Empower Black Parents With Vouchers


children in school

In a commentary titled “Solutions to Black Education”, Dr. Walter E. Williams writes the following:

“There is little that the political and education establishment will do about the grossly fraudulent education received by many black youngsters, and more money is not the answer. For example, according to findings by Cato Institute’s Andrew J. Coulson, Washington, D.C., spends $29,409 per pupil (http://tinyurl.com/mpc82dq). In terms of academic achievement, its students are nearly the nation’s worst. The average tuition for a K-12 Catholic school is $9,000, and for a nonsectarian private K-12 school, it is $16,000. A voucher system would empower black parents to remove their children from high-cost and low-quality public schools and enroll them in lower-cost and higher-quality nonpublic schools.”

Dr. Williams’ idea would work for black children who are trapped in poorly-performing public schools, but the teachers unions are opposed to school vouchers.

So, who do Democrat lawmakers side with?

Answer: The ones who provide Democrat lawmakers with campaign cash, and they aren’t the black children who are trapped in poorly-performing public schools.

One way to close the so-called “income gap” would be to provide poor children with a better education, and the use of school vouchers would help to accomplish that goal.

Yet, Democrat lawmakers work against that goal by being opposed to school vouchers. Why?

Answer: The ones who provide Democrat lawmakers with campaign cash aren’t the black children who need vouchers in order to escape poorly-performing public schools.

Democrats who are wealthy enough to send their children to private schools seem not to care about the parents who aren’t wealthy enough to do the same thing. The former have what they want; the latter are left to wait for Superman.

Who knew that Lex Luthor was a Democrat?


[Image Source: Townhall.com]

John Cornyn’s opponent calls for impeachment of Obama
South Oregon Proves Gov't Subsides Are Bad for You
  • DanMelson

    I don’t understand why this is only a solution for blacks.

    Not too long ago, we got a letter from a school district. It said, basically, your child’s school has been identified as so failing that we’re required by law to offer you a transfer to another school in the district. Unfortunately, we have no schools that *don’t* fail this bad. Nor do any of the surrounding districts.

  • Hank_M

    Kinda ironic isn’t it?
    The party of “choice” doesn’t want poor families to be able to choose the best schools for their children.

    I really hope that someday, the various constituencies that the democrats claim to advocate for, realize they’re being scammed.

  • jim_m

    The racist presumption here is that only blacks are in crappy schools and that only black parents are utterly incapable of doing anything to help their children. Otherwise there would be a need to help white or hispanic families of similar economic status.

    The other option is that this is just a racist move to provide something for blacks that everyone of similar station needs but they want to exclude others based solely on race.

    Either way this is just more evidence that the left is thoroughly racist.

  • GarandFan

    “Dr. Williams’ idea would work for black children who are trapped in
    poorly-performing public schools, but the teachers unions are opposed to
    school vouchers.”

    Correction. Should work for ANY children. Maybe Dr Williams can talk to Eric Holder. Oh, wait. Holder is too busy trashing the voucher program run by Governor Jindal.

    Dr Williams would better spend her time getting prepared for her IRA audit. And hope Holder doesn’t threaten her with some type of ‘civil rights action’.

    • jim_m

      The key for the dems is to support these things in theory but to oppose them in reality.

    • Brucehenry
      • GarandFan

        As compared to the current system?

        • Brucehenry

          Check out the 3rd link, the headline of which reports that the voucher schools are, indeed, worse than the public schools.

          • Sky__Captain

            Not really sure of the point of posting the 3rd link. The embedded Times-Picayune article is much more informative of the issue.

            Of course, the link provided is to an all-racism-all-the-time website, which I shall never visit again.
            And before the local troll complains – the linked website is only about ONE color of skin, thus racism website.

          • Brucehenry

            LOL with the he who smelt it dealt it schtick again. Do you have anything to say about the CONTENT of the article?

            ADDING: Check out these obviously racist organizations. You know they’re racists because they only talk about their own ethnic groups.




          • jim_m

            Trust the racist to come in and argue that it is better to just keep blacks living in ignorance and poverty and to deride any attempt to improve their lot in life.

          • Brucehenry

            Trust the loony to read words that haven’t been written to arrive at a meaning that was not intended.

