in per student spending, which should make their parents even happier.
So, garage, you are contradicted by logic on all sides. How does it feel?
It's a lovely bit of projection by the Democrats: "Hey, we pass laws, then get judges to screw over people we made a deal with, so obviously Walker will do the same."
It's very very very very important to garage that no one in WI have educational options.
One size fits all.
It's what made garage the towering intellect he is today.
garage mahal said...
Communities don't want them, not one news editorial in the state came out in favor of vouchers
So, garage's definition of "community" is "people who write newspaper editorials." Good to know.
leslyn: "I always like a good laugh."
I'll bet you were laughing your head off when those minority kids had their vouchers taken away from them by obambi and crew early in his tenure.
Of course, once it became patently obvious that Obama was trying to force "those" kids back onto the liberal plantation against the fervent wishes of the parents, he "relented" and restored the funding.
Yep.
The left.
All about choice......
Now that's a laugh riot!
Gregg: "So, garage's definition of "community" is "people who write newspaper editorials." Good to know"
garage only "knows" what he is told to "know" by his political betters.
He knows his place.
And he's quite pleased with it.
I mean, there's free cheese!
You've gotta respect the argument that WI's schools are excellent, but given the chance people will pull their kids out of them en masse. And by "respect" I mean, of course, laugh at.
Also implicit in garage's argument is the belief that when kids leave a public school to attend a private school, the public school's costs don't go down.
Yes, if only 1 kid left a school there'd be no reduction in classroom space or teachers. But it doesn't take too many kids leaving in order to reduce the number of classes. And the teacher who's let go can go work at the voucher school if he or she is a good teacher.
The main threat of vouchers is to teachers who the public schools would fire and who wouldn't be hired by any new private schools.
If you are correct, and "people on Wisconsin" truly love their government schools, and don't want to use vouchers, then they will ignore the choice that vouchers gives them, and nothing will change
Except it would cost the state and local districts anywhere from 1.3 billion to 1.9 billion to support annually, they're a proven a failure where tried in Wisconsin, and more than half leave the choice program and go back to public schools.
garage mahal said...
Yeah, but then there are the voucher schools.
I wouldn't doubt you have shitty schools in the state you live in. But in Wisconsin we have good public schools. If you're so insistent on funding private schools in Wisconsin I'm sure they would accept your donations.
No you don't.
garage mahal said...
If you are correct, and "people on Wisconsin" truly love their government schools, and don't want to use vouchers, then they will ignore the choice that vouchers gives them, and nothing will change
Except it would cost the state and local districts anywhere from 1.3 billion to 1.9 billion to support annually, they're a proven a failure where tried in Wisconsin, and more than half leave the choice program and go back to public schools.
No it wouldn't.
Except it would cost the state and local districts anywhere from 1.3 billion to 1.9 billion to support annually
Go to the source of this quote, garage, the Dept of Public Instruction, and you'll see that they count the $7,000 per student voucher as a cost, but they don't count the $12,000 per student SAVED at the public institution. So the $1.9 billion "cost" is actually an approximate $1.4 billion SAVINGS to taxpayers.
No one goes to voucher schools any more, they're too crowded.
"Except it would cost the state and local districts anywhere from 1.3 billion to 1.9 billion to support annually, they're a proven a failure where tried in Wisconsin, and more than half leave the choice program and go back to public schools."
Assuming the vouchers are only $5,000, this means that even taking the lowest estimate of $1.3billion dollars, this would mean that at least 260,000 families will choose to leave the government school system. All in all, there are nearly 1 million student sin Wisconsin. If we take the higher number that you quoted, then total of 380,000 students, which amounts to about 38% of students.
So, garage, explain to me, how come you claim that "communities are against vouchers", when by your own numbers, nearly 38% of students would be taken out government schools?
And this does not even count the fct that vouchers are much cheaper than per student spending in government schools, which the state and local budget will see a huge saving.
So the $1.9 billion "cost" is actually an approximate $1.4 billion SAVINGS to taxpayers.
Almost positive this isn't right, would love to see a cite from the LFB.
: A recent memo by the non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) shows that while the average
public school student in Wisconsin receives roughly $4,900 of general state aid, the state guarantees
private voucher school students $6,442 in aid from the state and local school districts. Over 80 percent of public school districts now receive less than the guaranteed voucher amount. That percentage is likely to grow because the governor now proposes to increase the guaranteed voucher payments to $7,050 for voucher schools at the K-8 level and $7,856 at the high school level.
