That Didn’t Take Long
For those of you who don’t follow the education debate in South Carolina, students in our state’s best public schools (i.e. in our best, lily-white, middle income neighborhoods) are trailing their peers in other states by increasingly large gaps.
Even more tragically, though, students in our worst-performing public schools (usually in black, low-income neighborhoods) are falling even further behind due to a growing achievement gap between black and white students within our state.
It’s a vicious, institutionally-perpetuated cycle that’s been going on for decades.
Two years ago, African-American Sen. Darrell Jackson (D-Richland) hinted that “a time was coming” when he would support parental choice as a means of providing hope to black children – you know, since the whole mo’ money, mo’ accountability approach hasn’t worked.
And yet within days, Jackson was eviscerated by educrats – accused of selfish motivations given the fact that his church school might have benefited from education scholarships or tax credits.
Jackson was also accused of being ignorant of black history, failing to adequately support public education and conspiring to “eliminate public education” in South Carolina.
Sadly, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Ten days ago, State Sen. Robert Ford (D-Charleston), who is black, joined Rep. Eric Bedingfield (R-Greenville), who is white, in announcing his sponsorship of a new parental choice bill.
Now, less than two weeks later, Ford is being viciously attacked by his local NAACP and two fellow lawmakers, Charleston Reps. David Mack and Wendell Gilliard, both black democrats.
Specifically, they’re calling him a sellout to the black community, throwing out expressions like “it’s hard to bark with a bone in your mouth” in an effort to paint him as a tool of the white man.
We certainly understand a group like the NAACP attacking Ford, and it’s certainly no surprise that they will angrily denounce the name “Howie Rich” as many times as possible because let’s face it – that’s the only arrow parental choice opponents have in their quiver.
Hell, it’s the same diversionary tactic they’ve been using for years.
In their effort to keep blacks in South Carolina from being slaves to “the man,” the NAACP and politicians like Mack and Gilliard have managed to turn them into the slaves of any number of different government bureaucracies – agencies that exists solely to keep them dependent.
That’s the NAACP plan for South Carolina – institutional slavery, and it starts with subservience to the State Department of Education (a.k.a. Ministry of Failure and Non-Competition).
But what we want to get at is the “why?”
Why is this the model when it so clearly hasn’t worked?
Why bow to a bureaucratic altar that has done nothing but force black children to be left behind each year by the thousands in under-performing government-run schools?
The answer to that question can be found in Sen. Ford’s attackers – utterly worthless and hypocritical black politicians like Rep. Mack, who along with fellow poverty pimp Wendell Gilliard pounced on Ford’s parental choice support like the trained status quo Dobermans they are.
Seriously, where does a guy like Mack get off accusing anyone else of shadiness with money?
Say what you want about somebody receiving a campaign contribution from a private citizen, but Mack makes his living off the taxpayers.
For those of you who don’t remember, Mack was the subject of Charleston Post and Courier feature last summer which exposed the fact that he has used his position in Columbia to funnel hundreds of thousands of dollars to “charities” he works for – and receives cash from.
From the story:
State politicians for years have used budget mechanisms to send tax dollars to pet projects. But the amounts tend to be higher for money funneled through universities.
In Mack’s case, he sent $300,000 to S.C. State in the 2006-07 school year and asked the university to send the money to a Columbia-based nonprofit organization called the Palmetto Center for Advocacy. The center conducts health education programs statewide, especially obesity prevention programs.
Mack sent the group another $400,000 through S.C. State in the 2007-08 school year.
Anastasia Shaw, deputy director for Palmetto Center for Advocacy, said the $700,000 from the state is the only money the group has brought in so far. But, she said, the center is “looking to diversify funding.”
According to the group’s Web site, Mack is employed as its “outreach director.” In a telephone interview, Mack said he now does consulting work for the group and previously was the organization’s interim director. He also said he is paid for all of his work with the center but declined to say how much.
