I’m currently engaged in a school choice with James Widgerson over at his Library and Pub.

It started with my response to this post… where Widgerson contends that not raising the cap on school choice is “standing in the way of school choice and educational opportunity for young African Americans in Milwaukee.”

My response was simply a cross-post of my earlier rant on school choice that I posted here on January 23rd.

Widgerson devoted an entire post in response, saying that I’m “honest enough to admit they would like to end school choice.” I can’t really argue with that. I still consider myself open-minded… and if I can be convinced that school choice is a positive solution, then so be it. But I’m not there yet.

Widgerson goes on to quote me and respond:

One correspondent here has laid out what I think are the basic arguments against school choice they’re willing to offer.

He writes, “Money used for vouchers to send Milwaukee students to private schools is money that could have been put towards the public school system”

The question is, why is this an issue? Shouldn’t the education dollar follow the student? And if there’s a more efficient means of educating the student (our presumed goal) then shouldn’t we put our investment there?

And that’s the beauty of the concept of school choice. The education dollar follows the student, and the parent (whom we trust would know best) gets to choose what is the best method for educating that child.

Here, Widgerson highlights our main difference, which I address in my comment:

One of the major problems with school choice that I haven’t seen addressed is that it’s parents, not students making the “choice” to attend a school out of the district. Unfortunately, in parts of the MPS district, there are parents who couldn’t care less where their kids go to school. Unfortunately, not all parents care enough (or have the time… with a strained family or work situation) to put much thought into their children’s education.
I think that’s our true difference. You say that it’s the parent that “we trust would know best”. That’s a broad assumption… I argue that’s (again EXTREMELY UNFORTUNATELY) not true. Sometimes school is the refuge for a child who’s home situation is less than desirable.

This post may be a little self-serving - but I think it’s valuable to have this discourse in a single venue so that it may be seen in its (near) entirety. The education of our (well, not my) children is an extremely important issue, and one that is currently being overwhelmed by partisan poltics and bickering on both sides. I have yet to see either public officials or political pundits lay the issues and priorites out as plainly and honestly as in this discussion.

Update: The one and only Chris Brophey weighs in (take a look at the comments):

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am sure schools operate on economies of scale. Therefore, removing money for individual students hurts the students left behind, not the institution or the teachers union some accuse Democrates of only looking out for. You may gladly forsake the remaining students, but I simply cannot. Especially when the solution is not as simply send them to private school. Fourth, an all charter/private school system in Milwaukee? I dont believe the city has the infrastructure for that.

Additionally, when funds are diverted to build this, where do they come from, MPS schools trying educate? And when you infuse large amounts of MPS students into the existing private schools, where do the kids that currently attend the private school go? There are such things as school capcities. So the kid that planend on going to private school now has to attend public…is that not the problem you are trying to avoid?

There aren’t many subjects that get me as riled up as school choice. From what I’ve been reading lately, Governor Doyle has continued to veto attempts by the legislature to raise the cap above the current 15% of Milwaukee’s public school enrollment. To many people, such as Charlie Sykes and writers at the Wall Street Journal, the answer is simple: let more kids in the system use vouchers to attend private schools outside the crippled MPS system. Better education for more kids. How can you argue with that? Like this:

Money used for vouchers to send Milwaukee students to private schools is money that could have been put towards the public school system.

The argument for school choice is that taking students (and money) away from public schools will force them to compete with private schools, and raise the quality of public schools.

The goal: Improve public schools.
The means: Take money away from public schools.

Great plan!

According to the WSJ article, a study has shown that “students using vouchers to attend Milwaukee’s private schools had a graduation rate of 64%, versus 36% for their public school counterparts.” What the WSJ failed to note is that parents who desire their child to participate in the voucher program are more likely to provide an environment conducive to learning and success. What the study should have done was compare kids who participated in the choice program to kids whose parents wanted them to participate in the program, but were not accepted.

