Tell These Senators The Stench Of Failure Must Go

By G.L. on April 27th, 2009 at 6:47 pm

I don’t see anyway this has the votes. I’d love to see it pass but, I can’t imagine a majority of those senators voting for it.

By Phillip Branton on April 27th, 2009 at 7:31 pm

Well,…

I’ll …..EMAIL

but … what have they done to benefit ANYONE..?? Its OK for LAWYERS to have their OWN practice …BUT ~~~ Teachers…~~ ?? Can you imagine teachers actually looking at themselves as Lawyers and their pupils as CLIENTS..???

This is all about the EDU-industrial-construction complex and their grip on the TAX payers wallets..!!! No different than LOAN SHARKS…!!!

When parents organize to circumvent and set up an educational BARTERING system….look OUT !!! The Cyber equalizer is gaining ground and this STATUS Quo better wake UP…!!!!

By RON PAUL on April 27th, 2009 at 9:56 pm

No more public schools…no more government dumbing down..take bids from private educators,save money and read the constitution!!!

By BIN News Editorial Staff on April 27th, 2009 at 11:37 pm

The stench is from Howie’s voucher scam. Everyone knows vouchers would only leave those who need help the most even further behind. But voucher clowns are not interested helping all children and should be ashamed of yourselves.

S.C. taxpayers and our Legislators have seen through the scam. That’s why it has failed and failed and failed. That’s why vouchers are dead in S.C.

If you really want to help education and help all children, then sign this:
http://www.goodbyeminimallyadequate.com/

Tell our Legislators that the first step in helping education and all children is to raise the pathetic minimally adequate standard.

BIN News Editorial Staff
Flair and Balance

By Old Bike Dude on April 28th, 2009 at 7:22 am

Fits, I need your reference on $11,000 per child spending. Seems a bit high, $8,500 should be more realistic. Local private schools that actually do a fair job at educating students are running $11,500-$15,000 per year. And at that rate they lack the facilities and activities of public schools.
When white folks quit crying about public education and get off their asses and get involved, then education will improve. Spending their way into segregation is not the issue. The only peeps that could be for the undoing of public education would be those who…well…make a lot of money from it’s demise. Now who would that be, I wonder?

By GGIH on April 28th, 2009 at 10:18 am

Can you back up the claim that low income schools in SC are getting around $13,000 from all sources? Cause I think that’s Voice for School Choice bs.

You know what else never happened? That any public school anywhere was ever improved by “competition” from private schools. That’s why lots and lots of people who supported the idea initially have concluded that it doesn’t work.

By baker on April 28th, 2009 at 11:10 am

Angelina, I have no way of knowing if your assertions are correct. However, I would think that if they are it’s largely because other states’ choice programs are targeted at the poor primarily, if not exclusively. What is being pushed in SC now has no income limits, if I’m not mistaken, and would eventually give money to people who already have their children in private school — including to some of South Carolina wealthiest people, again, my reading of the proposal is correct.

I also refute this “one-size-fits-all” rhetoric. There may be places where this rings true to some extent at certain grade levels. But most public schools I know of offer a very wide range of courses and services and extra-curricular activities. Within the same high school system, I think you’ll often see kids in a metal-working class, learning a trade that can lead to a high-paying and stable career….and also kids in an AP class who are bound for Ivy League universities.

Now, we’ve GOT to figure out how to better reach those youngsters who don’t find their way and who lack direction. The “average private school” in South Carolina — whether its tuition is $4,000 or $14,000 — is unwilling to take on those kids.

By baker on April 28th, 2009 at 11:41 am

I say this talk about the fancy building is a ruse. It’s being presented, in my opinion, as if the so-called “educrats” are literally taking per-pupil funding and using that money to fancy up buildings. This is not how it works.

First of all, most major building projects are funded by voter-approved bond referendums….Gene and others may not like it, but when folks vote to improve their school facilities, I see nothing wrong with it.

Also, the legislature approved a large pot of money some years back for school construction and renovations. Perhaps the education “establishment” was pushing the legislature to get that money….sure….and I would guess that improvements were very much needed in many school systems around the state. But, either way, it isn’t like this money was taken out of regular school district budgets.

Finally, while I think that well-adjusted kids who SHOW UP TO SCHOOL PREPARED TO LEARN can do fine in almost any setting, and while I’m not a huge fan of the “mega-school” complexes, I do wonder why it’s so wrong to want to provide a first-class facility for children. People pay a lot of money to have nice houses for their children to live in and drive nice cars. Why would those people want their kids to then go spend 7-8 hours a day in a dumpy, drab school building? My guess is that most parents — whether their children are in public school or private school — want their children to be in buildings that are comfortable, safe, and that have some “extras.”

By BIN News on April 28th, 2009 at 9:23 pm

We certainly struck a nerve of truth! Only that would prompt such an outpouring of porno from FITS Scam Gals and Angelin@ss.