Not sure about the ad valorem part, but they would definitely lose the MDE part because that is based on Average Daily Attendance.
How will the new MS freedom eduction bill affect public/private school sports, teachers ect?
- Thread starter bulldoghair
- Start date
100% a right. Guaranteed by statute law (several of them) rooted in the 14th amendment as well as established case law.
There was an LA times article when the data first came out where the reporter basically dissed the entire thing based on the same arguments bulldoghair posed. He then did a follow up article about a month later where he said he had actually looked at the data. His new conclusion was yes Mississippi's improvement is real. Does anyone think for a second that other States would not be raising holy hell if Mississippi was playing statistical games? Instead, they are trying to copy what we are doing. The improvement is real. The challenge is to maintain it and move it forward into the upper grades.
Yes, it is. What does that have to do with the right to education? It serves to guarantee citizenship, due process and equal protection. I'm genuinely asking what does that have to do with the right to education because I could be missing something.
In the really bad districts in the short term, not much will change for the students that don't get out. They'll continue to be stuck without a good option if their parents can't find a better alternative. In the medium term, presumably you'll see more schools like Delta Streets academy pop up to provide a viable alternative once they're not having to beg, scrape, and borrow. In the more populated areas, you'll have real options. In the sparsely populated areas, it's going to be more hit or miss, but that's a function of not having the population to support options, whether it's public or private.
It's not the poor/bad districts that will be potentially hurt. It will be the ones that are okayish. Haven't been given up on by parents, but maybe they have a better option, but not one that's better by enough to cover the cost of paying taxes and full private school or whatever tuition. Good districts won't be hurt unless they fail to compete. Bad districts won't really be hurt, but some students in those districts will get an absolute life line, and mediocre school districts will have to up their game or they will lose students.
It's a "privilege" for the purposes of the 14th Amendment. Education is not a right under the federal constitution, but to the extent it is provided, it is subject to equal protection. Because of that, people get confused and think it is a right under the 14th amendment.
I think one fear is if a bigger district with maybe bigger facilities than your typical 1A or 2A schools suddenly has a mass exodus of all that funding because a ton of their students have left, how long will they be able to afford to keep the lights on?
To me it seems like the initial wave of whoever moves would be one adjustment and then you kinda have to wait a few years to see the trickle down effect on the schools that lose kids. If some of those schools eventually shutdown, well the kids that are still there gotta go somewhere.
They could become a further drain on their dying community.
They could pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
Or they could take the bootstrap and figure out how to whupsomeass with it.
So much promise. So many possibilities.
Hard to do when you're taking the funding away from an already struggling school district.
The statutes guaranteeing the right to a free appropriate public education as well as case law establishing it are rooted and based on equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. As you know “protection” doesn’t just mean safety, but the right to have laws apply equally to everyone. Also of note on the question of “it’s not a right if it’s not explicitly in the constitution” is the 9th amendment which explicitly destroys that line of reasoning.
I haven't seen the wildly successful examples. It will absolutely do just what you said.
It's damnnear impossible if not absolutely so. But this is what they are expected to be able to do by those who've been born with a silver spoon in their mouth and those who have no 17n clue.
That's why I'm pulling for the whupsomeass option.
It's a lot cleaner than when we just literally took public school funds and applied them to private schools post-integration. Give us a few decades and we can figure out any loophole...this is literally the same thing dressed up as school choice.
Where is this happening? Didn't happen to me or my kids in public school. Any specific examples beyond scary stories told around the campfire?
Yeah, we used to have this crazy idea of collective good. Stupid us.
I don't know. I can see some good arguments against SNAP, but being against it because some of the food might be provided by private grocery stores seems like a weird argument. Even weirder if you pair it with, "you can only go to the government run grocery store nearest you, and if it's dysfunctional, you'll just have to move or do without. But probably been dysfunctional for slightly less than three decades, maybe four at the most, so we will probably figure out how to make it functional any day now."
Yep. The more I think about this, it will mean nothing for public. It's all about private. Even the possible exemption on property taxes is cleaner than this choice voucher stuff.
No such thing as a government-run grocery store, so kinda makes this a horse of a different color.
No such thing as a government run grocery store now, but the government used to distribute food directly to needy recipients before moving to food stamps. People didn’t let the horror of a private grocery store receiving money make them act callously towards the poor people stuck with crappy government provided food. And that food was actually perfectly adequate as far as I know, unlike a lot of schools.
"And that food was actually perfectly adequate as far as I know"
They were generally good quality and called commodities and a lot of people would sell them as quick as they got their hands on them........cheap.
Update: the bill only passed the House by a 60-58 margin. Seems unlikely it makes it through the Senate as currently written.
that was always a given. that 400 some odd page monstrosity was never getting through the Senate
I am on disability. My taxes have gone down almost 75% in Texas during that time.
That is not the same for taxes in general.
That is not the same for taxes in general.
Where exactly will the 2 new multi-billion dollar Amazon data centers be located? What school districts will or could those people/families with those type of jobs reside in? Are they good public school districts? Just wondering if this bill could be a push from some lawmakers because of all this or not.
So finally took a brief look at what is being proposed, and unless I looked at a different bill than what everybody is talking about, this is a nothing burger even if it passes.
Our "universal" school choice will be for 12,500 students, with preference given by household income. Goes up to 20,000 students over the next three years. So something like 5-6% at max might get it, and to the extent it's over subscribed, the poorest households get preference (not that higher income households can't get it, just not if poorer households want to use it).
Not that it's not huge for the up to 20k students that get it. That will be a lifeline for parents in some of the worst districts. I get that the government run school fanatics view any choice as the camel's nose under the tent, but the objections just look insanely overwrought. They are that worried about 3-6% of students in the state having a choice outside of public that they don't now have?
Our "universal" school choice will be for 12,500 students, with preference given by household income. Goes up to 20,000 students over the next three years. So something like 5-6% at max might get it, and to the extent it's over subscribed, the poorest households get preference (not that higher income households can't get it, just not if poorer households want to use it).
Not that it's not huge for the up to 20k students that get it. That will be a lifeline for parents in some of the worst districts. I get that the government run school fanatics view any choice as the camel's nose under the tent, but the objections just look insanely overwrought. They are that worried about 3-6% of students in the state having a choice outside of public that they don't now have?
No public money to private entities ayy?? May want to think that thru before posting something as stupid as that
Well, if you are referring to HB 2, it will mess up a bunch.
First, local funds don't transfer with the student. Public to Public transfers cannot be blocked, but can be denied by the district they are transferring to.
State funds would transfer, but it would put a large strain on all districts as the state funds are barely 50% of the cost to educate each student.
Private schools would receive those state funds from students that decided to go there. Public to private still cannot be blocked.
It eliminates all funding for PreK. Which everyone knows, money spent on PreK is worth 20:1 what it is to High School Students. PreK kids do better in almost every metric on average versus kids that wasn't in PreK.
Mississippi is different due to the amount of money they receive from the state and the lack of money they get from their tax base.