Those in favor want to raise the cap on school choice participation above the current ceiling of 15%. My question is, raise it to where? To 20%, leaving 80% of Milwaukee’s students in the public schools that choice advocates say need to improve so much. To 50%? The major problem with school choice is that, while a small fraction of the students may get a better education, THERE ARE ALWAYS STUDENTS LEFT BEHIND. Why not devise a plan to fund and improve public schools for all of these students? Why must we save the few lucky enough to make the 15% cut and defund public schools for the other 85%? Raising the cap won’t help, but proper funding and some effort put into fixing MPS will. Don’t just abandon these kids, help them.

Mr. Sykes writes, “Today, black students in choice schools face the possibility that they will also be excluded from the schools of their choice. While the current governor will not literally stand in the schoolhouse door, the effect will be the same: the kids will be kept out.”

My question to Sykes is: what is your plan to provide EVERY child with a quality education. Sykes says that kids will be left out if the Governor doesn’t up the cap. What he doesn’t state, is that, no matter what the cap is, kids will be left out. What I believe Sykes is saying here is that all children who have parents who desire them to get a quality education should be allowed access to it. What I’m saying is that all children should have access to a quality education, whether their parents are supporting enough to care about where they go to school or not.

According to the WSJ, the only way Doyle will raise the cap is if, “it’s tied to a change in the school-aid formula that he knows would never pass the Republican legislature — particularly in an election year.” No shit. Doyle realizes that just sending more kids into the voucher program won’t help the bigger problem: improving our public schools. You know what will help? Proper funding; which is exactly what Doyle demands be part of the package and is what he’s been fighting for over the past three years.

This isn’t to say that simply throwing money at poorer districts will improve the problem. Funding has to be accompanied by effort, reform, and accountability. But defunding public schools doesn’t come across as a responsible action to me. The bottom line: use public money to improve public schools, not to send a small fraction somewhere else.

That’s my opinion. What’s yours?

Folkbum: Shameless Race-Baiting on the Right: Conservatives’ True Colors (this one’s a must-read)

Wall Street Journal: The Education Borg (Poor form with the analogy, WSJ. I expect better.)

Charlie Sykes: WHY ARE DOYLE AND XOFF SO UPSET?

Xoff: Sykes choosing words more carefully? His ’spot’ becomes paid commercial

Let’s just say I don’t think this is something that the legislature in Wisconsin will be working on any time soon. They’re too busy allowing people walking down the street to carry a concealed weapon.

From the AP:
ABC News: Wash. House Passes Gay Civil Rights Bill

note: I’m not saying that I support this exact piece of legislation, but I’m of the opinion that it’s more beneficial to work for policy that protects civil rights instead of limiting them.

I’m not sure who made this juxtaposed editorial decision, but they highlighted an interesting contrast in Southeastern Wisconsin. The Journal Sentinel gave approximately equal space to these two stories on the bottom of its January 2nd frontpage: “Lakeside castles bring a backlash” and “Family center can’t cure all of area’s ills“.

The first story is about a proposed rule restricting the size of waterfront mansions in the Village of Chenequa, in Waukesha County. The caption accompanying the map of Waukesha County reads: “MANSIONS: TOO BIG?”. The second story is about the opening of a new community center in a Milwaukee neighborhood where 86% of the residents live below the poverty line. Both stories continue on page 5B.

These two communities are only 25 miles away.

Just something to think about as we start the new year.

In another one of his insightful discussions of the “War on Christmas”, Bill O’Reilly slams Madison for no apparent reason. The discussison in which this comment was made didn’t even have anything to do with Wisconsin.

Video clip at Media Matters:

O’REILLY: Now, this is a conservative city, Richmond. I mean, this is not Madison, Wisconsin, where you expect those people to be communing with Satan up there in the Madison, Wisconsin, media.

O’Reilly’s talking about how horrible it is that people get offended by terms such as “Happy Holidays” and “Season’s Greetings” and he goes on bashing the city I live in for no reason whatsoever. Talk about vindictive.

If you ever did before (and I can’t imagine why anyone would), I don’t see how you could take Bill O’Reilly seriously after the last couple weeks.

hat tip: Xoff and Folkbum

On a slightly related note, the Badger Herald has an editorial that should end the Capitol Christmas Tree debate once and for all. Tsk, tsk… Those legislators have better things to do… like allow me to carry concealed gun and ban gay marriage.