Link
You're linking to an infected source.
I can't read your source, but there's one obvious distinction that's being obscured in what you quote:
while the average public school student in Wisconsin receives roughly $4,900 of general state aid, the state guarantees private voucher school students $6,442 in aid from the state and local school districts.
Nothing in your quote directly addresses the question of the net financial effect of students leaving the public system for a voucher school.
the average
public school student in Wisconsin receives roughly $4,900 of general state aid
Dude, you apparently don't understand school funding, and are easily misled by those with political agendas. Your quote only references "general state aid", which comprises only 41% of school funding. Most of the rest comes from property taxes. Including all sources, each public student costs $12,000 (your number just confirms this, as $4,900/.41 = $11,951). Vouchers, as stated, cost between $6,000-$7,000.
Drago said...
It's very very very very important to garage that no one in WI have educational options.
One size fits all.
It's what made garage the towering intellect he is today.
Once again, it's garage in, garbage out.
"private voucher school students $6,442 in aid from the state and local school districts"
Putting things in perspective.
In Wisconsin, in 2011, per student was $11,774, which is twice the price of the voucher. This does not even include future liabilities, like pensions to teachers and healthcare. It is undeniable that vouchers would dramatically cut government spending on education, and this conclusion can be reached by reading garage's own data.
Now tell me, garage, if your data is true, then all local taxes for schools can eliminated, and these constitute about half of total spending, and state school taxes will remain practically unchanged. Which communities would be against that?
Your quote only references "general state aid", which comprises only 41% of school funding. Most of the rest comes from property taxes. Including all sources, each public student costs $12,000 (your number just confirms this, as $4,900/.41 = $11,951).
The school district I grew up in (from the LFB memo I linked) shows the district is guaranteed $1696 per pupil from the state. And yes I understand that doesn't include local property taxes. A voucher pupil would be guaranteed $6442 in that same district.
Anyway if you have something concrete from the LFB or similar that shows the state would save 1.4 billion from the expansion of voucher schools statewide I would love to see it. Not even Walker and his flunkies are pushing that line.
Garage, your own numbers prove that total federal-state-local spending for education would fall if everyone used vouchers. Your own data show that vouchers cost less than per student spending in Wisconsin. Do you understand this?
Garage, your own numbers prove that total federal-state-local spending for education would fall if everyone used vouchers
Then why don't communities want them? And if that were true I'm pretty sure we would be hearing about that ad nauseam.
And what about the 97,488 students already enrolled in private schools not receiving a taxpayer voucher? Do they get one too? That's $628 million more right there if they do get one, and if there aren't any income eligibility requirements as Walker has proposed.
"Then why don't communities want them? "
You keep repeating this, but the numbers you yourself quoted showed than as many as 40% of the students may immediately leave government schools if vouchers were provided to them. And your own number show that education spending in Wisconsin can be cut in half if vouchers come into effect. I things are as good as what you say, then it's clearly a lie that "communities don't want vouchers". O course, if the definition of community is "union families", then yes, I can see how those communities won't like parents having a choice in th education of their children.
"And if that were true I'm pretty sure we would be hearing about that ad nauseam."
I do hear it ad nauseam, people on this blog keep telling you this over and over. Even the numbers you quote support this. Of course, if you rely on liberal media, you won't hear this, even though their own numbers clearly say it. But why are you surprised?
"And what about the 97,488 students already enrolled in private schools not receiving a taxpayer voucher? Do they get one too? "
Sure, why not. Given that total education spending is much more than th cost of a voucher, we can easily afford this for everyone.
"That's $628 million more right there if they do get one, and if there aren't any income eligibility requirements as Walker has proposed."
For every student that leaves government school and using a voucher, you save at least $5,000 immediately, and more in the future when teachers retire. It's a great investment to have vouchers. Of course, government unions will suffer, and DNC will get less help in the elections, but I am willing to sacrifice them. It's for the children, you see.
And what about the 97,488 students already enrolled in private schools not receiving a taxpayer voucher? Do they get one too?
I they paid property taxes they should get one. Either that or a tax credit.
I bet voucher would go over well in Milwaukee and Racine.