          • Sky__Captain

            Nice try, L’il Brucie, but you’re the one who posted the link, not me. I just made the mistake of clicking on it and reading.

            So if you really try the RAAAAACISM meme, keep in mind that you posted the link.

          • GarandFan

            Read the 3rd link. It is apparently someone’s opinion. Overtures of ‘an assessment’, by who? Then there’s this:

            “There is still much data to be released before observes (sic) can adequately assess the voucher programs.”

            With D’s and F’s under the current system, the ‘system’ isn’t working. So DON’T try something else? Or just pour more money down the rat hole?

          • Brucehenry

            The assessment was by the state of Louisiana:


            That link was contained in the breakingbrown.com link I posted above.

          • GarandFan

            I’m not trying to be thick-headed or obstinate. WHO did the study? The State Dept of Public Education? If so, you’d think they’d have an ax to grind in this. Better if it were done by some Inspector General or someone who has no stake in the outcome. And once again the statement was made that the study was incomplete.

          • Brucehenry

            Dude, just google “problems with Louisiana school voucher programs.” It’s true this one link doesn’t definitively demonstrate that Jindal’s program is crap, but the preponderance of evidence does.

            But here’s one more for ya:


            Or maybe you think taxpayers should pay to teach creationism in science classes. Yeah, that should equip these kids for the competitive 21st Century marketplace!

            Here’s a hint: Just because a school is “private” doesn’t mean it is “better.”

          • Texas_Accountant

            Mr. Henry,

            You are correct that “just because a school is ‘private’ doesn’t mean it is better.” However, it usually is better. Back in the 1960’s, the government commissioned the “Coleman Report” to determine what makes a good school. Funny, but only one factor made a difference: the involvement of the parents of the children who went to the school. You can’t fix that with more money. That is why “schools of choice” normally out perform public schools. If parents care enough to pay, they are usually “involved.”

          • Brucehenry

            Yes, it usually is better.

            However, when you throw a bunch of government voucher money at a gang of grifters, as Louisiana has apparently done, not so much.

          • Texas_Accountant

            Does it matter if the grifters work for themselves or for the government?

          • Brucehenry

            When this school voucher thingie is presented to parents as a panacea, then come to find out the private schools are even lousier than the public ones, yeah, it matters.

            Parents think that because they are sending their kids to a private school the kids are getting a better education. But in Louisiana we see there’s no accountability and the ones who DO get reported on are failing even worse than the public schools the parents fled.

            Worse, many of them are filling kids’ heads with a lot of creationist and dominionist nonsense that will serve them poorly later in life. Clearly unconstitutional, too, to support religious instruction with taxpayer dollars, but that’s a whole nother topic.

          • jim_m

            The voucher program is an opportunity to get your children out of a crappy public school. It does not prevent people from making bad choices about where to send them outside the public school systems.

            Now it sure as hell sounds as though you believe that people should not be trusted to make decisions for themselves and therefore the government is the only decision maker that can be trusted to make the right choice for them.

            Sounds a hell of a lot like you want a totalitarian government there Bruce. What’s so wrong about people making choices for themselves? Why should the government be trusted to make any choices when we already have the evidence that they cannot make the choices necessary to produce a decent school?

            Even if only 1 out of a thousand families chooses correctly and gets their kid into a better private school they will still be exceeding the results of the government. But you wouldn’t want that. It’s always about the control.

          • Brucehenry

            Good job keeping 95% of the paranoia out of your comment, Jim.

            But yes, I agree that there should be alternative, private schools, and I don’t know that I am diametrically opposed to any and all voucher systems. My comments here have been confined to pointing out that Louisiana’s system is ummm, less than perfect, so to speak.

            Your comment that if only 1 out of 1000 get into a better school it’s better ignores the fact that if taxpayer dollars are being poured into private schools and 800 out of 1000 are getting a WORSE outcome, then the 1 kid out of 1000 who isn’t doesn’t equal a wise expenditure, now does it?

            If another state institutes a voucher program that works better than Louisiana’s, or if Louisiana’s system can be fixed, I’ll reconsider my opinion. As of now, all you’ve got is ideology. The results haven’t measured up in Louisiana, at least not so far.