This week’s Carnival of the Badger is up at Subject to Change.

Some highlights (other than TNV, of course):

Belle at Leaning Blue cites her first amendment rights as the reason she can post blogs like this.

Folkbum’s Rambles and Rants questions the effectiveness of voter ID. Is anyone reading yet, Jay?

Later today, the Milwaukee Brewers will be unveiling new Sunday home uniforms that feature the beloved glove logo that graced Brew Crew gear from 1978-1993. The decision for the resurrection of the classic emblem (the letters M and B hidden in the shape of a baseball glove) was prompted by feedback from fans who have been sporting the old colors in recent seasons.

Not so random fact: The logo was created in 1977 by UW-Eau Claire art student Tom Meindel.

From MLB.com:

“We’re trying to marry the old with the new,” owner Mark Attanasio said at the end of the regular season, while the Brewers were still in the process of designing the new look.

The event will also mark the beginning of the team’s season ticket campaign, and sales staff will man the phones during the broadcast. Select incoming calls will be fielded by Brewers alumni and others participating in the evening’s activities.

Three hundred invited guests are expected to be in attendance at the event and will be invited to ask questions during the evening’s panel sessions. Because of limited space in the .300 Club, the event is not open to the public.

Of course, The Kid will be there too.

MLB.com: New uniform to highlight Winter Warmup

I’m not going to attempt any real analysis (I’m feeling pretty lazy today), but here’s the latest WI polling data from Strategic Vision:

(I do find the responses to the last question interesting, given the approval ratings in other categories)

Below are the results of a three-day poll of registered voters in the state of Wisconsin. Results are based on telephone interviews with 800 registered voters in Wisconsin, aged 18+, and conducted November 11-13, 2005. The margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

1. Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush’s overall job performance?
Approve 29%
Disapprove 62%
Undecided 9%

2. Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush’s handling of the economy?
Approve 27%
Disapprove 63%
Undecided 10%

3. Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush’s handling of the war in Iraq?
Approve 32%
Disapprove 60%

Undecided 8%

4. Do you consider President Bush to be a conservative in the mode of Ronald Reagan? (Republicans only)
Yes 34%
No 52%
Undecided 14%

5. Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush’s nomination of Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court to replace Sandra Day O’Connor?
Approve 52%
Disapprove 36%
Undecided 12%

6. Would you like to see the United States Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade?
Yes 36%
No 56%
Undecided 8%

7. Would you like to see the United States withdraw all troops immediately from Iraq?
Yes 49%
No 40%
Undecided 11%

8. Do you expect another terrorist attack within the near future?
Yes 69%
No 10%
Undecided 21%

9. Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Jim Doyle’s job performance?
Approve 47%
Disapprove 44%
Undecided 9%

10. If the Republican primary were today, whom would you vote for? (Republicans only)
Mark Green 45%
Scott Walker 39%
Undecided 16%

11. If the election for Governor were held today, and the choice was between Jim Doyle, the Democrat and Mark Green, the Republican, whom would you vote for?
Jim Doyle 47%
Mark Green 44%
Undecided 9%

12. If the election for Governor were held today, and the choice was between Jim Doyle, the Democrat and Scott Walker, the Republican, whom would you vote for?
Jim Doyle 46%
Scott Walker 40%
Undecided 14%

13. Do you approve or disapprove of United States Senator Russ Feingold’s job performance?
Approve 57%
Disapprove 28%
Undecided 15%

14. Do you approve or disapprove of Senator Herb Kohl’s job performance?
Approve 54%
Disapprove 27%
Undecided 19%

15. If the election for United States Senate was held today, and the choices were Herb Kohl, the Democrat or Tommy Thompson, the Republican, whom would you vote for?
Herb Kohl 42%
Tommy Thompson 44%
Undecided 14%