Well, well, well … more taxpayer-funded “community outreach” that in reality goes to line the pockets of black lawmakers who do the bidding of their government masters – like attacking African-American colleagues who dare to “get out of line,” for example.
Again, say what you want about Robert Ford (and we’ve said plenty), but how can you go after him for receiving legitimate campaign contributions when Mack and Democrats like him are fleecing the taxpayers to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Politicians like Rep. David Mack are nothing but paid whores for a failed political establishment that wants to keep each and every black child in this state stupid, broke and devoid of hope … and the fact that they feel justified in criticizing anybody for anything only shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt they are.
They’ve been giving billions of dollars and decades to turn things around, and they haven’t.
They can’t.
They’re too busy making themselves rich.
Ford, at long last, has acknowledged that it’s time to try something new.
For that he should be praised, not attacked … but certainly the last people who should be throwing stones are these modern-day Pharisees.
Comments
By Pat Hendrix on March 13th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
“agencies that exists solely to keep them dependent”
Yeah, slavery.
You boys do realize that the devil is always in the details? You don’t really think that they’re going to toss the doors of Porter Guad or Bishop England open to a bunch of poor black kids do you? More likely, the plan will simply provide tax breaks to people that already send their kids to private schools and open up the possibility of even more white folks bailing once they can more readily afford the tuition.
If, however, this is about real choice – between different public schools and even private schools, good. If it isn’t, it’s just another way to keep the white kids away from “you know who.”
By baker on March 13th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
“Diversionary tactics” — That’s funny, considering that your “friends” at SCRG have sent out election-year attack mail on opponents of private school choice that dishonestly highlight almost everything BUT their stance on school choice. That’s the real bait-and-switch here.
And, Will, don’t you think invoking the institution of slavery is beneath you? I mean, you’re an intelligent and thoughtful person — you can do better than that.
Especially considering that you and Mark Sanford have touted a plan that guaranteed nothing to our state’s poorest black (and white) families and that many (if not the vast majority) of our state’s private schools (including your alma mater) have no intention whatsoever of taking in our state’s most struggling students….considering all that, I’d say your righteous indignation would be laughable, if not for your shameful use of the “peculiar institution” for the purposes of propaganda.
By Philip Branton on March 13th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
WHAT……..!?!?!
Hmmm…Robert FORD attacked? Wow …the POST should have this FRONT page….!!??
Hmm : “.. less than two weeks later, Ford is being viciously attacked by his local NAACP and two fellow lawmakers, Charleston Reps. David Mack and Wendell Gilliard, both black democrats.
Specifically, they’re calling him a sellout to the black community, throwing out expressions like “it’s hard to bark with a bone in your mouth” in an effort to paint him as a tool of the white man….”
Well…….MR. Black and Mr. Gilliard, I may not agree with Mr. Ford on all issues (CASINOS) BUT…..BUT …I know when to lift a BLACK MAN UP !!! You two need to take a look in the mirror and repeat this …
“School CHOICE….School Choice…..SLAVES had NO CHOICE !!!
School CHOICE…School Choice….SLAVES had no choice !!!”
Where have you two been….OBAMA is president and the MAN wants…CHANGE !!!! Stop sniffing METHANE with the NAACP…!!! I’ll lift Mr DARBY up too if he realizes that OUR trash is ENERGY and gets PLASMA Converters installed to CLOSE our Landfills and EDUCATES his VOTERS on the benefits…!!!! I hope you two know about PLASMA Converters from http://www.startech.net !!! I did NOT SEE you two at the Charleston County Council meeting Last night to talk with citizens about YOUR views on TRASH…!?!? You do have trash cans don’t you..?? Are you two going to DUMP on PARKERS FERRY..??? ARE YOU GOING to truck our trash to BERKELEY Co or Dorchester Co….??? I highly suggest you two get a freakin’ CLUE…!!!
Mr. Gilliard and Mr. MACK….who is acting like SLAVE MASTERS and not CHANGING…!?!?!
