Getty Images
One of the overlooked accomplishments of President Obama's term is the reform of the student-loan system -- an effort that was decades in the making, but had been blocked by Republicans and bank lobbyists until 2010.
Under the old system, the student-loan industry received billions in taxpayer subsidies to provide a service the government could perform for less. As Rachel explained on the show a month ago, in 2010, Democrats removed the middleman, streamlined the process, saved taxpayers a ton of money, and helped more young people get college degrees.
Yesterday, Mitt Romney unveiled a new education agenda, which vows to bring the middleman back.
Mr. Romney's speech was almost entirely focused on K-12 education. But in his policy paper, he called for restoring private lenders to the subsidized college loan market. Congress passed a law in 2010 at Mr. Obama's urging that eliminated government fees paid to private banks, an estimated savings of $68 billion over 10 years, which was channeled into Pell grants for the poorest students.
Sure, Obama's reforms save taxpayer money and help more young people go to college, but by streamlining the process, Democrats have cut into bank profits -- and that can't stand.
Taken together, it's quite a pitch Romney has to make to young adults and their families: a Romney administration will cut Pell Grants, make it harder to get student loans, and encourage students who struggle with tuition costs to "shop around" until they can find a college they can afford.
The former governor recently said, "I don't see how a young American can vote for, well, can vote for a Democrat." Yeah, it's quite the mystery.
That wasn't the only thing we learned about Romney's education agenda yesterday. The Republican, in the midst of an extended harangue against teachers unions*, also endorsed school vouchers.
From the address:
"As President, I will give the parents of every low-income and special needs student the chance to choose where their child goes to school. For the first time in history, federal education funds will be linked to a student, so that parents can send their child to any public or charter school, or to a private school, where permitted. And I will make that choice meaningful by ensuring there are sufficient options to exercise it.
"To receive the full complement of federal education dollars, states must provide students with ample school choice."
Vouchers generally aren't popular, and have repeatedly been voted down when put on statewide ballots, so Romney's position may not do him any favors with voters.
What's more, the track record on voucher programs is poor -- "experiments" in Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, and D.C. all led to waste, mismanagement, and test scores that failed to improve. Of course, Romney is less concerned with results and more concerned with privatizing American education.
Making matters even worse, Matt Yglesias took a closer look at a related Title 1 proposal. After some kids take the voucher and run, remaining kids in the underfunded public school will "have the option to use federal funds to purchase supplemental tutoring or digital courses from state-approved private providers rather than receiving Title I services from their district."
That's far more problematic than it might sound.
For on-the-ball parents, this should work out fine. Having each family shop separately for education services sounds pretty inefficient, but well-organized families will probably team up to buy some small group lessons or whatever. It'll be an extra hassle to shoulder additional responsibilities in this regard, but some people will appreciate the extra flexibility and one way or another people will do what they have to do for their kids.
But the kind of kids who are worst-served by the existing school system -- kids experiencing family disruption and who low-income and often poorly educated parents themselves -- are going to be very poorly served by this idea. Neither a single mom who dropped out of high school and is trying to raise three kids on a minimum wage job, nor a pair of Mexican immigrants with no English literacy are going to do a great job of hiring an algebra tutor for their children. The overall Romney budget framework implies such a steep drop in per student Title I and IDEA money one way or another that the specific details of how he'd dole it out are less relevant than they might otherwise be, but the basic concept here seems almost willfully indifferent to the problems facing low-socioeconomic status families.
I don't imagine education policy is likely to drive the 2012 election, but if it does, and voters get engaged on the issue, Romney will have to defend a tragically flawed agenda.
* When President Obama urges millionaires to pay slightly more in taxes, he's being divisive and pitting Americans against each other. When Romney attacks public school teachers, he's bringing people together.
Leave a Comment:
Just like at Bain, Romney's plan is to hollow out the system in place and pass the bucks on to the wealthy few.
Actually what President Obama's new bill does is makes it possible for the government to decide who wins and who looses. With the government in charge of where the money goes, it chooses the winners. This has already taken place, since 2010 scholarship funds have been shifted so that 2/3s of them now go to places that supported President Obama in the last election. Sounds great until the republicans are in charge then they will shift the money to those that supported them. Having a non-political entity handing out scholarships is the best way to get the most deserving people the help.