16. Would you like to see former Governor Tommy Thompson run for President in 2008?
Yes 48%
No 34%
Undecided 18%

17. Would you like to see Senator Russ Feingold run for President in 2008?
Yes 51%
No 36%
Undecided 13%

18. Who is your choice for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2008? (Democrats only)
Hillary Clinton 31%
Al Gore 14%
Russ Feingold 13%
John Edwards 7%
Wesley Clark 5%
John Kerry 5%
Mark Warner 4%
Joseph Biden 3%
Tom Vilsak 2%
Evan Bayh 2%
Ed Rendell 1%
Bill Richardson 1%
Barbara Boxer 1%
Undecided 11%

19. Who is your choice for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2008? (Tommy Thompson included; Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 27%
John McCain 23%
Tommy Thompson 22%
Newt Gingrich 8%
Bill Frist 2%
Mitt Romney 2%
Rick Santorum 1%
George Pataki 1%
George Allen 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 12%

20. Who is your choice for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2008? (Tommy Thompson not included; Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 32%
John McCain 29%
Newt Gingrich 12%
Bill Frist 3%
Mitt Romney 2%
Rick Santorum 2%
George Pataki 1%
George Allen 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 17%

21. Would you like Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to run for President in 2008? (Republicans Only)
Yes 47%
No 34%
Undecided 19%

22. Who is your choice for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2008 with Condoleezza Rice included? (Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 30%
John McCain 20%
Newt Gingrich 10%
Condoleeza Rice 10%
Bill Frist 4%
Rick Santorum 2%
George Pataki 1%
Mitt Romney 1%
George Allen 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 20%

23. Do you think Wisconsin headed in the right direction or wrong direction?
Right 30%
Wrong 58%
Undecided 12%

There’s been a major rift developing over the last few years at the University of Wisconsin. Two sides struggling for respect on a campus known for its radicalism and fights over freedom of expression. One minority ridiculed by the native population for their different upbringing and manner of dress. And only the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is bold enough to cover the story.

That’s right, the divide is between “Coasties”, students hailing mainly from New York, New Jersey, and California and “Sconnies”, a term I’ll use to cover students who call the Midwest home.

According to the Journal Sentinel:

Of the 28,217 undergraduates at UW-Madison, 58% are from Wisconsin and 11% are from Minnesota.

Most of the other 31% come from Illinois, New York, California and New Jersey. These students form a distinct demographic, and are often clumped under the all-purpose category: Coasties.

Unfortunately the Journal Sentinel has failed to acknowledge that students from Illionis have their own unique title: FIB.

Randy Frankfurter, a freshman from East Brunswick, N.J., who lives in a private dorm called Statesider is quoted in the story:

“They look down on us just because our parents have a little bit more money, because we talk about where our fathers work. They want to feel superior to us because they think we think we’re superior to them. Then we’re forced to.”

It’s a rough life in the land of popped collars, skin-tight black spandex pants, Ugg boots, North Face, massive sunglasses, and daddy’s credit card.

My advice if you don’t want to be scoffed at: stop wearing stereotypical clothing and avoid the KK like the plague.

Lori Berquam, dean of students, described the cultural conflict on campus as “good-natured,” and a lot of students agree.

But Wren Singer, director of orientation and new student programs, takes it seriously. At freshman orientation, students are prodded into discussions of “stereotypes of coastal culture vs. Midwest culture,” Singer said.

“Most people think about ethnic diversity, people from different races,” she said. “But I think it’s much more likely that a freshman would make a derogatory comment about someone from the East Coast than someone of color.”

A serious question for other college bloggers: is the divide between regional and out-of-region students so visible at other schools?

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: The great ‘Coastie’ divide

Thanks Anne and Meg!

Note: I’ve got nothing against anyone from Illinios or either coast, only people who insist on wearing ugly, overly expensive clothing and sit in tanning booths until their bodies are a peculiar shade of orange.

Wigderson Library & Pub hosts this week’s Carnival of the Badger, a round-up of blog posts from around Wisconsin.

Some highlights include Folkbum’s post on the passed referendum in Florence County and Subject to Change’s analysis of possible motives behind Milwaukee’s proposed smoking ban.

If you’re a Wisconsin blogger, you can request to be included in the next Carnival of the Badger. Just submit your post.

The University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire has a policy prohibiting resident assistants (RA’s) from leading bible study groups in their dorm. The University claims that the policy is necessary to ensure that RA’s are approachable.

