Special Needs voucher (SB 57) debated in Ohio House today
Thursday, May 29th, 2008 By David HansenUpdate:
The House vote on SB 57 has been delayed until probably June 10th, since Representative Widowfield, a bill supporter, resigned from the House yesterday and was unable to vote today.
———-
The Special Needs voucher, SB 57, may be debated and voted on in the Ohio House today.
Interested citizens can follow the debate here on the Ohio Channel.
Warning: there may be scenes that will anger or disappoint you. For example, the pervasive distain many legislators will have for parents’ abilities to choose what is best for their children, or, their unquestioning embrace of socialistic principle in defending a one-size-fits-all government monopoly of public education.
As we heard in the Senate debate, there will be gross distortions of the facts, particularly the cost of the program. When any number more than $70 million in terms of money spent though the voucher program is mentioned, know that to be a whopper. And the opportunity for the program to save money for taxpayers (because the vouchers are capped in certain instances and because private schools – namely your community’s Catholic, Christian or Jewish schools well-versed at efficient operations – are simply less expensive that public schools) will probably not be aired.
Finally, watch for a poison-pill amendment perhaps coming from OEA-beholden Republican Randy Gardner. Rep. Gardner may propose what will sound like a good idea, to remove the voucher funding from the current flow of state money to local schools for special needs children.
But think of the perverse incentive this creates for public schools: if they are able to get rid of their special needs students into the Voucher program, they still get to keep all of the state funding as if the child were still filling a chair in their building. Also, the competitive effects – of public schools improving their activity because of parental/market accountability — that have been found in Florida would no longer apply. There would be no ‘whip of competition’ to condition the public schools to perform better.
The true purpose of this amendment will be to redesign the voucher as a costly, duplicative program thereby giving Gov. Strickland a more defensible excuse to veto it.