Chem you meant to say student loans and not scholarships. The bill PBO passed did not affect current scholarship programs. Scholarship programs are by and large private although there are some federal scholarship programs you can apply for. Those include things like the ROTC and GI Bill. One would presume you would encourage only a select group receiving those scholarships. Additionally scholarships by their very nature do not go to everyone. Scholarships are, by definition, awarded out to persons who meet certain criteria (so they have a certain GPA, volunteered for a certain club, have a certain heritage, played a certain type of sport, etc).
I also do not know where you get this 2/3rd figure. I think it should be worthwhile to note that most people live in blue states as opposed to red states. This would, hypothetically, assume that more people gain scholarships attending school in blue states and not red states. However since you are talking about grants this may also be because the most expensive schools in the country are almost all located in blue states. Did you ever stop to think that there's a correlation between the cost of the private college and the amount of scholarship/grant money that goes to that school?
Putting banks back in the middle of federally insured student loans is economically inefficient and is nothing more than a subsidy to the politically powerful Washington banking lobby. Anyone supporting a return to the old system must be in bed with Wall Street and not care about making higher education accessible to middle America.
These attempts to privatize schools will result in more control over the curriculum that will be taught. Our children will be brainwashed into becoming docile, low wage workers to be used in the Koch brothers industries or for other "benevolent" masters.
You nailed it carol . A permanent underclass scrambling for low wage jobs is exactly what hey want .
He while we're at it, how about eliminating the minimum wage and child labor laws to free up the labor market ?
I would be an Onion headline except republicans have already proposed it .
This is the kind of society Romney, Kochs and all the other 1%ers are striving for.
I got my student loans form a private entity, I came from nothing, worked hard to get good grades, and was accepted to Dental School. I was able to do this because of hard work and freedom of choice.
Carol your statement has got to be the dumbest thing I have ever heard. The best way to brainwash a nation is make it so there is only one source from which information can be learned. By giving people choices they can get all information a decide for them self the validity of that information.
Your statement also leads me to believe that you don't think a liberal organization, outside of the government, has the ability to produce a superior learning environment. Why else would you scared of letting private schools compete for our school dollars.
So wait a minute. You're a medical doctor chemist AND a dentist?
.....you do realize that private banks are STILL able to give out school loans, right chem? They just aren't relying on the government to fund those loans. You are a free market person right? You DO realize that what PBO did was to expand freedom to the banks, not limit it, yes? What he did was very libertarian.
Facts are not to be decided on. Either something is factually correct or it is not factually correct. Providing more information =/= making more informed people. This is about the silliest reasoning I've ever heard. By your logic people should be able to decide for themselves whether or not our atmosphere is comprised of oxygen. Sighs
No this is you simply straw manning her argument in order to argue against a point no one else was making. Her argument is that privatizing schools so that there are ONLY private schools limits education. As someone who supports freedom you should want people to be able to choose which one they want to attend. You should also be against vouchers since private schools- if they are operating w/in a free market- should not be needing government funds in order to attract students. If the private school is superior it will attract students on it's own w/o the help of government subsidies. Remember economic libertarians do not support government subsidies to businesses because this is a form of interfering w/ the free market. You either are in favor of a free market (no governmental interference) or a limited market (some governmental interference). You can argue either position, but then I expect you, from this point on, to keep your rhetoric in line. If you want government to intervene w/ the private sector and if you believe the private sector cannot exist w/o government intervention that is fine. But then you would be making the liberal argument....in which case, welcome to the club =P
Next week, he adds 'lawyer' to his quiver of fake skills, to go with the fake moral superiority that allowed him to (supposedly) get a higher education without contaminating himself with public loans. I'll eat my own feet if he's got so much as an associates degree.
In other words, it's well designed to accomplish its goals.
Remember: one of the most basic premises of the right is "Government doesn't work, elect us and we'll prove it!"
I'll try to make this brief, because it's probably not the best analogy, but the whole thing reminds me quite a bit of the "DIVX debacle" in 1998-1999. Before becoming the name of a type of video file, DIVX was an attempt at competition/a complement to regular DVDs, at a time when that format was just rolling out. The idea with DIVX was, you bought a DIVX player, the DIVX discs were essentially rentals you'd never have to return. Your player was attached to a phone line and you had an account with DIVX, so when you put your disc in your player, you could watch it as much as you wanted within 48 hours. After that, you had to pay again. MAYBE you could pay an additional fee to get it to play unlimited in any player you owned (DIVX Silver), MAYBE you could pay even more for it to play in any DIVX player (DIVX Gold), that was up to the studios releasing the movies.