Subsequently, there has been a major backlash from conservatives in media and government calling for the repeal of the policy and basically bitching about how the University of Wisconsin system is run by the devil.

There are essentially two issues here:

1) Separation of Church and State

This is a pretty cut and dry issue. It’s a cornerstone of our government. But… it doesn’t appear that the University is making this claim. They just want to ensure that their RA’s are “approachable”.

2) 1st Amendment Rights

The 1st Amendment argument does hold water, since the government cannot ban speech simply because they don’t like it or the effect that it may have. But, they may place time, manner, and place restrictions on speech if the government interest is significant enough. I believe (I could be wrong) that RA’s are still allowed to hold Bible study sessions, just not in there dorm room, which in this case happens to be an extension of their paid position. If the university didn’t allow RA’s to run Bible study groups as all, they would be blatently running afoul of the 1st Amendment.

Usually, a significant government interest will have to do with public safety or national security. Given previous decisions on what constitutes a significant government interest, I don’t see how ensuring that RA’s are “approachable” even comes close to a significant public interest.

Abraham Miller, a professor of political science at the University of Cincinnati, wrote an article on Chronwatch.com about the controversy titled “Bibles Out, Vaginas In at University of Wisconsin“. I’m guessing he leans a little conservative. Anyway, he makes a great point (although not in quite the way I might express it):

The rationale for this public trampling on the First Amendment’s sacred grant of freedom of religion is that resident associates who study the Bible and pray to God might be seen as “unapproachable” by their charges. Some academic bureaucrat’s arbitrary notion of what “approachable” means, of course, trumps the First Amendment.

And how consistently has this notion been enforced? One RA who for three years staged the controversial but feminist-applauded play, ‘’The Vagina Monologues,'’ as an official residence hall activity, received praise from the Office of Housing and Residence Life. No university official suggested that participation in a controversial play that obsessed about a woman’s vagina for more than an hour would make someone “unapproachable.” Only studying the Bible would do that!

Here’s the University’s original comment on the subject, from the Journal Sentinel:

“As a state employee, you and I have a responsibility to make sure we are providing an environment that does not put undue pressure on any member of our halls in terms of religion, political parties, etc.,” Newman wrote. “As a ‘leader’ of a Bible study, one of the roles is to gather and encourage people to attend. These two roles have a strong possibility to conflict in your hall.”

It doesn’t seem as though there’s must consistency to the university’s reasoning, despite the fact that the prohibition was extended to study of the Koran and the Torah.

There is a diffence in the Vagina Monologue comparison, in that the University’s ban is on religious study groups. But, just because RA’s are technically “working” nearly 24 hours a day doesn’t mean that they can’t express themselves.

According to the Journal Sentinel:

The university’s position is backed by a similar written policy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and is supported by the Freedom from Religion Foundation in Madison.

“There’s free speech, but this isn’t free,” said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom from Religion Foundation. “This amounts to taxpayer subsidy of worship.”

In that case, tax payers are subsidizing RA’s to go to worship, work a second job, or write a politically-oriented blog. RA’s receive a stipend… does that mean they’re always on the clock… even when they’re not performing RA duties?

There’s an apparent conflict of interests here, but I’d say that the 1st Amendment trumps any state interest ensuring that RA’s are “approachable”. If the University made a direct “separation of church and state” claim, they’d have a better case, but it would still lose.

According to the Badger Herald, both U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R-Wis and state Rep. Scott Suder, R-Abbotsford “called the policy unconstitutional and ‘un-American.’ They accused UW-Eau Claire of infringing on the rights of students to free speech and freedom of religion.”

They may be right about the legality of the policy, but pulling our ‘un-American’? They just hate the public university system, or at least the one run by the ‘liberal elites’. I’d say that is what’s un-american. Wow, that phrase just really pisses me off.

In the end, I end up agreeing with Green, Suder and Miller, but I doubt it’s for the same reasons. Miller’s just using the 1st Amendment as an argument for protecting his beliefs against any possible threats. But, I guess that’s what the 1st Amendment really is for… protecting speech.

