A sitting President cannot choose to garner votes at the
expense of educating children; I cannot vote for Obama, reason #2.
The Obama administration is once again standing with
education special interest groups and against low-income children in
Washington, D.C. His 2013 budget request zeros out funding for the highly
successful D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which was revived last year
thanks to the hard work of Speaker John Boehner and the thousands of D.C.
families who received scholarships to attend a private school of choice.
The D.C. OSP has been highly successful. According to
federally-mandated evaluations of the program, student achievement has
increased, and graduation rates of voucher students have increased
significantly. While graduation rates in D.C. Public Schools hover around 55
percent, students who used a voucher to attend private school had a 91 percent
graduation rate.
And at $8,000, the
vouchers are a bargain compared to the estimated $18,000 spent per child by
D.C. Public Schools.
Our President choses Union votes over children. To use a Democratic phrase thrown around with
heft and vigor, "why does he hate children?" Our President, Obama, chose to side with the
teacher's unions instead of kids, why?
Because he was more concerned about votes than about children
learning....about children learning and graduating like never before. School choice is important; choice is
important. I would go so far as to say,
his supporters want the choice to abort babies but not the choice for
school? I do not understand this line of
thinking. The power of the Union cannot
be held higher than the customer it serves.
DC area teachers in public schools are not offering or serving an
education of a required value; they are serving an inferior product. What is more, they are using their power to
tell parents and children that they care less about teaching well and more
about money and protection from the rigors of the life we in the private sector
must endure. Teachers are supposed to be
providing a product to the children placed in front of them; knowledge,
education, learning. When a better
system comes along, one with proven results, how can anyone go against it? Especially if parents are demanding it: 9000 applicants for 3000 seats.
We are not talking about eliminating teachers. We are not talking about getting rid of schools. We are not talking about firing everyone and hiring new teachers. We are not even talking about getting rid of even one teacher. We are simply talking about providing an alternative choice for parents and kids to best enable them to learn and prosper. Is that not the foundation of education in America? Providing a sound mechanism for children to learn, grow and graduate? Well, "Johnny" can't read and his parents would like an alternative. They want to use their tax money to better help their children be successful in this world, to better enable them to be productive members of this country.
Why Mr. President is that bad? Why are you against it?
What reason could President Obama have to decline the
funding in his 2013 budget for the DC school scholarship program? Could it be performance? No, as we have shown the voucher program increased graduation rates in the DC area.
Could it be that President Obama feels that children should take their Government education and have no say in it? I would be surprised at that and to note his children do not go to public schools.
Could it be that DC schools are great? No problems, no violence, no issues; nothing but great teaching? Not likely, have you looked into test scores? Graduation rates?
How about this, President Obama cares more about the Unions and what they want than he does about your children and mine. He cares more about votes and staying in power than he does for the improvement in education and the better teaching, in safer environments for our children.
No, I cannot vote for any politician that cares more about
power than he does about the citizen.
No comments:
Post a Comment