The idea was rife with troubles from the start - would these players play standard DVDs? (after some hemming and hawing, it was decided that yes they would) Aren't all those extra discs a waste? (It was decided that stores would have return bins for recycling) What are you gonna do with those discs? (Resell them) What if my account info is still attached to them (uh, we'll delete that...probably) Are you using mt watching habits for telemarketers? (Perish the thought? WE will be the telemarketers offering you specials based on your habits, what could go wrong?) What if I buy a kid's movie and my kid wants to watch it ALL the time and that studio doesn't give me the option for unlimited play? Am I gonna have to keep shelling out 4 bucks for 48 hours? (never gave an answer on that one) And so on and so on. But the people behind it were so focused on all the money they could make, no one ever stopped to say "maybe this is an inferior product." And it turns out it was.
AND THAT'S how I feel (yay, the point, finally!) about school vouchers. They do not guarantee a superior product, it just provides someone an opportunity to make money selling you a "product," in this case, your child's education. There is no real guarantee that education will be good (though demographically speaking there are guarantees some of those schools will be "white" and for some parents maybe that's allll that matters). There's no one to be held accountable if the "product" is faulty (not that there's much of one now, the way Education gets gutted), and there are no guarantees that a "good school" will be able to expand to meet the demands of parents who do want the best for their kids which means some kids are going to lose out (gee, wonder which ones THOSE will be?).
It's such awful idea, the only ones who really love it are the ones who stand to profit from it. A halfway decent mediatype person should make that the first question to anyone who praises school vouchers: "Do you or anyone you know or anyone you have business connections with stand to profit from school vouchers?" Or do the research and PROVE that's the case (we all know it will be).
I pity any parent in a crappy school system trying to do right by their kids, who might actually benefit if they were given a voucher and told "go, find a better school for your kid." But I also pity the kids who get left behind, whether they don't get to the good school fast enough or their parents don't have enough on the ball to get them to a good school, or their parents prefer an education that proves dinosaurs and man lived together and went to Jesus concerts together where He praised the slaughter of the inferior black man or whatever horse crap they'll wind up being taught.
But hey, there's profit to be made, so the profitmeisters will let the next generation worry about the mess...or rather, they'll let their kids worry about how to profit from the mess, because you know THEY'RE getting a quality education.
I wrote that I'd TRY to make it brief, not that I'd succeed.
The Republicans are trying to privatize every government function and sell off most government properties including those federal lands in the west. These Republicans intend to cannibalize the government and then walk away and let Dems pick up the pieces. It is time to end privatization and that should begin with the military, schools and the Post Office. Dems need to make a stand or SS/Medicare will be next because they will be the only programs left to privatize. There will be no government functions that have not been privatized and Dems should not make it easy for Republicans.
Mike I live by millions of acres of Federal land, you know how they became federal land Bill Clinton signed a bill stating that they were. Why does the federal government have the right to just take state land? The unions make up this country not the fed, THE UNITED STATE OF AMERICA.
Next name one thing that the federal govenment does better and at a lower cost then the private sector. Name one. you can't .
How about the USPS loosing 25 million a day, yet ups does the same thing at a much more efficient rate.
Bingo, they want to get their hands on taxpayer dollars and skim off profits in the whole process. We have to fight hard against this for profit education system. We let them get away with privatizing military logistics.
Look what happened when we outsourced military logistics, we no longer have a place for many young people to go learn good work habits and some basic skills. Now we have really high unemployment among poorly educated youth and higher crime rates because they have no job. Peeling potatoes on KP duty would be a much better solution but Cheney and friends wouldn't be nearly as rich.
I also see that Wall Street panty sniffer Cory Booker is now big a getting rid of the War on Drugs, is he connected to some syndicate that has private treatment centers? Would be a compatible business with his for profit school buddies.
....this is just crazy. We are a federacy chem. That means that the central government and in particular the US Constitution (which is a federal document, NOT a state document) delegates powers to the states. It is NOT the reverse. The federal government owns all land and then hands that land over to the states. At any time the federal government may take it's land back from the states.
Medical care when provided by an all government network is cheaper than private sector medical care.