See ,Garage, what you are failing to grasp is that people that are satisfied with their school need not apply for a voucher. Vouchers put poorly performing schools on notice. It's all about freedom of choice and it puts schools in competition with each other.
Choice is a good thing.
"See ,Garage, what you are failing to grasp is that people that are satisfied with their school need not apply for a voucher"
Ad their local taxes go down considerably. Wn-win situation.
And what about the 97,488 students already enrolled in private schools not receiving a taxpayer voucher? Do they get one too?
Good for you! I almost made that argument for you earlier, but I wanted to see if you'd get up to speed on the subject for yourself. But of course with the limited number of vouchers and income caps, that won't be an issue any time soon.
I think one reason that the voucher program is being rolled out so slowly is this initial cost problem for existing private school students. But so long as new private enrollees outpace voucher use by existing private students, the overall cost will remain neutral or decrease.
Sure, why not. Given that total education spending is much more than the cost of a voucher, we can easily afford this for everyone.
These students are already enrolled in private schools. Should we also pay for their piano lessons and summer trips abroad as well? Why not an Audi for graduation?
Many of the students in private school currently receiving a taxpayer voucher would have gone to and paid for the tuition themselves.
garage mahal said...
Sure, why not. Given that total education spending is much more than the cost of a voucher, we can easily afford this for everyone.
These students are already enrolled in private schools. Should we also pay for their piano lessons and summer trips abroad as well? Why not an Audi for graduation?
Many of the students in private school currently receiving a taxpayer voucher would have gone to and paid for the tuition themselves.
6/11/13, 4:52 PM
As said by others above, if those parents are paying property taxes and state income taxes for services they are not consuming they should either get a voucher (less expensive) or a tax rebate.
Why are you so afraid of vouchers? If the communities as you say don't want them then there is no real consequence from your perspective. If on the other hand there is a demand, then why chain kids to crappy schools and pay extra for the privilege? Or perhaps you already know the interests of the parents and their kids are not aligned with the unions.
As said by others above, if those parents are paying property taxes and state income taxes for services they are not consuming they should either get a voucher (less expensive) or a tax rebate.
Then childless parents should get two rebates? I can think of a lot of services I pay for that I don't use, I could make some real money off of this.
Or I could open a Madrassa and make all these fools pay me.
Or I could open a Madrassa and make all these fools pay me.
Y'know, this sounds kind of bigoted.
Muhammad's School Choice Alliance of Wisconsin.
Your tax dollars will provide needy young Muslim students the prayer rugs they desperately need!
And no, I'm not bigoted. You are.
What I need:
Your tax dollars and for you and the state to shut the fuck up about my business practices and "curriculum".
And no, I'm not bigoted. You are.
Wow.
I feel like I'm in the presence of rhetorical greatness.
"These students are already enrolled in private schools. Should we also pay for their piano lessons and summer trips abroad as well? Why not an Audi for graduation?"
Based on the numbers that you showed here, we can indeed pay for their piano lessons, summer trips abroad and an Audi for graduation, if sufficient number of students use vouchers and move to private schools.
But still, on another level, why not pay for everyone's k-12 education? I know you decided to bring in piano lessons, Sumer vacations and audis in order to walk away from the conversation about government schools. If we live in a just society, why shouldn't we pay same amount for private schools as we pay for government schools? Wo decided that government schools are inherently better? We know that comrade Obama does not like government schools.
"Muhammad's School Choice Alliance of Wisconsin.
Your tax dollars will provide needy young Muslim students the prayer rugs they desperately need!"
No problem,given Islamic issues with our way of life, lets make all Moslem private schools in eligible to school,vouchers. Would this answer your Moslem concerns, and eliminate your fears of parent choice?
Good Luck
Inflatable Movie Screen Rentals
garage mahal said...
As said by others above, if those parents are paying property taxes and state income taxes for services they are not consuming they should either get a voucher (less expensive) or a tax rebate.
Then childless parents should get two rebates? I can think of a lot of services I pay for that I don't use, I could make some real money off of this.
No. Pay attention. You get to keep your own money and not pay it out in taxes. No body is giveing you anything. You get to keep what was/is already yours.
See?
I feel like I'm in the presence of rhetorical greatness.
I know, right?
The Diogenes of the modern age.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा