Ongoing NC GOP debacle thread

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

Well, since you called me dense, I'm not going to let you have the last word after all.

Here's the deal. My wife works at Pilot Elementary in Greensboro right now. There is a busing zone for Pilot. We agree so far since you're constantly bringing up busing zones. The zone includes some middle class, blue collar, and low income housing, including some public housing.

A charter school gets set up outside the zone. The middle class and blue collar and a few low income kids get in. It doesn't bus, so only the ones who have cars can attend. The poorest kids with the crappiest home lives and no cars cannot attend, even if their parents could bestir themselves to apply. Pilot Elementary, therefore, now sees the average intelligence and behavior levels of its student population go down across the board. Pilot Elementary is not saving any money on the kids who have left and don't ride the bus anymore, because (a) they probably never rode it to begin with, and (b) those buses have to run throughout the zone anyway, and a few empty seats makes little difference. Pilot is still obligated to provide transportation, and rightfully gets money to do so.

Now, under the proposed legislation, the "money would follow the child". So those kids who left - who never rode the bus and don't need it now - lived in the zone. Money is to be extracted from that zone and allocated to the charter, following those kids. Under the legislation, the charter has no obligation to establish a bus system to go into the Pilot zone, or anywhere else, and provide transportation to students who live in the Pilot zone. They just get to use the money however they see fit - one of the legislators called it "seed money" - to improve the charter school. Pilot has less money to serve needier kids, because, again, zero money is being saved on the kids who left.

All I am saying is that the bus money should only follow a child if (a) the child needs transportation and (b) the charter school has an obligation to provide it. If the charter school your kid goes to wants to establish a busing system to reach low income kids, I think that is great. That problem could be solved in a number of ways, perhaps by the legislature establishing a grant program and allocating funds for charters to apply for by showing they have a plan to establish busing. The "money follows the child" scheme in the proposed legislation is simply a way to defund and disadvantage traditional public schools and increase economic and racial segregation.

I hope that is clear enough for you to understand. I am not the one being dense here. Neither are the people in Raleigh. They understand this quite well, and have done an excellent job convincing people like you that "money following the child" is just, fair, equitable, and the 'Merican way. They didn't get their way this time but I'm sure they will next session.

No, you are simply wrong, that isn't the way the federal funding works. The money in question is assigned on a per-child basis, not on a zone basis. This is the link to the 2014 NC school budget:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...ts.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGEuN9EABKwgmZ4kMoxQ1SlQGF6tQ

Look on page 12 of the PDF, which is where the federal funding is broken down. The school gets $27.46 from the feds for every student. Then, the school (in this case the traditional public school) gets an additional $1,822.38 for each Low Income Family student (which is what is being discussed here, the lunches and bussing); another $1,507.01 for each student with an IEP; and $1,452.26 for a limited English student. These funds are tracked by student, not by zone. How do you think the IEP funding works - they just guess based on a percentage? No, of course not, when a kid with an IEP moves from district to district or from public to charter, the federal money assigned to that child goes with them. It is the same way for the Low Income Family addition within the traditional public school system.

So, again, the only way the charter school gets the Low Income Family money under the proposed legislation is if the student from the Low Income Family goes to the school. So your hypothetical doesn't work, unless you think that there are Low Income Families who are swinging the system by qualifying for the subsidy while hiding their cars and lunches from the process. In your scenario a middle class kid from Pilot going to a charter school, regardless of how he gets there or what he eats for lunch, would not bring the $1,822.38 of Low Income Family funding with him, because he is not from a Low Income Family. The only way your hypothetical works is if there are Low Income Families who qualify for the $1,822.38/student bonus but who don't need the bus or the lunch, which doesn't make sense because they likely wouldn't qualify for the funding category in the first place. The charter school would not get that $1,822.38 unless the Low Income Family student actually went to the school.

Here is how charter school annual funding works: The charter school opens on day 1 of the academic year. They then have to wait 20 school days for the enrollment to sort itself out, as some kids who got accepted don't show but never bothered to decline, others try it for a few days then switch, whatever. After that 20 day threshold, the charter school submits its actual roster of students to the various public school systems from which it draws. That home system then transfers the money allotted to those particular students to the charter school. Currently, for a student with an IEP, the federal $1,507.01 addition for that IEP follows that student. That is why certain charter schools push for more IEP students and designations, because if they only have a few then they don't get enough funding to fully support them, but once they reach a critical mass then they can put the infrastructure in place and then use any excess arising from their efficiency for the school in general.

And that is what hey are trying to do here with the $1,822.38 Low Income Family addition. It is already tracked by student, they are trying to get it to follow the student. And there is no logical reason why it shouldn't. The public school no longer has that Low Income Family student, why should it get to keep the $1,822.38 allocated by the feds to that student, whereas the charter school has to make it up from other sources? Yes, Pilot would no longer get that federal subsidy if the Low Income Family student goes to a charter school, but why should they? They obviously failed enough to alienate that Low Income Family to push them somewhere else, so they have nobody to blame but themselves. That shouldn't mean that said Low Income Family student should lose his funding because he has a better opportunity. #allLowIncomeFamilylivesmatter

 

[Deacon923]

Not gonna quote that, too long. I'm just going to let these smart people answer your post. The proposed legislation which (surprise) was not well thought out, included far more than just the LIF money anyway.

Onslow County’s CFO Hollamon explained that the local school district uses its own fair share of per pupil funds — that was divvied up and distributed to the district after charter schools also got their fair share from the state — to support the indirect costs associated with administering the federal school lunch program.

“The LEA pays for services related to utility costs, custodial costs, maintenance support, IT, etc,” said Hollamon. “The district is using its own money to pay those indirect costs after the per pupil funding has already been distributed. So receiving reimbursements for these indirect costs is a way to recoup some of those expenses that the LEA has paid for with its own share of state money.”

“But then these indirect cost reimbursements must be shared with charter schools that didn’t provide any of those services in the first place,” Hollamon said of the proposal.

Hollamon says that’s not fair—and it’s not the only example of a situation where traditional public schools would have to lose out on funds that they use toward supporting critical services.

“A school district sometimes uses its schools to serve as hurricane shelters for communities. They may get federal reimbursements for providing those shelters, or they could get reimbursements from a private group like the Red Cross, or the county,” said Hollamon.

“Either way, when they do get that reimbursement, that would have to be shared with charter schools even though they didn’t bear any of those costs.”

The legislators involved admitted that the money would be going to the charters for things they didn't do. Their justification was that it would help them start doing them as "seed money" - which apparently is what your charter wants to do. But there was no requirement in the legislation that they actually do them, or even have a plan for doing them.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

Charter schools don't have utility costs, custodial costs, maintenance support, or IT costs? GTFO with that ridiculousness. So the only rationale left for not moving the funds is that some schools are sometimes used as hurricane shelters? That's a winning argument right there. Let's ignore the other 99.9999% of statewide overall school usage and Low Income Family benefits, because we need to make sure New Hanover High School gets reimbursed the $48.62 it costs them to run electricity to their gym while the Red Cross sets up shop for one night once every 7 years.

 

[Biff Tannen]

The more you bitch and moan, the more I think we shouldn't have charter schools at all.

 

[WFFaithful]

Charter schools don't have utility costs, custodial costs, maintenance support, or IT costs? GTFO with that ridiculousness. So the only rationale left for not moving the funds is that some schools are sometimes used as hurricane shelters? That's a winning argument right there. Let's ignore the other 99.9999% of statewide overall school usage and Low Income Family benefits, because we need to make sure New Hanover High School gets reimbursed the $48.62 it costs them to run electricity to their gym while the Red Cross sets up shop for one night once every 7 years.

The only rationale is the ridiculous notion that we should have a new, separate educational system.

 

[deacvision7]

2&2 is really poor at debate

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

The only rationale is the ridiculous notion that we should have a new, separate educational system.

Sure, because everyone should be content to just take it up the ass in the current system that pretty much everyone agrees is broken but is too big to be materially fixed. Sounds like a winning solution for our future generations.

 

[Deacon923]

What's broken about it that couldn't be fixed with decent political leadership and a willingness to spend the appropriate amount of money? I don't agree that it's broken, I think it's hard to educate really poor kids in underfunded segregated schools. Even moderately wealthy public schools do just fine and the international test scores prove it. But apparently the solution is to create more underfunded segregated schools.

 

[WFFaithful]

Sure, because everyone should be content to just take it up the ass in the current system that pretty much everyone agrees is broken but is too big to be materially fixed. Sounds like a winning solution for our future generations.