OUR STATE’s problem is ENERGY….the SILENCE on this issue by YOU two and MR FORD ….is deafening !!!!!!!!!
My backside……..!!!!
By PalmettoCPA on March 13th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
I will support vouchers for private schools as long as they’re on the same playing field as public schools:
Accept any student who comes to the door, regardless of ability or handicap. (or in the case of over-enrollment, allow equal-opportunity to all prospects)
Require the same testing as public schools, and publish data.
Require the same qualifications for teachers. (college degree, certification)
No discrimination based upon ability to pay. (voucher covers all required expenses)
If they want taxpayer money, they need to play by the same rules. It is as simple as that. If they’re willing to do that (and let’s face it, most private schools are not) then I think vouchers are a wonderful idea.
By Gillon on March 13th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Looks like PalmettoCPA has some pretty sound and strong arguments. What say thee, Sic Willie?
By Old Bike Dude on March 13th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
We’re having a little throwdown on this at the Bluffton errrr Beaufort Gazette blog.
http://www2.beaufortgazette.com/blogs/post/24948
Palmetto CPA has said it best. Level the field, then vouch away.
btw sic our throwdown doesn’t feature any SLED agents but it’s true.
By Terry B on March 13th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Of course, PalmettoCPA, if we’re going to hold the private schools to all those standards, shouldn’t the voucher amount be the average $10 thousand plus that the public school gets for each student? Or would that be too level a playing field?
I note with amusement the call for standard qualifications. The homeschoolers proved years ago, with standardized testing versus the public school crowd, that the education level of the person doing the instructing had absolutely no statistical bearing on the numbers the homeschooled kids turned in; well above those from the public school kids.
And what do the standardized tests really prove, other than that the students are able to pass standardized tests, which we know from example the public school teachers concentrate on as part of their job security? How about some more meaningful information like dropout rates, acceptance to college/junior college, or even gainful employment of graduates?
By fitsnews on March 13th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Damn right Terry B …
Course we LOVE how stimulated everybody gets over this issue!
By Nope on March 13th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
I don’t belong to the NAACP, but I can’t imagine what Robert Ford is thinking. No existing private schools — neither those like the one Will attended, nor the lesser “white flight” academies that do a really poor job of educating even “lily-white, middle income” children for a LOT more than the $2,500 Ford’s legislation would allocate — are going to take the poorest children from the highest-poverty neighborhoods.
And who in his right mind believes that start-up schools formed specifically because public money is available would be able to educate the poorest, most disadvantaged children for that amount of money? Do we really think that communities so dirt poor that they can’t support a local McDonald’s would somehow be able to establish a world-class school for $2,500 per student per year? Where would they get buildings, technology, decent teachers?
But the oddest thing to me is why any real conservative would think it’s a good idea to give huge amounts of taxpayer money to a school that doesn’t have to tell anyone what it does with that money, doesn’t have to test students, and doesn’t have to report how students perform even if they do test them. How is that consistent with conservative principles of fiscal responsiblity?
I don’t want my tax dollars going either to fancy private schools where the parents don’t need it, or to upstart schools that can spend it however they want without telling me. Nobody in his right mind should.
By BIN News Editorial Staff on March 13th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
The simple fact is the voucher scam is dead in SC no matter how much of Howie’s carpetbugger money sic(k) willie pimps to promote it on this porn site.
Dead! Period! And in this economy – even more dead.
Just ask Jakie. He will tell you to your face.
BIN News Editorial Staff
Flair and Balanced
By Palmetto CPA on March 13th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
TerryB…
Of course, the voucher should be equivalent to the marginal per-student cost. I have no issue with that. I don’t think it’s a very simple equation because a large amount of per-pupil dollars are spent educating (or should I say attempting to educate) those children in need of “special help”. However I do agree that there needs to be an attempt at finding a reasonable amount per “typical” student, and a higher amount for “special needs” children (to vary depending on the extent of the need). Again, I’m all about a level playing field, not anti-voucher at all.
