🚀 go-pugleaf

peercy@kaos.Stanford.EDU (Mark S. Peercy) writes:
>The motives of the opponents certainly should not go unnoticed.  In the 
>October 11 editorials of the San Francisco Chronicle, Milton Friedman writes:
>
>  To know how important it is to pass Proposition 174, all you need to know 
>  is the list of people who are opposed to it.

This is the baldest kind of ad hominum argument.  Prof. Friedman should
present arguments in favor of the proposition, not try to slam it because
of the identities of the opponents.  Presumably this means that he finds
it easier to slam the opponents, because labor unions are unpopular with
many people, than make arguments in favor.

>  Based on the September 12 
>  editions of The Chronicle, the opponents are: the State Board of Education; 
>  the interim superintendent of public instruction; the California PTA; the 
>  League of Women Voters; teachers' unions and the state AFL-CIO; the 
>  California School Boards Association; and most Democratic office holders.  
>  There is also the major opponent, the National Education Association.

I am not a member of any of these groups.  I went to Catholic schools
throughout my childhood and my family was not wealthy and certainly could
have benefitted greatly by voucher money.  If anything, one could argue
that my self-interest goes the other way.

I might even be for a well-designed voucher system (though it is my belief
that private schools do better because every private school student has
parents who care so much about education that they were willing to pay
twice, not because the public schools are so vastly inferior).  I am very
much against Prop. 174.

Prop 174 is a very poorly conceived measure that would take large amounts
of money away from public schools unless huge numbers of students move.
It not only places no requirements on schools that receive the money, but
it has unprecedented language designed to prevent either the legislators
*or* the public from ever changing major portions (even an initiative
would fail unless it got 50% of *all eligible voters* voting in favor,
something that is flat-out impossible in the typical election with < 50%
turnout).

Even if you're in favor of vouchers, vote this turkey down, re-write a
decent one, and try again.



-- 
-- Joe Buck	jbuck@synopsys.com
Posting from but not speaking for Synopsys, Inc.
Formerly jbuck@<various-hosts>.eecs.berkeley.edu