Education when provided by an all government network is cheaper than private sector education.
The US military as a whole runs cheaper than paramilitary companies
Police departments run cheaper than private security firms
The cost to repair a helicopter built and maintained by the US government is cheaper than one built and maintained by the private sector by an almost 6 to 1 ratio
Should I keep going?
The USPS doesn't lose 25 million a day. The USPS has to fund retirement 50 years out for hypothetical workers who haven't started yet all of which is something no other federal branch has to do. This money is then borrowed from and used to back bonds which then requires more money to be taken from the USPS. The USPS would be running a surplus if it wasn't for this problem and this problem was not created by the USPS, but was instead created by the US Congress. It's fine to point out the mess, but you are incorrectly stating that this is the USPS problem. The USPS is not funded directly by tax payer money, but is instead entirely funded by stamps. Using those 48 cent stamps at a time the USPS is able to accomplish what takes UPS several dollars at a time to match. Additionally UPS has had to issue massive layoffs several times due to lost revenue and over-borrowed debt, which the USPS has never had to do until this stupid law passed by the 2005 US Congress. It should also be noted that the USPS services more customers than the UPS and yet does so for less money and less operation costs than the UPS or FedEx
Amazing. Earlier today I coined in my own little brain the term 'cannibal conservatism'. But I guess it's not all that amazing. If two people are looking at a pile of @!$%#, it's not really all that surprising if they both say, Hey! That's a pile of @!$%#!"
Exactly Mike!
And BRAVO to the Mouzer above for his comments to chemhead.
"When President Obama urges millionaires to pay slightly more in taxes, he's being divisive and pitting Americans against each other"
If the 99% comes to understand that the social, economic and political system is rigged to favor the 1%, Obama could unify 99% of Democrats and Republicans alike and even some of the 1% that care about issues of fairness and equality. That would be the opposite of divisive and of course that is what the 1% is so worried about and why Wall Street is donating so much money to Romney.
Sadly, the GOP part of that 99% isn't interested in facts or realities; they would rather repeat unverified sound bites over and over, and secretly (or not so secretly) cling to the idea that a Democratic president is illegal, a racist against whites, a Muslim, or a socialist facist dictator apologist (or whatever other contradictions they can come up with). The truth is sometimes uncomfortable, but putting on your blinders doesn't make it any less true, not that they would ever acknowledge that.
The Pendulum swings to extremes. Regarding the Arc of the pendulum and relating it to Alexandrov Surfaces, The farthest point mapping for compact surfaces, associating to each point x of the surface the set of absolute maxima (not the car) of the intrinsic distance from x, is for some surfaces single valued and a homeomorphism, while for other surfaces it is not single-valued, and not subjective.
These two big classes are not well understood.
For instance it is unknown whether, in the convex case,
the second class is dense.
(Vouchers) Not well understood, Dense… There was a reason to study the Calculus.
I enjoyed that thoroughly! Insider humour deserves appreciation.
I was a banker when the banks were brought in as middlemen between the students and the government. At the time I wondered why anyone wouldn't want to invest in the future of these students which can only result in a better future for our country. But the powers that be brought the banks in, and it was an outrage. It's disgusting that Romney wants to bring the banks back in. Does anyone trust any bank any more? It doesn't bother Romney because he keeps his money, untaxed, and overseas. But the banks have screwed us time and again. The only reason for Romney's wanting to do this is to give more of our money to banks....................that's right, the organizations that just about took our country down. What country do you think Romney supports? Does he believe in the future of any country other than his immediate family? I doubt it.
Republicans understand...
that what the hell is the point of people getting sick or injured or getting an education or having water and sewer services unless the wealthy can make a profit from it!
Republicans are not really opposed to anything, as long as their wealthy contributors can get their cut!
Wondering why the story of the Student Protests in Quebec are not being covered by TRMS? http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/mass_arrests_in_quebec_during_defiance_of_anti-protest_law_20120524/
These protests will be coming to a campus near you thanks to http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-government-is-running-a-massive-spying-campaign-on-the-occupy-movement-2012-5
Maddow mentioned it, but only in a quick blurb. I don't know if she'll address the issue more closely or if she's content w/ that quick shout out she did before moving on.
The making of Romney's BAIN-ana Republic:
The Bainification of Education: Kill off public education in favor of for-profit schools that cater to the wealthy thus leaving underprivileged kids undereducated with little chance of succeeding economically.
