But apparently, that's just me.
The sudden buzz over the relative value of senior year stems from a recent proposal by state Sen. Chris Buttars that Utah make a dent in its budget gap by eliminating the 12th grade.Most conservatives don't like public schools, which they perceive as a breeding ground for liberals; the idea that younger people tend to be more liberal and have been since the beginning of time isn't the issue, as far as they're concerned. Anyway, the most important thing is to ensure that the rich hold on to their historic tax cuts. If it means whittling away at education until the typical Peruvian kid is more knowlegable than one of our'n, then so be it. The rich kids will still be able to afford school, right?
The notion quickly gained some traction among supporters who agreed with the Republican's assessment that many seniors frittered away their final year of high school, but faced vehement opposition from other quarters, including in his hometown of West Jordan.
"My parents are against it," Williams said. "All the teachers at the school are against it. I'm against it."
Buttars has since toned down the idea, suggesting instead that senior year become optional for students who complete their required credits early. He estimated the move could save up to $60 million, the Salt Lake Tribune reported.
The proposal comes as the state faces a $700-million shortfall and reflects the creativity -- or desperation -- of lawmakers.
"You're looking at these budget gaps where lawmakers have to use everything and anything to try to resolve them," said Todd Haggerty, a policy associate with the National Conference of State Legislatures. "It's left lawmakers with very unpopular decisions."
7 comments:
"...the idea that younger people tend to be more liberal..."
What a sort of... well, RIDICULOUS comment! Conservatives aren't against public schools because KIDS are liberals! They are against them because the liberal establishment teachers and administrators are liberals!
Still, eliminating the 12th grade is pretty stupid... unless you are eliminating the whole system, just getting rid of one grade is nutty.
Still, conservatives are against liberals in schools, yes, but conservatives are not against the concept of schools. Not at all. They are for private industry taking on the schools. Competition is the key.
But above all conservatives are against ALL federal funding for schools. It is certainly un-Constitutional an violates the whole concept of local control.
The question is, Piker, why don;t you want your neighbors to have the power to administer their own children's education? Why are you against the right of the people to have a say in their government? I thought you lefties called yourselves the "Democrat Party"? Or is that just a smoke screen?
Man, forgive my misspellings. I did jury duty all day, had to wake up 4 hours early to go to the place and I'm tired as hell.
My neighbors don't have the power to administer their own children's education? Are there not private schools? Is there not home schooling?
What I want to know is why you guys are so dead set on denying education to poor kids. The last time we did that as a nation, all it got us was children taking the plum seamstress and meat packing jobs.
Sorry to hear about jury duty... if you get on a panel, I hope it's an entertaining case!
... again, no one wants to deny education to any poor kids. Show me where any... ANY conservative is saying they want poor kids to do without education. On the other had I CAN show you a liberal that wants to take all power over education away from parents, and local community leaders. His name is James Meeks and he's a Chicago "reverend" in the state government who wants to make all school decisions removed from local school boards and handed to a state agency. But Meeks is no different than any other left-winger. Few left-wingers want any one other than the state involved in anything. THAT is why they are socialists and commies. (And I wasn't picked for a jury, so I was released.)
You don't want to deny education to poor kids, just privatize the education system. In other words, either make government force poor people to pay for a private service or allow them to chose food and rent over education.
I don't blame you for not SAYING it, but that is the end result that you want.
Once again, you make a strawman argument. No one has ever said anything about making the poor pay for their education or they don't get one. Show me ONE conservative plan that has said such a thing. Show me one plan that would even cause such a thing.
It's not really a strawman argument, it's a slippery slope argument. You're familiar with it through the "death panel" provisions of the health care reform bill, or the notion that gay marriage will destroy all marriage.
Post a Comment