Rhee is standing up for vouchers.
If your overall political philosophy defines the public good so broadly that it allows some groups (teacher’s unions) to free ride on the public good, often losing sight of the children, then when do you stand up for the children, and the parent’s right to give their shot at the best choices possible?
Isn’t that right more closely aligned with our founding documents?
“My job is not to preserve and defend a system that has been doing wrong by children and families. My job is to make sure that every child in this city attends an excellent school. I don’t care if it’s a charter school, a private school, or a traditional district school. As long as it’s serving kids well, I’m happy. And you should be, too.”
Here’s the question we Democrats need to ask ourselves: Are we beholden to the public school system at any cost, or are we beholden to the public school child at any cost? My loyalty and my duty will always be to the children.’
Parents wanting the best for their children is one of the true engines of our society, and it is one of the engines that drives people out of poor, dangerous neighborhoods, leaving schools overrun by the problems of those neighborhoods. We give people the economic freedom to live in the suburbs, and to get out, which helps create some of the best schools possible. I submit that you can see the lure for what I call ‘excessive egalitarians,’ especially in education, those who want equality first, and often equality of outcome and a broad raft of rights no matter the cost, and in some cases at the expense of children.
When those public schools left behind become inefficient and mismanaged, wasting money on pupils with very little change in outcomes: What do you keep, and what do you change?