Sunday, April 19, 2009

Obama's Hypocrisy on DC Voucher Program

According to Shikha Dalmia writing in Forbes, Obama nixed D.C.'s successful school voucher program just as positive results were coming in.

The most blatant hypocrisy involves Obama's personal parental decisions. He chose to send his own daughters to Sidwell Friends, a private school among D.C.'s most exclusive institutions whose annual tuition runs around $30,000. If he felt so strongly that offering children an exit route would stymie the reform of public schools, then why not put his own daughters in one? Jimmy Carter did. This would not only please unions--prompting them to open up their war chest even more in the next elections--but also signal his resolve about reform. If he didn't, that's presumably because his daughters' futures are too precious to be sacrificed on the altar of politics. But, evidently, the futures of other children are not.

Incidentally, among the children who will have to return to public school once this program is scrapped are two of his daughter's schoolmates, who were using their vouchers to attend Sidwell. It's sad that Obama's message of hope and change doesn't include children like them.

13 Comments:

At 4/19/2009 2:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about the hypocrisy of the "free marketeers" who support a system of taxing the population to create supposedly free-market vouchers, when they don't support exactly the same idea with carbon trading schemes?

There is nothing beneficial about vouchers except that many confused libertarians support the idea because Milton Friedman came up with it. Well guess what guys, Friedman also came up with the withholding tax!!

 
At 4/19/2009 4:20 PM, Blogger Colin said...

Yes, except a recent Department of Education study that indicates voucher children perform at least as well -- if not better -- than public schools kids at a reduced cost there is nothing beneficial about them.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/04/03/dc-vouchers-better-results-at-a-quarter-the-cost/

Free marketers tend to support a carbon tax, not cap and trade, as it is more efficient.

And Milton Friedman also helped to push for the abolition of the draft -- what's your point?

 
At 4/19/2009 5:01 PM, Blogger aria said...

It's saddening to witness a professor of distinguish institution would resort to posting a drivel that you would usually expect of sloppy bloggers. Apparently that goes for the majority of drollery post on this blog.

 
At 4/19/2009 6:05 PM, Blogger 1 said...

"It's saddening to witness a professor of distinguish institution would resort to posting a drivel that you would usually expect of sloppy bloggers"...

What's truly pathetic is the inability of socialists like aria complaining but not offering a reason for the complaint...

Now this bit from anon @ 2:20 PM is just hilarious!

"How about the hypocrisy of the "free marketeers" who support a system of taxing the population to create supposedly free-market vouchers, when they don't support exactly the same idea with carbon trading schemes?'...

What the heck is this nonsense?!?!

Support a carbon trading scheme?!?!

Who but a fool buys into the man made global warming crapola?

 
At 4/19/2009 8:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Free marketers tend to support a carbon tax, not cap and trade, as it is more efficient."

A carbon tax is more efficient at collecting money.

Cap and trade is more efficient at meeting a given pollution goal.

RH, free marketer

 
At 4/19/2009 11:53 PM, Anonymous Jim Glass said...

Sweden's public schools are voucherized completely, 100%, everyone is very happy with it, even the schools unions, and vouchers have produced exactly the benefits that their proponents claimed.

I’m always amazed that US voucher advocates never point to this example of nationwide real-world success.

Sweden also has private accounts in Social Security, and has contracted out the operation of its urban mass transit systems to private firms, etc.

Sweden’s social-economic policy is in fact far too right-wing for US Democrats. I’m surprised that Krugman hasn’t denounced it as a Cato front.

 
At 4/20/2009 12:13 AM, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

> when they don't support exactly the same idea with carbon trading schemes?

What, are you actually claiming that any system of carbon trading vouchers is VOLUNTARY?

Because that's literally the only way to actually equate the two...

First off, most people who support vouchers would GREATLY PREFER getting government out of the education business ENTIRELY.

Any support for vouchers comes as a middle-ground compromise.

Second off, "carbon trading" is an attempt to "fix" a problem which hasn't actually been demonstrated to even exist. And I'm not going to go into proving that to you. This isn't the venue, even if it wasn't a complete waste of time.

The difference is pretty obvious -- there's no questiont there are school kids who need educations. There is a massive question about what need there is for a huge, expensive effort to "remove" something which hasn't been demonstrated to be causing a problem.

> what's your point?

It's on his head, but he usually wears a hat.

 
At 4/20/2009 12:16 AM, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

> It's saddening to witness a...

It's saddening to witness a brain-dead idiot posting a vacuous claim-filled accusatory blathering rather than attempting to actually make a relevant counterpoint and then justify/support it with reason and citation.

Actually, it's no surprise at all. We see it all the time around here.

Nice name... Is that short for Ariahead?

 
At 4/20/2009 12:21 AM, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

> Cap and trade is more efficient at meeting a given pollution goal.

Which, if CO2 were a useless, damaging pollutant and not a required, life-giving molecular compound, might be an appropriate response.

;-)

Ariahead: Note the difference -- he made a claim and attempted to justify it. I refuted the claim/justification with further reasoning. Now the ball is in his court to explain how my argument is somehow inaccurate, if he can.

Note how no mindless blathering was involved on either side.

That's how a dialogue is formed.

 
At 4/20/2009 4:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's good for any politician is obviously too good for the rest of us. Hypocrisy knows no bounds when it comes to politicians. Look at good, ole Teddy dying from brain cancer (is that ironic or what). He has benefitted from the best medical care in the world, but wants to put the rest of us under national healthcare. When politicans write legislation but exempt their noble a$$# from it, THAT'S HYPOCRISY.

 
At 4/20/2009 6:38 PM, Anonymous Ralph short said...

The bottom line with the public school system is it is about as efficient as congress. That is due to the fact congress controls it. It is not an educational system, it is a legal system.

The best thing we could do is abolish government schools and guaranteed, the test scores would go up.

 
At 5/06/2009 9:27 AM, Blogger lurk said...

Interesting concept ..
That is "about me" mentions a former membership to " Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a >>nonpartisan<<< research and public policy institute "
and you post starts with :
"The most blatant hypocrisy involves Obama's "
Hypocrisy on your part ?? No it cant be , you are a professor of economics ..
Oh , one more thing ,, Jimmy the Peanut farmer who is usually reserved for ridiculing the liberals all of a sudden became a
model citizen .. One more hypocrisy , Nahh just an empty drivel.

 
At 12/18/2009 3:16 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You guys are over reacting! The Demowits only support programs that don't work. Heaven forbid we bring a few African Americans out of the hood.

A few more tid bits of info. I found out after reading this story. The voucher program provided parents with a $7,500 tax credit to send their children to their choice of private schools. Guess how much money DC spends on each child per year? 13k, which makes perfect since because anytime you involve the government you need to add a minimum of 30% for waste, and a bunch of lazy bureaucrats. So, lets do some quick math. The DC schools spent nothing on this program because it was sponsored by the Feds, it cost the Fed. around 15 mil. Now, since the program won't be moving forward it looks like the DC schools are going to have to come up with an extra 25 mil., now we are making since from a Demowit perspective. Let us delete a program that is successful and changing the lives of many minorities living in poverty, and poor more money in a system that has been established not to work for over 60 years. Now your talking Demowit.

Now, let's talk about Jesus (Obama). I challenge the Obama's to enroll their daughters into DC's finest public schoosl. He is forcing over 1,900 children to go back to the fine public schools of DC. Are they not good enough for the Obama children? I mean, Obama seems like the type of leader that would lead by example, right. I put it you President Bull Shitter, you should let your daughters follow the same dream your enslaving upon these 1900 poor minorities children you claim to care so much about.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home