A survey of Oklahoma voters, commissioned and paid for by a self-described "conservative" think tank, finds that "nearly two in three Oklahoma voters support using tax dollars to choose the private or public school which best meets their child's needs" (Brandon Dutcher, OCPA Senior Vice-President). One survey question related to Education Savings Accounts (ESA) - A proposal has been made to give parents the chance to customize their child's education through Education Savings Accounts, or ESAs. With an ESA, the state puts the funds it would have spent on a child's behalf into a bank account the parent controls. The parent can then use these funds to purchase the education that best meets their child's needs from a wide variety of sources, including private schools, virtual schools, and institutions of higher education. Any funds not used in a school year could be carried over for future education, including college. Would you say that you support or oppose Oklahoma having a program like this one?
The proposal referred to (in the question) was undoubtedly House Bill 2003 - which was trotted out by voucher and privatization lawmakers during the 2015 general session. HB 2003 died in the House Common Education Committee on a 9 yes, 9 no, tie vote. Corporate Republicans voted "Yes" while conservative Republicans and Democrats voted "No". State Representative Ann Coody R-Lawton, the chair of the panel, voted "No". Pat McGuigan of CapitolBeatOK stated that "the outcome is a direct blow to Republican Party campaign promises to advance school choice options" and asked Representative Coody (among several other questions) "Why did you oppose this bill?" - to which Representative Coody replied "I believe that tax dollars should fund public schools. Tax dollars do not belong to legislators but to the citizens of Oklahoma. We are charged with representing our constituents to the best of our ability and according to the principles in which we believe." Many public school supporters believe that HB 2003, the ESA bill of 2015, will re-surface during the 2018 regular session of the legislature. Specific groups such as the OCPA are preparing the groundwork for lawmakers to pass the bill by providing questionable survey results (which indicate that ESAs are indeed popular). In voting for the measure, a lawmaker will be able to say "My constituents are for it", even if it's not true.
Many conservatives like Ann Coody and Dennis Casey know that public education is a public service, and not a commodity to be purchased. Another public service or state agency is the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT) which provides new public highways, bridges, and state road and bridge repairs for the public benefit of all Oklahomans. State road and bridge maintenance and new roads and bridges are not commodities to be purchased by private individuals, but for the publics well-being. If we substitute road and bridge terminology as a public service for "public education" in the survey question above, one may see how truly ridiculous the OCPA assumption really is: A proposal has been made to give Oklahoma auto drivers the chance to customize the roads and bridges they use through Road and Bridge Savings Accounts, or RBSAs. With an RBSA, a State Legislator puts the funds that would have gone to ODOT into a bank account the individual driver controls. The driver can then use these (public) funds to purchase the state road or bridge that best meets his or her needs for a wide variety of selections, including private driveways, corporate parking lots, and only the roads and bridges that are used by the individual driver. Any transportation funds not used in a year could be carried over for future private road and bridge repairs. Would you say that you support or oppose Oklahoma having a program like this one, which no other state has?
I think many Oklahomans can see just how truly absurd that RBSA and ESA proposals really are - but we must continue to shine a bright light on corporate lawmakers' motives...
No comments:
Post a Comment