There is no doubt that there are people who do not have formal educational qualifications who would be far superior teachers to those currently in public school classrooms. However, currently they are unavailable for public school jobs because there are minimum educational requirements to get a teaching certificate. Those folks can, however, teach in private schools (and cost the private school significantly less, remember that in your $$$ per pupil!). Bottom line is private schools need to pull from the same pool of potential educators (and compete for them with their salaries/benefits!). As for homeschoolers, those standardized tests typically do not cover advanced topics which would require more education on the part of the teacher. Also keep in mind that parental involvement IS a huge indicator of future academic performance, and who is more involved than a homeschool parent? Homeschooling certainly has its place, but obviously public school student’s parents are not on that same level as far as participation and monitoring of their children.
As for standardized tests themselves, I agree that they’re largely useless. However they seem to be the favorite of the voucher crowd because they’re a great way to label failures in public ed. Dropout rates would be a poor indicator because they incentivize social promotion, cheapening degrees. Not to mention obviously private schools would do well because if a parent does not care about what school their child attends (public v. private) they probably won’t care about their child’s attendance at all.
Bottom line is that those who like to demonize public education seem to have their own agendas. There is a place for both public and private (and homeschool) in this state. However, if we are going to send tax dollars to both systems (which I reiterate, is not a bad idea), then both systems need to play by the same rules. It’s really just that simple.
disclaimer: I am a product of both public and private schools myself, and was fortunate to have parents who placed a high value on education.
By BIN News Editorial Staff on March 14th, 2009 at 12:39 am
Simple sic(k) willie. Vouchers are dead.
Howie knows it because Jakie told him so. You and your carpetbugger “buds” at Voice for Voucher Scams and SCRG know it too.
BTW. What happened to Putting Parents in Charge?
You guys are good (read: boring) at coming up with fake organizations.
Like Voice for Voucher Scams.
By explanation needed on March 14th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Fits, I’m not against school choice. But I believe Pat Hendrix makes a good point about existing private schools not opening their doors to the poor. How does your pro-choice plan address issues like that?
By BIN News Editorial Staff on March 14th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
explanation,
sic(k) willie can’t answer that because the voucher scam would only make things worse for the poor. They care not for those who cannot pay.
That is why vouchers are a scam.
They claim help for all.
But they speak with forked tongues.
They know vouchers are a scam.
BIN News Editorial Staff
Flair and Balanced
By Chloe on March 14th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Weez all knows thats dem skoolz are onlle as good as de chidrn’s pearents.
Crappie pearants equalls crappie skoolz.
Dont mattah how moch monie youz throws at dem.
By Scott on March 14th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Solid post. I read your post and then went online to read the actual school choice bill. It’s obvious that very few – if any – of the commenters have taken the time to read the bill.
First of all, there are no vouchers in this bill. It is all tax credits. Tax credits for individuals and for businesses.
Secondly, private schools now require more rigorous testing year in and year out that actually compares children to other children across the nation rather than comparing ourselves to ourselves.
Thirdly, this particular plan gives tax credits for only a portion of the state per pupil funds while the remainder of the state portion – and the local and federal funds stay where they are.
Fourthly, the private school where my child attends already opens their door to the poor and provides financial aid to assist. This particular plan uses a scholarship organization to give funds to the poor students to have access to other schools.
By Richard on March 14th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Agreed, Blacks in South Carolina suffer poor education because their families are in shambles. Look at all the irresposible black men sleeping with anything and anyone with a vagina. No personal responsibility. HIV rates raging! They are just not focused on education, but rather looking for an Obama handout . . .
By Adam on March 24th, 2009 at 11:33 am
By a combination of price and quality of the Ford has no equal:)
By Jay on July 8th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
As long as the Republican Party has bigotry in their national platform and their political leaders use race-baiting and religious bigotry as tools in their campaigns, their economic ideas will always be suspect and not fully appreciated even by fiscal conservative moderates who want the federal deficit reduced.