Utah: A+... Patrick Byrne: F... South Carolina: ???

Cross Posted over at Utah's Accountability Blog

On Election Day earlier this month, Patrick Byrne, the CEO of Overstock.com, and an ardent supporter of private school vouchers, claimed Utah’s vouchers referendum was an IQ test for Utahns – a test we presumably failed when voters rejected the plan by a 24-point margin that Tuesday.

What a tremendous insult to Utahns. We don’t need our IQs assessed by a millionaire businessmen with more of an interest in right-wing politics than in the future of our communities and schools.

When pro-voucher forces brought their voucher plan to Utah – which ranks dead last nationally in per-pupil spending and has the largest class sizes in the country – we knew they were looking not for education solutions, but rather just to push a narrow political ideology.

You see, Utah legislators have long made public schools far too low a priority, as evidenced by such abysmal funding levels. Utah schools have done remarkably well in spite of their funding challenges, but the bottom line is that the flawed voucher plan put before Utahans this year did not address any real challenges in the state. Instead, it just promised to spend much needed resources elsewhere: in unaccountable, inaccessible private voucher schools.  

And, contrary to what we’ve been hearing from voucher proponents, they just cannot provide any credible research showing that students in private schools do better than their counterparts in public schools. In fact, a 2006 U.S. Department of Education study of Washington, D.C.’s voucher program and a 2001 U.S. General Accounting Office study of Cleveland and Milwaukee’s voucher schools found no significant differences between academic achievement of private school and public school students. Proponents also suggest vouchers benefit poor and urban students but a report released this October from the Center on Education Policy found these students generally do no better in voucher schools than in public schools.

Instead of an unproven vouchers program that would just divert much needed resources away from public schools to unaccountable private schools, what we really need in Utah and across the country is to work together to provide education solutions for all students. We should be investing that money to reduce class size, buy textbooks and supplies, and attract strong, qualified teachers to the profession.

Utah voters reiterated their support for public schools on November 6th when they so clearly rejected the flawed vouchers plan.

So, this begs the question: if pro-voucher interests can’t force vouchers in Utah (which was widely rumored to be a testing ground for such a plan) where can they force them?

The day after suffering such a dramatic defeat, two weeks ago, Byrne announced plans to take his vouchers campaigns to other states, with the first stop in South Carolina.

South Carolinians beware: Byrne is coming for you and your public schools next. I can only hope you too “fail” his vouchers test.

•  Um, slightly biased much?

  I'd like to know where you think Utah could get more money to fund education?  They spend more of their budget on education as a percentage than any other state.  It's over 50% of the taxes, I believe--on top of all the property taxes school districts collect.  It's over $200,000 per classroom per year.  Surely that should be sufficient, right?  

  And, as I recall, the voucher plan didn't take any money from schools--all the money that would have been spent on vouchers was coming from another fund.  

  Please get your facts straight before you go ranting.  It's certain one thing is true: something needs to be done, or are you in favor of the status quo--i.e. bureaucrats getting more money, teachers not accountable, and good teachers ignored because they don't kiss up to the unions?  

  by Vanceone on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:24:25 AM PDT

  •  Where to get more money for schools

    Casinos on Antelope Island!

    by Utahrd on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:37:42 AM PDT

    •  Just what we need!

      I do hope you are joking...  casinos and other forms of gambling pretty much are a tax on the poor, if I remember correctly.  

      Besides, who wants to pull a slot lever with a buffalo staring them in the face?  

      by Vanceone on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:44:55 AM PDT

      •  Yes, I'm joking

        Gambling is a tax on people that are bad at math.

        I drive on Utah roads.  That's gambling enough.

        by Utahrd on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 08:10:41 AM PDT

        •  Yeah, unfortunately

          I wish they'd run light rail all the way up and down the Wasatch Front--heck, I'd love it to go clear to Cougar stadium.  Traffic is a nightmare on game days, and frankly, I  trust a train over a car in winter anyway.  

          by Vanceone on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 08:19:37 AM PDT

  •  vouchers was coming from another fund

    What fund would that be and where does that money come from? I agree that something needs to be done but certainly the vouchers were a loser.

    by woodenshoe24 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:57:24 AM PDT

•  Byrne's done.

  I can't see how he think he's got anywhere to take vouchers now. What a waste of taxpayers dollars and voters time. How committed is he to going to SC? Any chance he'll back down? Thanks for posting, Pat.

  by GradyG on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:35:34 AM PDT

•  I don't have the numbers, but

  in Utah, there may be more children of Democrats in private schools than children of Republicans.

  Latino Catholics form a large percentage of Catholic School enrollment.  So do the Democratic descendents of Slavic, Greek & Italian miners.

  I think there's a few African American kids whose parents came here because they were stationed at Hill AFB that are in Baptist-run schools.

  There's also a "Realms of Inquiry" private school around here.  No Republican would ever send their kid to a school with a name like that.

  by Utahrd on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:36:36 AM PDT

  •  maybe...

    but the anti-vouchers crowd talked a lot about the fact that the plan would have mostly helped wealthy families who could afford private school, but who weren't already sending their kids there. i don't think there was an income cap, and the amount provided in the plan for each family would have been just a drop in the bucket for tuition costs. so, i expected the referendum to do much better than it did because the pro-vouchers campaign seemed to be directed at wealthy, smaller gov't conservatives ("i want more control over my child's education"), which might equate lds folks, no?

    by SmilingIrish on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 08:05:49 AM PDT

    •  That's right

      Vouchers were being sold as a way to get back at teachers' unions; which contain lots of * gasp * Democrats.

      Either way, in this state which is the fraud and scam capital of the country; even the most Republican voters saw that this was a boondoggle waiting to happen.

      by Utahrd on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 08:09:47 AM PDT

•  No Mormom private school system

  ergo, no widespread support for vouchers.  Bad state to test voucher support.

  MA or IL or CA with large Catholic populations or TX and AL for the fundemental Christian (read "white") academies.  

  by redlief on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:40:13 AM PDT

  •  You're right, and one more reason

    Utah is the White Collar Crime, fraud and scam capital of the US.

    Orange County, CA is totally Owned in that competition by Utah.

    Utah voters knew that a bunch of this money was going to end up in Cayman Islands bank accounts.

    In another state where fraud & scams are less rampant, the vote would be different.

    by Utahrd on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 08:13:15 AM PDT