Father James Altman: You cannot be Catholic & a Democrat. Period

  • Thread starter Thread starter fide
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ender said:
So charter schools provide fewer services, and you want them only in poor neighborhoods? The fact remains, however: if charter schools only receive 75% as much per pupil as public schools, then the extra 25% remains with the school district, so they will have even more to spend on the students in the public system.
Click to expand...
But when the charter schools take mostly high-achieving students, that leaves the public schools with a higher proportion of special ed needs, thus increasing the need for public school funds. History has shown that when charter schools appear, local public school districts are negatively impacted financially. Certainly that is true in the short run, since it is not easy to reduce the fixed cost, such as buildings, without closing schools, which makes public school even less convenient. Charter schools enjoy all the benefits of public subsidies without the same responsibilities. That cannot be overlooked. But if charter schools are so great, what is the reluctance to build them in poor neighborhoods? Remember, the subject of charter schools was introduced as a way to give kids in poorer neighbors an choice to get a quality education. Building a charter school in Beverley Hills does not offer much of a choice for kids in Central Alameda.
 
I find it ironic that, in many cases, the charter schools set up in former public school buildings.

As Leaf said, allowing the motivated parents to enter a lottery or whatever to get into a charter school leaves the public schools with an even tougher row to hoe.

My question is, why aren’t we just improving the public schools?
 
LeafByNiggle said:
But when the charter schools take mostly high-achieving students, that leaves the public schools with a higher proportion of special ed needs, thus increasing the need for public school funds.
Click to expand...
Let’s see if the math bears that out. Assume this:
41,000 kids in school district, taxes provide $10k/student: $410M budget
1000 special needs kids @ $20k/student
40,000 regular needs kids @ $9,750/student

Charter schools enroll 5000
@$7,500/pupil they take $37.5M from the district.

New (public) district budget is $410M - $37.5M = 372.5M
1000 special needs students: $20M
Leaving $352.5M for 35K students = $10,071

Now I have no idea how all this works out in real life. My numbers are all completely speculative, but the point is it is not obvious how charter schools “take” money from the public schools. In my example, which may be totally wide of the mark, but it at least seems reasonable, the public system ends up with more money per pupil than it had before.
PaulinVA said:
My question is, why aren’t we just improving the public schools?
Click to expand...
That’s a conversation you can have with the teachers unions.
 
Last edited:
Ender said:
40.png
PaulinVA:
My question is, why aren’t we just improving the public schools?
Click to expand...
That’s a conversation you can have with the teachers unions.
Click to expand...
To blame the teacher’s unions for poor school performance is disingenuous at best. The vast majority of teachers are highly trained, highly motivated and caring professionals who are not paid at anywhere near the rate that equivalently credentialed professionals who work the same hours and under the same stress earn. The main problems with public schools, in my personal opinion, are administrators who cannot administer properly and parents who treat the teachers like indentured servants for their children.
 
whatistrue said:
To blame the teacher’s unions for poor school performance is disingenuous at best.
Click to expand...
I’m willing to spread the blame, and I readily accept that administrators have their fair share to account for. As for my comment, the teachers and their union are two very different groups. My finger was pointed at the union, not the teachers.
 
Ender said:
My finger was pointed at the union, not the teachers.
Click to expand...
You shouldn’t be pointing fingers at anyone without all the information. I have seen many cases where the union is the only thing keeping teachers from being seriously mistreated, and even then it doesn’t always work.
 
Last edited:
Could a Catholic support these Democratic principles? Not this one.
Securing Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice
Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice.

We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should be able to access high-quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion.

We will repeal the Title X domestic gag rule and restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood, which provides vital preventive and reproductive health care for millions of people, especially low-income people, and people of color, and LGBTQ+ people, including in underserved areas. Democrats oppose and will fight to overturn federal and state laws that create barriers to reproductive health and rights.

We will repeal the Hyde Amendment, and protect and codify the right to reproductive freedom. We condemn acts of violence, harassment, and intimidation of reproductive health providers, patients, and staff. We will address the discrimination and barriers that inhibit meaningful access to reproductive health care services, including those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, income, disability, geography, and other factors. Democrats oppose restrictions on medication abortion care that are inconsistent with the most recent medical and scientific evidence and that do not protect public health.

We recognize that quality, affordable comprehensive health care; medically accurate, LGBTQ+ inclusive, age-appropriate sex education; and the full range of family planning services are all essential to ensuring that people can decide if, when, and how to start a family.

We are proud to be the party of the Affordable Care Act, which prohibits discrimination in health care on the basis of sex and requires insurers to cover prescription contraceptives at no cost. These efforts have significantly reduced teen and unintended pregnancies by making it easier to decide whether, when, and how to have a child.