Unfortunately, Miller’s call to action is too dramatic for my taste:

Stand up in your congregation and make people of faith aware of this outrage. Write to the Governor Jim Doyle of Wisconsin Jim, POB 7863, Madison, WI 53707. Write to President Bush and demand that his administration cut off all federal funds to the University of Wisconsin system.

Cut off funding from the entire University of Wisconsin system in order to save Christianity. Yeah, that’ll work real well. Just like holding back money from public schools with low test scores makes them better.

Talk about making a politically charged media event out of a molehill.

Chronwatch.com: Bibles Out, Vaginas In at University of Wisconsin

Badger Herald: Reps. blast UW-Eau Claire

Journal Sentinel: Bible study policy raises ire

Capital Times: UW-Eau Claire decides to review Bible study ban

FIRE: University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire: Ban on RAs Leading Bible Studies

“The Kid” is returning to Milwaukee in a Brewers uniform, this time as a coach. The Journal Sentinel is reporting that hall of famer Robin Yount will be a bench coach for the Brewers next season.

Having a coach of Yount’s experience and influence on the Milwaukee bench should be another boost to the ballclub in 2006.

Brewers TV announcer and former teammate of Yount, Bill Schroeder had this to say: “Just his presence will rub off on the players and make them play harder. You don’t want to disappoint Robin Yount. He brings even more credibility to a team starting to have success. I can’t think of a better guy to be our bench coach.”

The Wausau Daily Herald published an editorial Sunday expressing essentially the same opinon that I shared on The New Vernacular in September. The Daily Herald adds a detail that I missed in my critique: the $30 million in tax dollars lost during the holiday would come directly from the state transportation budget. The state would either need to cut funding for transportation or get that money from somewhere else. And as the budget debates this summer show, the state coffers aren’t overflowing with extra cash.

Why is that a bad idea?
For starters, the bill would eliminate the tax but not the annual increase built into the state’s transportation budget. See, every penny of Wisconsin’s gasoline tax is dedicated to road construction, repair and maintenance. Those costs keep increasing, so the transportation budget keeps increasing.

The senators who introduced the bill instead want to take money from the general fund and use it to fill the hole left by eliminating the gas tax increase. In other words, they’re robbing Peter to pay Paul because taxes are taxes - they all come out of our pockets.

The hole would be about $30 million a year - the first year. It would be about $60 million the second year, $90 million the third and so forth.

And what does eliminating the 0.8 cent increase do for you?
If you drive an average car the average number of miles every year, about 15,000, eliminating the annual increase would save you about $4.
That’s right. Four bucks.

That four bucks translates into $30 million when multiplied by every motorist in the state - including those who drive much more than average.

Those millions buy us pothole repair, snow plows, transit systems, safety programs and other transportation benefits.

…We can eliminate the 0.8 cent increase, but we’ll have to either cut $30 million in road services or make up the money from somewhere else.

Wausau Daily Herald: Tinkering with gas tax is no solution

Badger Herald: Nass seeks gas holiday

A group of zombies descended on Madison, demanding their rights last Saturday. The march of the undead began on the steps of the Capitol and continued down State Street to the Memorial Union. Living protestors from Advocates of Zombie Attack Preparedness (AZAP) were on the scene to show their concern over the rising zombie population.

Signs at the event displayed messages such as “the undead are people too”, “life is wasted on the living, ” and “got brains?”

Similar lurches have been spotted in Montreal, Vancouver, Austin, and San Francisco.

From TheDailyPage.com:

Variants of re-animated corpses included rocker zombies, dress ball zombies, child zombies, and even a Super Mario zombie. As remarked to me by one of the undead (in a moment of lucidity), it was a remarkably well-behaved lurch, particularly considering the vocal calls for flesh, brains, and other cellular ephemera. The zombies stuck to the sidewalks, apparently too shy for the middle of the street. Nevertheless, they did their best to conform to expectations as they made their way west, moaning at pedestrians, banging on restaurant and tavern windows, and even attempts at re-animation with more gameful of onlookers. Indeed, the lurch grew progressively larger as it progressed down State, resembling to a slight extent a zombie infection simulation.

The original Zombie Lurch press release on LiveJournal

Summary and photo galleries