          • jim_m

            Failing is failing. There really isn’t a worse when it comes to the fact that kids can’t read, write or do math. So yeah, even if one benefits you are still getting ahead.

            What does it say that you would rather prevent 1 person from succeeding so you can maintain an equal level of failure across the entire system?

            And again, it is about letting people have a choice. They can always choose to stay in the public schools. Why are people not allowed to make decisions for themselves? Why are people not allowed to choose how they will live their lives?

            What right do you have to demand that they surrender their freedom to the government?

          • Brucehenry

            An educated populace is a vital economic and national security interest, which is why advanced nations, starting with Prussia, I believe, one by one instituted compulsory public education in the first place. So how best to educate tomorrow’s workforce and tomorrow’s military is a matter for political debate. I’m not demanding anyone “surrender” anything, you lunatic.

            If you read my comment directly above your latest screech, I mean reply, you’ll see I have a pretty moderate opinion on this matter. You’ll have to look for another way to paint me as some kind of fascist, Jim.

          • jim_m

            Seeing as the US has roundly rejected compulsory public education and that its biggest supporters were the KKK and anti-catholic lunatics, it does not surprise me that you are opposed to private schooling.

            Your position is that the state has the deciding choice in how people should educate their children. You say there should be public debate. Where does the public get to decide what you do with your children? I’ll bet you would fight tooth and nail against anyone telling your children where they can go to school.

            Yes, you are some kind of fascist. As soon as you said that there should be a public debate over where families should be forced to send their children to school you crossed that line.

            No one has the right to tell me how I should educate my children. I get that there should be laws that say that you must educate your children but demanding that the law dictate what sort of school does that is unconstitutional and has been held so multiple times.

            What you are really doing is trying to back door your fascist agenda by demanding that if people aren’t wealthy that they should be forced to do whatever you tell them to. You make much of my private grammar school education but you are the one that wants to deny it to as many people as you can. I’m the one that wants to offer it to as many people as I can. Whose the elitist now?

          • Brucehenry

            Yes I shouldn’t have used the phrase “compulsory public education.” Compulsory education, with the option of paying for private school or going to free public schools, is what I should have said.

            You have the right to send your children to private school if you wish. However, for those who cannot afford to, or for any other reason choose not to, the state will educate their kids at taxpayer expense.

            That’s because, as I said, an educated workforce and military manpower pool is in both the economic and national security interests of the state. Which is why all advanced countries have compulsory education.

            I don’t know where you got the KKK stuff, but if only the affluent sent their kids to school this country would be about as advanced as Honduras or Myanmar. The state has a compelling interest in ALL children being educated to at least a minimum standard, and will supply the education if you don’t. That’s why there’s an offense called “truancy.”

            The state does, indeed, have the deciding say in how your children are educated — IF you don’t send them to private school. Even then, the state can decide that a particular private school doesn’t meet a minimum standard and take action to ensure that students at that particular school DO get educated.

            If you DO send your children to private school, you still must pay taxes to support the public schools, just as you must if you have no children at all. That’s because, as a citizen, you enjoy the benefits of there being an educated workforce and an educated pool of talent for the military.

          • jim_m

            I got the kkk stuff from Wikipedia, which links the movement for compulsory public education to efforts by anti-catholics (including the KKK) to eliminate catholic schooling.

            As for the benefits of public schools…. What is the benefit from a public school which becomes the epicenter of gang recruitment, drug distribution and crime? Should home owners get tax rebates in those communities?

            Fact of the matter I have never seen a single study validating the assumption that public schools contribute to the value of the community. While there is some general belief that they do this has never been quantified and if it were we would also be able to determine how much of a drag poor schools are on the community.

            It cannot only go in one direction. If good schools improve the community then bad schools tear it down. And I do not benefit from schools that turn out kids that cannot read, write or do math for the military because the military will not accept them. The military has higher standards than most leftists. Planned Parenthood and Acorn might take those people but the military requires better than human waste.

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah, like I said to Hank, below. The conservative panacea for everything is privatization. Now we have you advocating for an end to public schools. You won’t be happy until this country IS Honduras.

            Good luck with your campaign.