The Bainification of Defense: Nothing to do with national security. Everything to do with making defense contractors wealthy.
The Bainification of Public Sector Workers: Destroy unions for garbage collectors, postal workers, firemen, police and teachers while corporations dump $$$ into campaigns to elect politicians who help with the destruction.
The Bainification of Free Enterprise: Instead of promoting mfg'ing of goods and services in U.S., bankrupt businesses that struggle in such a way as to make rich people richer.
The Bainification of Healthcare: Destroy medicare. Make HMO's and drug companies rich at the expense of hospitals, doctors, and everyone who can afford to pay while they are healthy enough to work. Make it easy to cancel sick people insurance.
The Bainification of Trade: If U.S. workers won't work for $2 or $3 per day, Chinese workers will. End of story.
The Bainification of Electoral Process: Corporate $$$ for policies that favor corporate greed; legalize voter restrictions to limit voting by uppity poor people.
The Bainification of Campaigning: Lying is not a sin, it is a business model.
The Bainification of Wall St: Put corporate raiders in charge of SEC and Fed Reserve. After stints in public sector, they'll go back to old jobs as heads of hedge funds. Yea!
The Bainification of Energy Policy: Drill, Baby, Drill! Invade Middle East, African and Latin American countries, steal their oil to pay for more invasions, but split the profits with China because they make all our stuff.
The Bainification of Women: Keep 'em barefoot and pregnant.
The Bainification of Europe: Let 'em go bankrupt.
The Bainification of Disaster Recovery: That's what church groups are for.
The Bainification of Infrastructure: If a bridge falls in the water and kills a few people, then we'll rebuild the bridge using private contractors. As for the people who die, they're easily replaced because of the new policy that bainifies women.
The Bainification of Climate Change: We like things a little warmer. Have you ever spent a winter in Massachusetts? Besides, breaking up of sea ice in the Arctic opens up oil reserves. That's a lot better than drilling the gulf because oil spills hurt shrimpers and rich people like shrimp. You can't eat polar bears.
The Bainification of the Presidency: The president is above the law. If you don't like it, move.
The Bainification of Democracy: People will continue to have the right to vote, but only those supported by corporate $$$ will be allowed to win elections. It will be up to the discretion of Republican governors if they want to install local tyrants who auction off community assets to balance their budgets.
The Bainification of Drug Policy: People use drugs to forget how miserable their lives have become. But only legal drugs like pills and alcohol will be tolerated.
The Bainification of Federal Lands: Oh Please, do we really have to go there? Federal lands are for everybody to enjoy especially if they're good for harvesting, mining, or setting up private hunting preserves.
The Bainification of Law Enforcement: Halliburton and Blackwater say it's feasible and are ready, willing and able to contract all enforcement and imprisonment services.
The Bainification of Selective Service: Can't find a job? Join the military. We're getting ready to start some new wars.
The Bainification of the Media: "Hello, Rupert, this is Mitt Romney. Say, I'd like you to buy Hollywood"
The Bainification of Immigration Policy: AZ is a model for the nation. There is no reason why brown people can't work in factories in their own countries. The only reason they come here is because we haven't yet moved enough factories down there. And, that's because of the failed policies of the current administration.
So far, that's a brain dump of what I learned from watching TRMS
Rmoney- the bain/bane of our existence!
So true!
Fabulous Article!!!
The GOP do not want people to vote, they don't want people educated, they don't want women to decide when/if they have a child. They want to seize emergency powers from elected officials and appoint someone, they want to cut unions out altogether (lower wages, no benefits), they want to own military, prisons, schools, let jobs go elsewhere, let schools be lower in standards, cut taxes for rich and cut safety nets, most of which were negotiated and paid for. They want to let corporations and moneyed guide the government and turn off regulatory powers, among other constitutional powers.
They must really hate America and Americans.
When did the dismantling of the middle and lower class become chic?
January 21, 1981.
Nothing like living under the Republicans yoke of oppression. Where did the reasonable Republicans of the past go? Did someone toss them all into a wood chipper?
The "reasonable Republicans" were labeled "RINOs" (Republican In Name Only) and expelled by the Teapublicans. The Teapublicans have a poor record of getting their favorites into office, but they don't care, ideological purity is their goal.
