Charlie Arlinghaus testimony on SB 372 to the Senate Education Committee, 2/14/12

posted Feb 18, 2012, 9:59 AM by Bill Duncan   [ updated Feb 19, 2012, 11:43 AM ]
There is an important exchange here.

If Charlie Arlinghaus' testimony is indicative of the evolving voucher advocacy strategy, they have clearly settled on the "poor kids deserve the same school choice that rich kids have" strategy. After giving up on studies, saying everyone will always disagree about studies, he says (2:15) 

"There's a common sense to this. And that is that if my child has additional options, the outcomes are going to be better. And a lot of people have additional options and a lot of people don't.

I might respond with something like, "Charlie, that sounds nice but doesn't really have any meaning.  If that's the best you can do....etc." Senator Kelly had a much more interesting approach (4:00). She asked:

"When I look at this bill, we're really talking about "additional options" in private school or home schools.  Or the principle and the option could be that we do have additional options in public schools and that we can continue to improve our public schools so that all children have those options within the schools.

......So I think that those statements, again, are exactly what you said - they are values and they are principles. And think that that where...we have to look at that and I just wondered whether you would agree that those are values and principles. (Mr. Arlinghaus agreed but went on to say there weren't enough options in the public schools.)


This should be the headline on the whole movement to defend public education.  In this very nice way, Senator Kelly makes the point that voucher supporters have made a value judgment to leave the public schools behind, but others might value the public schools and want to continue to improve them in order to give our children all the choices they need.

Charlie Arlinghaus testimony on SB 372 to the Senate Education Committee, 2/14/12