Take Advantage of Texas Open Primary Laws

[CardinalBacker]

16 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

True, but if a school district is failing to provide a proper education, the option to take that funding to provide a better opportunity for your kids is not a bad idea.  

I think the real purpose of the legislation is out there. We keep thinking in terms of kids getting better educations, avoiding liberal-leaning teaching, etc… and we’re focusing on middle class kids. 
 

What I think it’s really about is higher income families with kids in private schools… people whose annual tax bill looks nothing like yours or mine. Let’s say that I’m a wealthy family man with three kids in private school AND I pay 8k a year in school taxes on my homestead… it’s appraised at $500k. But I’ve also got a business and a handful of rental properties as well…. What’s more annoying than paying $30k a year for tuition to send my 3 kids to private school (so they don’t have to attend with “those” kids), then having to write another check to cover $30k to cover my school tax bill. 
 

So I call my good friends (I’ve got their cell numbers because I also contribute to campaigns) and we cook up a scheme whereby rich guys like me can get a break on my school tax bill by way a school voucher that I can use for tuition for my entitled brats. 
 

It’s not about quality of education, it’s about a break for rich people (who make generous campaign contributions) to send their kids to private schools and get an offset. 
 

That struggling single mom still won’t be able to send her kids anywhere.

If the powers that be really wanted better educations, they’d force all schools to accept all students. People could send their kids wherever they wanted and bad schools would be forced to get better or close because the kids all went to better schools. 

[LumRaiderFan]

20 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

I think the real purpose of the legislation is out there. We keep thinking in terms of kids getting better educations, avoiding liberal-leaning teaching, etc… and we’re focusing on middle class kids. 
 

What I think it’s really about is higher income families with kids in private schools… people whose annual tax bill looks nothing like yours or mine. Let’s say that I’m a wealthy family man with three kids in private school AND I pay 8k a year in school taxes on my homestead… it’s appraised at $500k. But I’ve also got a business and a handful of rental properties as well…. What’s more annoying than paying $30k a year for tuition to send my 3 kids to private school (so they don’t have to attend with “those” kids), then having to write another check to cover $30k to cover my school tax bill. 
 

So I call my good friends (I’ve got their cell numbers because I also contribute to campaigns) and we cook up a scheme whereby rich guys like me can get a break on my school tax bill by way a school voucher that I can use for tuition for my entitled brats. 
 

It’s not about quality of education, it’s about a break for rich people (who make generous campaign contributions) to send their kids to private schools and get an offset. 
 

That struggling single mom still won’t be able to send her kids anywhere.

If the powers that be really wanted better educations, they’d force all schools to accept all students. People could send their kids wherever they wanted and bad schools would be forced to get better or close because the kids all went to better schools. 

lol, I don't think it's simply about the big bad rich guys.

Why wouldn't the struggling mom be able to send her kids to a better school is she had a voucher?

[CardinalBacker]

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

lol, I don't think it's simply about the big bad rich guys.

Why wouldn't the struggling mom be able to send her kids to a better school is she had a voucher?

Because she still can’t. A voucher won’t cover rides to school (wherever that may be), uniforms, the entirety of tuition, they don’t have free lunch programs, etc, etc… 

A voucher won’t help a mom in a rough place get her genius into a a private school that doesn’t exist in that area. But it will help that guy in river oaks with the tuition bill on his three kids that he’s already paying. 
 

You just have to ask yourself “why?” Why are they fighting so hard for this program? What’s the motivation? We all agree that anything that strips money from public schools is a bad thing, right? If the schools lose 5% of their students to private schools, they’re going to have their funding cut, right? But their expenses won’t go down. The only way for this to work is if we raise local taxes to subsidize them for the funds that the state is redirecting to the voucher program… that’s what no one wants to explain. 
 

You just have to ask yourself “why are they fighting so hard,” and the answer is this… everybody complains “why should I have to pay school taxes? I don’t even have kids in school!” The fat cats got somebody to listen, and “school choice” became the cause that politicians have to get done. 

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

Because she still can’t. A voucher won’t cover rides to school (wherever that may be), uniforms, the entirety of tuition, they don’t have free lunch programs, etc, etc… 

A voucher won’t help a mom in a rough place get her genius into a a private school that doesn’t exist in that area. But it will help that guy in river oaks with the tuition bill on his three kids that he’s already paying. 
 

You just have to ask yourself “why?” Why are they fighting so hard for this program? What’s the motivation? We all agree that anything that strips money from public schools is a bad thing, right? If the schools lose 5% of their students to private schools, they’re going to have their funding cut, right? But their expenses won’t go down. The only way for this to work is if we raise local taxes to subsidize them for the funds that the state is redirecting to the voucher program… that’s what no one wants to explain. 
 

You just have to ask yourself “why are they fighting so hard,” and the answer is this… everybody complains “why should I have to pay school taxes? I don’t even have kids in school!” The fat cats got somebody to listen, and “school choice” became the cause that politicians have to get done. 

