Home | About | Donate

Trump’s ‘School Choice’ Plan: Religious Fundamentalism At Taxpayer Expense


#1

Trump’s ‘School Choice’ Plan: Religious Fundamentalism At Taxpayer Expense

Jeff Bryant

President Donald Trump is being praised for a change in tone in his recent address to Congress, but his belligerent attitude toward public education hasn’t changed a bit.


#2

The Trump/Pence/Devious trinity will turn the US into a theocracy by 2020. Give Ted Cruz a little more power and the GOP will fully morph into the Murkin Taliban Party with these "leaders" becoming ayatollahs.


#3

If you want the rest of the story, Google H.R. 610. SCARY STUFF! This is the school funding bill working its way through the House while we are all distracted by the Sock Puppet-In-Chief. Heck, I'll just put it here:

"Choices in Education Act of 2017

This bill repeals the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and limits the authority of the Department of Education (ED) such that ED is authorized only to award block grants to qualified states.

The bill establishes an education voucher program, through which each state shall distribute block grant funds among local educational agencies (LEAs) based on the number of eligible children within each LEA's geographical area. From these amounts, each LEA shall: (1) distribute a portion of funds to parents who elect to enroll their child in a private school or to home-school their child, and (2) do so in a manner that ensures that such payments will be used for appropriate educational expenses.

To be eligible to receive a block grant, a state must: (1) comply with education voucher program requirements, and (2) make it lawful for parents of an eligible child to elect to enroll their child in any public or private elementary or secondary school in the state or to home-school their child.

No Hungry Kids Act

The bill repeals a specified rule that established certain nutrition standards for the national school lunch and breakfast programs. (In general, the rule requires schools to increase the availability of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat or fat free milk in school meals; reduce the levels of sodium, saturated fat, and trans fat in school meals; and meet children's nutritional needs within their caloric requirements.)"

That last bit seems to be directed at Michelle Obama. Petty enough for you?


#4

The ESEA of 1965 is the Federal Government's funding mechanism for US schools. Funding is currently divided into nine categories, Title I through Title IX. ALL WOULD BE ELIMINATED!


#5

Oh, ICK! Here's the link to the official tracker, where you can get alerts when there's any action:

Do note that this is different from the kind of program covered in the article. The bill was authored by Steve King of Iowa and cosponsored by Andy Harris (MD; yes, "Andy" is his official name), Trent Franks (AZ), and Pete Olson (TX) (all R, as if I need to say so). I don't see how any such can stand constitutional muster, but we'll have to follow them. Throwing out the entire 50yo structure of federal education regulation and funding is pretty extreme.


#6

Thanks, bkswrites, your HTML skills are better than mine.:sunglasses:


#7

I just copy and paste the URL line from my browser. You gave me the bill number.


#8

Do you think Trump's voucher plan would pay for Madrassas or is it for Chrstian fanatics only?


#9

Not on our watch they won't.


#10

The really ironic thing about giving people vouchers to take their children out of public schools because public schools are underperforming is that this is unconstitutional.

We used to have segregated schools. The Supreme Court ruled that this was fine so long as the schools were equal (Plessey v Ferguson). Of course, it was impossible to have separate but equal schools because wealthy whites had better schools for their children than did poor blacks.

The Supreme Court then ruled in Brown v Board of Education that separate schools are inherently unequal and schools must be desegregated.

Now we have the notion that people should be given vouchers to take their children out of underperforming public schools and put them in separate and unequal schools.


#11

Yes, I believe it is unconstitutional. I also wonder about the separation of the religion and state parts. The theocracy that DEVINE visualizes is only for Christians. However, we are a secular nation. Would Trump ( who probably is afraid of Russian investigation as well as tax returns also like to run as FIRST PASTOR? Give me a break. Parents have always had the choice to send their kids to private schools. This is a plot to defund public schools as well as deunionization. The governor of MA tried to do it by expansion of more charter schools ( which are scams) but that did not work as the measure was resoundedly defeated. That's what happens when a tea party governor tries to usurp power in a progressive state. Over 90% of kids in the US attend public schools, and many attend public universities. This is also a plot for wealthy people to get the taxpayers to fund their kiddies just like the taxpayers bailed out the elite banksters on Wall Street. The Trumpers who watch Fox News just believe whatever comes out of these people's holes.


#12

I wonder if vouchers could be used at Quaker or Mennonite schools.


#13

Praise the Lord and pass the propaganda


#14

This infuriates me. I DO NOT want my tax dollars given to the church.


#15

You will need a time machine to return to the era of separation of church and state, a firewall that has been eroding for three decades to the point that it is very porous..


#16

" a traditional educational model founded on Christian principles and values".

My understanding of Christian values is that they come from the work of Jesus Christ, who advocated that one could find God without the need of the High Priests of the day, as well as suggesting we take a socialistsic outlook towards helping our neighbours, both of which un-American notions got him crucified.


#17

Well, let's acknowledge JC was not American.


#18

"The" church? Which one would that be? It's no better to condemn than to hallow with a broad brush.


#19

Not condemning. Just do not want my tax dollars funding religious organizations. It is bad enough we give massive tax benefits. Its in the constitution. Separation of church and state. No money to hateful sky-gods.


#20

My point is that not all churches, let alone all communities of faith, are "hateful." Please narrow your brush, no matter what it's doing.