What a horrible excuse. The size of the public education system is a huge asset to see what works and what doesn't. #largesamplesizedeac Nobody gives a damn about actually helping the kids. A certain group of people are actively setting up the system for failure.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

What's broken about it that couldn't be fixed with decent political leadership and a willingness to spend the appropriate amount of money? I don't agree that it's broken, I think it's hard to educate really poor kids in underfunded segregated schools. Even moderately wealthy public schools do just fine and the international test scores prove it. But apparently the solution is to create more underfunded segregated schools.

You can say that about any of our domestic problems, but that doesn't mean it will happen. We have few, if any, decent political leaders, and no willingness to spend money on the right things. And I think most people living in reality realize that it is not going to happen. If President Hope & Change couldn't make a goddamn difference with respect to this particular problem, who pray tell is going to actually overhaul it to the extent necessary to correct the subject problems? Waiting around for something to get fixed 80 years from now doesn't help the parents or kids in school now. So, do the best within the shitty system that we have.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

What a horrible excuse. The size of the public education system is a huge asset to see what works and what doesn't. #largesamplesizedeac Nobody gives a damn about actually helping the kids. A certain group of people are actively setting up the system for failure.

Calling it an excuse doesn't change its effect.

 

[WFFaithful]

Calling it an excuse doesn't change its effect.

The GOP "solution" then is to purposely damage public schools while praising the unregulated and suspect innovation of the charter movement. "Sounds like a winning solution for our future generations."

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

A noticeable flaw in Republican logic is that our current public education system is only broken for the poorest children, and yet all of the republican fixes are designed to help the middle and upper class.

Just look at these comprehensive, all inclusive mindsets:

...
Put another way, looking out for the interests of your own kids is not the same as thinking "fuck other people's kids."

I mean, isn't that kind of the entire point of representative government? No, not involved parents! We can't let them have any say! Fuck those sons of bitches!

Your opinion on this might become a bit more nuanced once you actually have school age children.

 

[Deacon923]

A noticeable flaw in Republican logic is that our current public education system is only broken for the poorest children, and yet all of the republican fixes are designed to help the middle and upper class.

You think that's a flaw, do you? I think the Republicans see it as a design feature.

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

Maybe someone can explain to me how the benefits of private school vouchers and suburban charter schools trickle down to poor children.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

The more you bitch and moan, the more I think we shouldn't have charter schools at all.

Good point. The clear solution for everyone is much simpler and more overtly racist/classist/segregationist. Simply move to a neighborhood originally developed using race-based deed restrictions and still primarily constructed with the remnants thereof, thus ensuring that they fall squarely into the Selwyn Elementary - AG - Myers Park HS pipeline bubble, so as never have to deal with the issues at all. Problem solved! Nothing to see here.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

Maybe someone can explain to me how the benefits of private school vouchers and suburban charter schools trickle down to poor children.

I didn't know the primary goal of the educational system is to help poor children. I thought it was to educate as many children as possible. I must have confused the educational system with welfare.

 

[Deacon923]

I didn't know the primary goal of the educational system is to help poor children. I thought it was to educate as many children as possible. I must have confused the educational system with welfare.

Ironic, because I'm pretty sure the conservative line on poor people is they need to bootstrap up, finish high school, get married and get a job. Sure would be nice if the educational system was designed to at least give them the same opportunity to do numbers 1 and 3 as their wealthier peers.

You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth here. On the one side, the system is "broken" so we need to set up an entirely parallel system so that people can get out of the "broken" system. Then when someone points out that it's only "broken" for the poorest students, you decide that they don't need any special help at all. Odd.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

Ironic, because I'm pretty sure the conservative line on poor people is they need to bootstrap up, finish high school, get married and get a job. Sure would be nice if the educational system was designed to at least give them the same opportunity to do numbers 1 and 3 as their wealthier peers.

You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth here. On the one side, the system is "broken" so we need to set up an entirely parallel system so that people can get out of the "broken" system. Then when someone points out that it's only "broken" for the poorest students, you decide that they don't need any special help at all. Odd.

I don't think and never said it is broken only for the poorest students. I think it is broken for the vast majority of students. Just because some kids don't need free lunch and get accepted into a college who is more than willing to take their money to give them a useless piece of paper doesn't mean that the educational system is working for them.

 

[Deacon923]

I don't think and never said it is broken only for the poorest students. I think it is broken for the vast majority of students. Just because some kids don't need free lunch and get accepted into a college who is more than willing to take their money to give them a useless piece of paper doesn't mean that the educational system is working for them.

Seriously, what is the basis for your belief that the public education system is broken for the "vast majority" of students? Do you have any actual data that backs up this belief, or is it all purely #anecdotes?