          • Actually, the Prussian system was designed to produce obedient factory workers – at least according to teacher friends I have. From der Wiki on the Prussian model…

            “It provided not only the skills needed in an early industrialized world (reading, writing and arithmetic), but also a strict education in ethics, duty, discipline and obedience.”

            So if we’re running on a Prussian model, we’re also failing that.

            I might refer you to the movie ‘Metropolis’ – “In the future, wealthy industrialists rule the vast city of Metropolis from high-rise tower complexes, while a lower class of underground-dwelling workers toil constantly to operate the machines that provide its power.”

            Of course the left would rail it’s a metaphor for our times, while the right would see it as a cautionary tale – not to let an upper-class control a lower. And while the evils of the 1% are constantly screamed about – isn’t it amusing that the most visible consumers, our celebrity elite (politicians and actors alike, though you could say there’s not much difference between the two) are in great need for a lower class to support them and serve their every whim?

          • Hank_M

            “When this school voucher thingie is presented to parents as a panacea,…”

            Who’s doing that? School vouchers are usually presented as an opportunity for parents to have a choice as to where to send their children.

            Do you really object to families having a choice about this?

          • Brucehenry

            My God, dude, privatization is conservative panacea for EVERYTHING, including education. You know this. Why are you pretending?

            Name one OTHER conservative prescription for fixing education for poor kids. School uniforms don’t count lol.

          • Hank_M

            Uh, no, I don’t think privatization is a panacea for everything. (panacea, is that the new word of the day you’re learning? Can’t wait to see tomorrows)

            And I don’t know of any other “conservative prescription for fixing education for poor kids” but that’s beside the point and you know that.

            All I know is that many poor families in the DC area, the voucher program I’ve heard the most about, were thrilled to be able to win the voucher lottery in DC so that their children would have a choice and might receive the education they deserved.

            Consider this, from a WAPO article from Aug 4th 2012.

            “More than 1,400 kids are already receiving vouchers. An additional 1,300 applied for open slots this year. Of those, 505 were found eligible and entered a lottery Tuesday, and 299 were selected for vouchers.”

            Would you really deny these people the choice to obtain the education they want?

          • Brucehenry

            Have I said word one about DC’s program? We have been discussing Louisiana.

            I’m not, in general, predisposed to look with favor on taking tax money out of public schools and bestowing it on kooks, grifters, boobs, and nutjobs, as is apparently happening in Louisiana. However, I do admit that DC’s program seems to be run more competently (I know little about it) and if it and other programs like it succeed, as I said, I’ll reconsider my opinion.

            Isn’t that fair enough?

          • There’s been a fair number of them – ranging from going back to drilling in the basics of language, science and math to major emphasis on self-paced learning as in the Kahn Academy model.

            The problem – at least as I see it – is that educational fads have a tendency to sweep out what might be working. Remember the ‘self-esteem’ movement, which emphasized the child ‘feeling good’ about himself over actually accomplishing anything? Or even minor stuff like not using red ink because it potentially frightens the child and makes him afraid of failure, so he gives up trying?

            The trouble with the fads is that they’re adopted because (to use a ‘Men In Black’ movie metaphor) they’re the New Hotness vs. the Old and Busted. And they’ve rarely been tested in the real world by real world teachers on real world children in real-world schools.

            You can make pretty much any educational fad operate and provide good results in a limited setting with carefully chosen kids and exceedingly well-trained teachers – it’s when it’s released into the wild that things go awry.

            One teacher friend despairs over the Common Core math because (to use her words) they’re expecting kids in elementary school to discern the principles behind what they’re being taught when they don’t even know the basics. How are you supposed to understand the principles of multiplication when you don’t even know 2×2=4 or 3×3=9?

            And whether something like Common Core will actually improve things or not won’t be apparent for years. At which point, if it’s not performing as overpromised, it’ll be replaced by some other fad.

            And the cycle will repeat itself – each iteration getting a bit worse.

          • Jwb10001

            And government intervention is the panacea for liberals. Will you feel the same when the government is not to your liking? I suspect not.

          • Sky__Captain

            Sorry, but I now know better than to click on any link the racist little troll posts.

            However, I believe his character would not have suffered so much had he posted the nola link in the first place. That does require actual skills, though..

          • Brucehenry

            You’re a hoot. “I believe his character would not have suffered…” LOL.