We believe that a person’s health should always come first. Democrats will protect the rights of all people to make personal health care decisions, and will reject the Trump Administration’s use of broad exemptions to allow medical providers, employers, and others to discriminate.
Click to expand...
2020 Democratic Party Platform
 
LeafByNiggle said:
The fact is that the quality of education is driven by small class size, more teachers, more qualified teachers, buildings that are not falling apart.
Click to expand...
Agreed. At older ages I would say athletics as well.
MagdalenaRita said:
Why shouldn’t a parent who doesn’t want their child to stay in one district have a choice to attend another for the benefit of their child.
Click to expand...
IDK where you live, but where I live a parent 100% has this choice…you just have to get them there if you decide to open enroll.
MagdalenaRita said:
Sometimes they want to be in a different district for reasons other than the building or class size
Click to expand...
Ya…most of the time it’s sports. We were teetering that line for a while.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Well, rather than speculate, consider real life facts:
Click to expand...
These aren’t actually real life facts. This is a study that addresses possibilities.

Charter schools can increase educational costs either by causing an increase in revenues devoted to education or by causing a reduction in services.…The additional costs borne by taxpayers might be justified by increased educational benefits, but nonetheless can be conceptualized as additional costs.

Higher costs might be justified by providing a better education…but we’re still gonna count this against charter schools because costs went up.

Charter schools can generate excess costs for a number of reasons. First, charter schools can be expected to attract some number of students from private schools…

Another bad effect of charter schools is that they are of sufficient quality to attract students back from private schools where the district was getting a free ride because the parents were picking up the entire cost of their education. Well that can’t be good.

While class size reductions may be beneficial to students, the benefits generated might not be sufficient to offset the costs to taxpayers or the reductions in other areas of the school budget required to finance the reduced class-sizes.

Well darn, another benefit that may not be free. Those darn charters.

Closing a school in a district is a politically contentious undertaking…

I think we can begin to understand the opposition to charter schools.

… in many states, districts are required to provide several services for charter school students including transportation, special education evaluation services, and health services. The costs of these services might be higher…

Transportation., special ed, health care - weren’t these the things you said they didn’t provide? I don’t think this study proves that charter schools financially harm the public system; all it suggests is that they might. They also indicate that they might improve the education students receive even in the public system. I certainly don’t see the big down side you’ve been alluding to.
 
Ender said:
… in many states, districts are required to provide several services for charter school students including transportation, special education evaluation services, and health services. The costs of these services might be higher…

Transportation., special ed, health care - weren’t these the things you said they didn’t provide?
Click to expand...
Note that the quote said “many states”. The average you cited is an average over those states AND the states that don’t set those requirements on charter schools.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Note that the quote said “many states”. The average you cited is an average over those states AND the states that don’t set those requirements on charter schools.
Click to expand...
This again makes the perfect the enemy of the good. You don’t like charter schools for some reason other than you have so far introduced, and despite the fact that they appear on the whole a benefit to children you disapprove of giving parents, rich and poor, the opportunity to give their kids a better education.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
They appear to benefit children in the neighborhoods where they are placed, not in the neighborhoods where they aren’t.
Click to expand...
This is a bit like condemning a factory that provides 1000 jobs because there are 2000 people who want them. Where is the sense in ignoring the good that is done because more good needs to be done? Should no child go to college because all who would like to go cannot? Should we not vaccinate any child because we cannot vaccinate all of them? Or should we rather accept what improvements we can make now and hope to make more in the future?
 
Ender said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
They appear to benefit children in the neighborhoods where they are placed, not in the neighborhoods where they aren’t.
Click to expand...
This is a bit like condemning a factory that provides 1000 jobs because there are 2000 people who want them.
Click to expand...
It is more like condemning a factory that provides 1000 better jobs to people who already have good jobs rather than provide jobs for people who have no jobs at all.
Where is the sense in ignoring the good that is done because more good needs to be done?
Click to expand...
Because the point at which charter schools entered the discussion was as a way to give kids in poor neighborhoods a choice for a better education. Just go back and look. What this latest turn does is deflect away from that whole discussion and change it to “why not give rich kids a better education?” However one answers that question, it says nothing about the original question that prompted the introduction of this side topic.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Because the point at which charter schools entered the discussion was as a way to give kids in poor neighborhoods a choice for a better education. Just go back and look. What this latest turn does is deflect away from that whole discussion and change it to “why not give rich kids a better education?” However one answers that question, it says nothing about the original question that prompted the introduction of this side topic.
Click to expand...
Given that less than 1/3 of the kids attending charter schools are white, where is the evidence that charters are not serving the very communities you claim they are avoiding? Where is the data to support your claim? Demonstrate that your charges are not simply your personal inventions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top