Is your tin foil hat shaped like a Stetson?

[CardinalBacker]

41 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Is your tin foil hat shaped like a Stetson?

It has to be to fit over this halo. 

[SmashMouth]

18 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

True, but if a school district is failing to provide a proper education, the option to take that funding to provide a better opportunity for your kids is not a bad idea.  

Well, Lumberton is not failing to provide a proper education. Neither are the majority of the schools in our area where I live.

This is a political move with the ruse of being used to keep liberal indoctrination away from our kids. While I agree with keeping our kids from being led down the happy blue path, I don't agree with the way they are trying to do it. Texas Conservatives (of which I am) are simply doing this to garner support from the right. If you think they really give two craps about your kids, my kids, any kids, then you are gullible (which I don't believe you are). You're a smart guy. I agree with the vast majority of things you post.

We are being given a poor solution which will raise taxes in the end and could possibly be harmful to a lot of middle class families on down to the lower class. There can be other ways to do it than school vouchers. From a guy that doesn't like paying any more taxes than I have to, I am definitely against it. I am also against fixing one problem by causing many more problems.

[SmashMouth]

15 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

Because she still can’t. A voucher won’t cover rides to school (wherever that may be), uniforms, the entirety of tuition, they don’t have free lunch programs, etc, etc… 

A voucher won’t help a mom in a rough place get her genius into a a private school that doesn’t exist in that area. But it will help that guy in river oaks with the tuition bill on his three kids that he’s already paying. 
 

You just have to ask yourself “why?” Why are they fighting so hard for this program? What’s the motivation? We all agree that anything that strips money from public schools is a bad thing, right? If the schools lose 5% of their students to private schools, they’re going to have their funding cut, right? But their expenses won’t go down. The only way for this to work is if we raise local taxes to subsidize them for the funds that the state is redirecting to the voucher program… that’s what no one wants to explain. 
 

You just have to ask yourself “why are they fighting so hard,” and the answer is this… everybody complains “why should I have to pay school taxes? I don’t even have kids in school!” The fat cats got somebody to listen, and “school choice” became the cause that politicians have to get done. 

Agreed from start to finish.

[LumRaiderFan]

12 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Well, Lumberton is not failing to provide a proper education. Neither are the majority of the schools in our area where I live.

This is a political move with the ruse of being used to keep liberal indoctrination away from our kids. While I agree with keeping our kids from being led down the happy blue path, I don't agree with the way they are trying to do it. Texas Conservatives (of which I am) are simply doing this to garner support from the right. If you think they really give two craps about your kids, my kids, any kids, then you are gullible (which I don't believe you are). You're a smart guy. I agree with the vast majority of things you post.

We are being given a poor solution which will raise taxes in the end and could possibly be harmful to a lot of middle class families on down to the lower class. There can be other ways to do it than school vouchers. From a guy that doesn't like paying any more taxes than I have to, I am definitely against it. I am also against fixing one problem by causing many more problems.

Agree, Lumberton is not failing to provide a good education, and they won't be affected by vouchers.  Gotta look at what is happening in other school districts that will get here eventually.

I never approach anything with the mindset that government cares about me or mine, that's why I don't understand why anyone has a problem with taking away their decision and giving it to the individual, as in vouchers, where I want to spend money on my kid's education.

If you have a better way to keep a poorly run school district in check than simple competition (vouchers), I'd like to hear it.

Please don't say the TEA, more government is never the answer.

[Big girl]

On 3/7/2024 at 2:55 PM, CardinalBacker said:

I think the real purpose of the legislation is out there. We keep thinking in terms of kids getting better educations, avoiding liberal-leaning teaching, etc… and we’re focusing on middle class kids. 
 

What I think it’s really about is higher income families with kids in private schools… people whose annual tax bill looks nothing like yours or mine. Let’s say that I’m a wealthy family man with three kids in private school AND I pay 8k a year in school taxes on my homestead… it’s appraised at $500k. But I’ve also got a business and a handful of rental properties as well…. What’s more annoying than paying $30k a year for tuition to send my 3 kids to private school (so they don’t have to attend with “those” kids), then having to write another check to cover $30k to cover my school tax bill. 
 

So I call my good friends (I’ve got their cell numbers because I also contribute to campaigns) and we cook up a scheme whereby rich guys like me can get a break on my school tax bill by way a school voucher that I can use for tuition for my entitled brats. 
 

It’s not about quality of education, it’s about a break for rich people (who make generous campaign contributions) to send their kids to private schools and get an offset. 
 

That struggling single mom still won’t be able to send her kids anywhere.

If the powers that be really wanted better educations, they’d force all schools to accept all students. People could send their kids wherever they wanted and bad schools would be forced to get better or close because the kids all went to better schools. 

I agree wholeheartedly