See Copyleft?? You had to go and blow that one moment when you sounded intelligent by replying back with some retarded statement about how we ALL benefit from educated children. Who gives a damn about their education?? I know, you suck up to Hillary on a regular basis, so I can see where your "it takes a village" mentality comes from. I tell you what. Find me a statistic that government funded education actually provides geniuses such as yourself, then you won't look like a twit.

Jeeze folks lets not go into the we live a perfect world/imperfect world area.

The vouchers are sorta working by the last paper I read. They are not zooming the participants to the top but giving them a chance. Lets keep it going.

Forget all the partisan crud. The Dems always say for the kids. The Repub always say for the kids. Lets do something for the kids! SUPPORT VOUCHERS

I am confused how people who oppose vouchers can turn around and say other handouts "for the children" like S-CHIP are a good thing???? And conversely, how can the people who dislike handouts such as S-CHIP turn around and support school vouchers?

I always thought the school voucher supporters were the "I'm pissed that public schools won't teach Intelligent Design" contingent, but I know that's not what Neal's about.

personally, I think both are stupid ideas. I don't feel much responsibility to provide free healthcare for the kids of parasites, nor do I feel the responsibility to provide private education for them.

well, how about we take private schools off the list. vouchers only for public schools?
No, let's just abolish the public schools. In their place we can have an exclusively private, FOR PROFIT, education system. Remember, The United States Postal Service, not withstanding there is no authorization for government to ever compete with private enterprise anyway. The public schools just might be UNconstitutional.
NEA = terrorist

Isn't that our money anyway? Shouldn't we say where to spend it?

I would love to get government out of education all together, all private, no teacher unions and teachers are paid based on the results of the students grades. If the students fail, the teacher has failed.

Here's my problem with your argument: You assume that it's the government's money.

It's not. It is our money, and it is confiscated by the government. The government does not produce. It only takes.

We could argue the issue of whether or not it's right to tax everyone whether they use the system or not, but that's not what vouchers are about.

They are about allowing parents to choose which schools are doing the best job of educating children. That means that they could choose any school that would accept the money, public or private.

If public schools do a better job than the private schools, they get the money. It's not about public and private. It's about making the schools produce results if they want the money, instead of rubber-stamping whatever they choose to do. Incidentally, in my view, there is much more indoctrination going on in public schools than in private schools, and I suspect that you are living proof of that.

I guess I should realize that getting paid on the merits of what you have to offer would be a foreign concept to you.

Instead of having government schools why not have all private schools? The government is willing to pay $7,500 a student to have an educated population. So stop any other funding of schools and just give that voucher to all students, even through college. As long as you are enrolled in an institution you get a voucher. Be it pre-k, elementary, middle, high school, college or post grad.

Some schools would form to take just the $7,500 and others would charge extra for better facilities and better teachers. The only thing that would change would be the value the students parents put on their education. When you get to high school and college the students could even get a job and earn money to subsidize their own education.

@Copy - Have you ever read the communist manifesto? You do realize that public schools are derived from chapter 2 of the communist manifesto. Here I'll link it to ya:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm

In a capitalist society we are free to educate ourselves. In America we value education and we believe that it is a needed for a productive society. However that doesn't equate to public schools. It equates to access to libraries and other publicly accessible sources of information. It means the government isn't going to outlaw certain books. It means if I'm a minority I can't be deprived of my right to learn to read. It doesn't mean that the government needs to pay one penny for my education.

When we call the current administration socialist, fascists, and communists it is for good reason. I'm sorry you haven't read the founding documents for those philosophies, some of us have and understand what they are doing. We are self motivated self educators that go beyond the curriculum given us by our communist school system.

well, how about we take private schools off the list. vouchers only for public schools?

That would be Point #1. Vouchers are using public, taxpayer funds to support private schools. That's a no-no right off the bat.

Now, if someone were to implement Elmer's idea, I'd be all for it. "You think private schools are so great? YOU pay for them. Don't rob the public treasury for your private indoctrination institutes."

Vouchers are a threat to the racial divide that gets Democrats elected. That's why the DC program had to be killed. Evil bastards.

Doesn't allowing vouchers for some students but not others violate the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment?

With regards to Copyleft, how did this nation survive for over 100 years without public education? And how did we grow in economic strength without the same? And when did we start slipping in overall education throughput? Before or after? Hmm....

I have a problem with the voucher system- at least that DC has (or had it), but not the rest of the country.How was that ever fair?? Can't do it for one city and not for every city.If the people in those cities don't like the gov't schools or how unsafe that town is, then MOVE to a town where the schools are better and the town is safer to live in. Why should they get $7500 for their kids to go private but not everyone else? Sorry,I think it should be done away with unless the same opportunity is afforded to every city in every state.I work and so does my husband and we can't afford a private education, but these people who live off the gov't get to have a private education for their kids?? And I am helping to pay for it! Boy that sure is backwards.

Isn't Obama saying that this is working for these kids so I don't want to harm them. What about all the other kids being harmed because they are trapped in the government schools?

Liberals go crazy when I repeat "Change you can believe in" (although I substitute the word 'chains' quite often). Keep it going!

It's the liberal equivalent to "mission accomplished."

Why don't the republicans take this issue on? Standing on the side of minority students against the Dem's and their unions?

It would seem to me that if you stand for personal liberties and opportunity for all that this cause is a no-brainer.

The current lot of Republicans are too busy debating what Reagan would do than to take on issues that should allign with their core values. Maybe that's because they haven't defined their core-values yeat, and are wandering blindly through the wilderness.

Seriously though, are Republicans....the current big government Republicans who are neo-cons but somehow believe themselves to be conservatives (Lindsay Graham/Mitt Romney?) truly in favor of vouchers? Many of them still support an anti-American large government legislation like the Patriot Act...and many support nation building and global welfare schemes that are working to bankrupt America why would they break their big government consistency in actual support for educational freedom?