[Vision2020] Support the School Levy!

[Carl Westberg]

Well, C.D., I was certainly planning to vote YES for the levy on Tuesday.  After reading your lengthy dissertation, I am all the more certain that I will vote YES for the levy on Tuesday.  Thanks.   Carl Westberg Jr.

> Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 12:09:22 +0900
> From: cdwitmer at yahoo.co.jp
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Support the School Levy!
> 
> Joe Campbell's arguments in favor of the school levy
> manifest a great deal of confusion and illogical thinking.
> I'm not directly affected by the levy so I won't presume
> to tell people how they should vote on Tuesday, but I want
> to address some of Mr. Campbell's more egregious errors.
> 
> First we need to note Mr. Campbell's abuse of the notions
> of things that are volitional (the real of choice) verus
> things that are obligatory (the realm of duty), and the
> concept of taking responsibility for one's choices. 
> 
> He starts off by asserting that "The state has an
> obligation to provide an education for everyone –
> Gabe
> ’s kids and mine."
> 
> Right off the bat, this statement is immediately subject
> to strong disagreement on constitutional grounds, because
> the education of children cannot avoid the promotion of a
> particular religious perspective to the exclusion of
> contrary religious perspectives. This is true in all
> subjects, but it is especially obvious in the creation vs.
> evolution controversy and in instruction with regard to
> sexual morality. If we are to have a publicly funded
> education system, then a system of vouchers is the only
> method that passes constitutional muster because it alone
> does not involve the imposition of a particular religious
> perspective to the exclusion of others. There are valid
> constitutional grounds for opposing even vouchers, but if
> you take the position that the State has an obligation to
> provide an education for everyone, the only approach
> reconcilable with the Constitution is that of vouchers.
> Under the current system, even people who strongly oppose
> the religious content of public schooling are being forced
> to subsidize the promotion of belief systems inimical to
> their personal beliefs.
> 
> The next erroneous assertion Mr. Campbell makes is, "The
> funding of public education is a social good, like the
> funding of the military or the funding of highways. We all
> benefit if everyone has a quality education." This too is
> patently false. To correct it, the first thing we need to
> do is remove the word "public" from his statement. The
> funding of education is a social good, but that funding
> does not need to come from the government. (It is simply a
> fact that a good education does not need to cost a lot of
> money, and in fact too much money can end up seriously
> interfering with the provision of a good education by
> encouraging involvement in all sorts of extraneous "bells
> and whistles" that are very much secondary to education. I
> strongly suspect, as an outside observer, that the very
> best thing that could happen to public schooling in Moscow
> at the present time would be for the school district to be
> forced to go on a severe austerity budget. I recently went
> on a diet and lost 25 lbs, and I feel better than I have
> in years. I'm much healthier on less, and I dare say that
> in general, most public school districts in the USA would
> be healthier on less too. What doctor, when a bloated,
> overweight patient comes to him complaining of constant
> lethargy, tells the patient that he needs to eat more? But
> I digress.)
> 
> The military recognizes "Conscientious Objector" status,
> but regardless of their views on war, people are still
> forced to pay taxes to support the military. Pacifists are
> forced to support through their taxes what they view to be
> the murder of innocent people. In their view, funding of
> the military is not a social good but rather a social
> evil. I'm no pacifist but I am strongly opposed to the war
> in Iraq and to America's huge permanent military
> installations around the world and to America's military
> interventionism all over the world, so I would have to say
> that with America's current military policy the funding of
> the current military is a social evil. The funding of
> highways I have much less argument with at a personal
> level; however, arguably even highways could be built and
> maintained entirely by the private sector. Anyway, you
> don't need to agree with me about our military or the
> highways to see the point I'm making about education.
> There is no disputing that EDUCATION is a social good;
> however, it is very much open to dispute that the PUBLIC
> FUNDING of education is a social good. I think a much
> stronger case could be made for the position that in the
> long run the public funding of education has actually done
> society far more harm than good, and society would be much
> better off if there was no public funding of education at
> all. The education would still get done even without
> public funding, and the education would be of much better
> quality as a result. Moreover, the whole system would much
> more reconcilable with our Constitution. (Note that our
> nation's founders in their wisdom did not make any
> provision for public funding of education, even though
> they easily could have if they had wanted to.)
> 
> Mr. Campbell says, "Even if I walk to work I still have to
> pay for the highways. I don
> ’t get to ride the tanks but I still have to support the
> military. I have to support the military whether I like
> the current war or not." This analogy is totally
> inappropriate. Parents who homeschool and who use private
> schools are -- to use Mr. Campbell's analogy correctly --
> are actively participating in the construction of the
> highways and actively participating in the defense of the
> nation. If anything, these parents deserve not to be taxed
> again on top of their current contribution, but rather to
> be reimbursed by the State for their services. I'm not
> saying the State should reimburse them, but it would be
> fairer than making them pay twice. If you really wanted to
> be fair in passing the levy for MSD, turn around and on a
> pari passu, pro rata basis, pay the same amount per
> student to the homeschooling and private schooling
> families that MSD gets. Note well that every single family
> would come out far ahead of the game financially because
> they are able to provide their kids with much better
> educations for far less money. The difference between what
> they spend and what MSD wants is, to put it succinctly,
> money that is being spend unnecessarily. It's waste.
> 
> Mr. Campbell says, "By living in Moscow, I have to pay a
> state income tax whereas if I lived in Pullman I would
> not. That is my choice and I have to pay because of it. To
> make that choice and then complain about the additional
> payment is silly." Just look at the Statist hubris
> expressed in this statement of his. What ever happened to
> accountability? Essentially he is just saying, "If you're
> going to live in Moscow, just shut up and pay what you're
> told to pay without demanding accountability, and if you
> don't like it, you are always free to move." The taxpayers
> have a right to know exactly how their money is being
> spent. Apparently the MSD has been extremely reticent to
> provide such accountability to the taxpayers. If the sort
> of logic expressed by Mr. Campbell is representative of
> the mindset of the thinking going on in the MSD, the best
> thing that could happen to education on Moscow on Tuesday
> is for the voters to send that levy down in flames. Until
> there is a significant attitudinal adjustment on the part
> of the people who are intent on spending that money,
> giving them the money that they are requesting would be a
> big mistake. True, I'm just an outside observer, but it
> sure seems to me that Moscow could be doing MUCH better on
> much less money. I look forward to seeing the results of
> the vote on Tuesday.
> 
> Chris Witmer
> Tokyo
>  
> Vote AGAINST the school levy on November 13, 2007!
> 
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================

_________________________________________________________________
Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare!
http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20071110/d41306aa/attachment.html