Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Chris's avatar

This is not meant to be an argument in favor of the Amendment being discussed, but these discussions always feel a little disingenuous to me when they seem to have an undertone that public school offers some sort of equal availability of equal education to all, which is a false premise. Public school is not even close to that. The Lt. Governor used the phrase “re-segregation of schools by socioeconomic status.” Where is the “re-“ part of this? Public schools are already wildly segregated by socioeconomic status. A large part of the reason suburbs came to exist was to create what I call “private” public schools, or elite public schools, and specifically and very intentionally create them with a large economic barrier to entry - high property taxes and very few, if any, renting opportunities. This still exists all over the country. I like the idea they discussed of the current public school choice in Kentucky - the ability to choose any public school in the state. But, that has to have limits, right? It wasn’t really discussed, but let’s say there are 5 high schools in an area, each built for an enrollment of around 500 per year. Then let’s say school #5 is way more desirable than schools 1-4. School 5 can’t be expected to take on up to 2500 students because they choose that school, right? So, I would guess even this choice has its limits? The details of the choice system weren’t really discussed, though. What I think would feel like a more genuine argument would be a variation on the “your tax dollars are not yours to decide how to spend” and the idea of public schools being a larger community investment, and a common good, to create educated citizens. What if all the property tax dollars for education in a state were put into one pool, then divided back out to each school in the state on an equal $/student basis? So the suburban, high property tax neighborhood school would get exactly the same amount of money per student as the poor rural and urban schools. Wouldn’t that really be the most community-minded, common good method of funding public schools? Wouldn’t it also create a whole new group of people BIG mad about where “their” tax dollars are going, and that they can no longer buy their way to better schools for their kids based on an ability to afford high property taxes and hoarding those tax dollars in their neighborhoods & districts? It’s all good to point the finger at people trying to claim “their” tax dollars, and I’m not saying it’s wrong to point that finger, but I also think a whole lot of people pointing that finger, would shift a lot closer to feeling the same way about “their” tax dollars if the ability to benefit from having “their” tax dollars create an exclusive school district was being threatened.

Expand full comment
Kimberly Mulligan's avatar

There is absolutely no way I was as erudite, collected, and sharp as Peter when I was a high school senior 😆 The kids are alright y’all.

Expand full comment
40 more comments...

No posts