Will somebody, some day reveal how the Koch brothers--the family--made their millions working for Stalin and Hitler?
There's even a pic you can Google of grandpa Koch shaking hands with Stalin.
Come on someone, call them out!!!!!
Behind every great fortune is a great crime.
Well its like Romney said not to long ago. Hes not worried about the poor
Well its like Romney said not too long ago. Hes not worried about the poor
Think of the money saved when employees of privatized prisons can moonlight at privatized schools. Graduates of the schools will get a discount at the prison.
Now you're thinkin' like a Teapublican. Welcome to the revolution!
Privatizing student loans became a rip-off. I'd like to see a comparison between how well private equity works compared to public equity (the SBA).
Rachel - your awesome as usual. If anyone would like to contact their State Representative or Congress person, I think I may have just about every phone number and address listing for them: http://studentloandebacle.blogspot.com/ Those on The Hill need to hear us, we need to tell them to 'listen to us' and not the plutocrats. We need to collaborate collectively and demand they hear us...
Wow.. way to go with charming the 'young' vote, there Mitt. Gee, do ANY Republicans get a Pell grant ? Just a few ?
I'm a teacher. Very sorry that there's a rant forthcoming.
First of all, Republicans' records on support of Educators and smart education policy--namely, their record of utterly failing on everything having to do with the subject--is well documented. This article gets the voucher argument right on the money, so I'll leave that subject be.
But it's been a great disappointment to many educators (myself among them) that under Arne Duncan and the Race To The Top program, many of the worst educational policies of the Bush administration were actually made far worse than ever before. RTTT takes the old NCLB assessment and graduation requirements (AYP) and puts money behind the absolute worst policies out there. I'll give a few examples.
In Maryland, students need to pass the High School Assessments in order to graduate. Well, it quickly became apparent that these assessments, like all standardized tests, weren't really good at telling anyone anything except that rich kids scored better on them than poor ones, and over time, schools could adapt to teach to the test. But Maryland wanted to show that it could close the achievement gaps--or at least, create a statistical way to show that they had done so. So they've implemented the Bridge Plan: if a student fails a state assessment three times, they can do a project in lieu of a test. With my own two eyes, I have seen this project done. A teacher sits with the student after school and dictates to them what sentences they are supposed to write on a paper. Two hours later (or a couple days if it's the Biology project; that one's a bit longer), they send off the project to be graded, and the student magically is declared ready to graduate.
Maryland received 250 million dollars for its "achievement" in raising graduation rates and supposedly closing achievement gaps. So this is the type of program that's being rewarded.
Think that's an anomaly? In Hawaii, student attendance doesn't matter. Regardless what the policy says, it's de facto okay to skip school outright. 75 million dollars to Hawaii. In the city of Philadelphia, schools put the students they expect to pass state tests in one set of rooms, while the rest of the students are in classrooms where the teacher walks from desk to desk during the test and says helpful things like, "Are you sure that's the answer you want?" Pennsylvania only got Honorable Mention from RTTT, so I guess it's not quite up to snuff on its cheating methods.
Just as messed up are the grading policies at many of these schools. Across the nation, it's quickly becoming the norm that if a student fails to turn in an assignment, their grade on it is 50%. (In the aforementioned Philadelphia, it can get to 63% for a minimum grade--and one needs a 65% to pass, according to that city's policies.) You'll hear the occasional justification given for such policies, such as: "It's unfair for a zero to have such a devastating effect on a student's grade." It's telling that arguments like this had no credible following until graduation rates affected funding; then, suddenly, anyone who wants to be hired as an administrator at a public school has to be prepared to voice support for such policies, like them or not.
People think that instances like Atlanta and D.C.'s cheating scandals, where teachers actually changed students' test answers, are somehow the only kind of cheating RTTT and NCLB result in. Well, no. That's not it at all. Every school, in every county and every city, is pretty much cheating somehow. It's not always the teachers; it could be the administrators, the school board, or even the state board of education politically manipulating the numbers to show the improvement they want to see.
Until the days of high stakes testing and AYP are over forever, education's going to suffer. It's one thing when Republicans propose piece of crap policies like this; we know their record. It's another thing entirely when Democrats do it. To hear Arne Duncan speak about this, you'd be led to believe, "We've raised the bar by implementing higher standards, because when you standardize standard standards, you standard standard standard standard standard raise the bar."
Seriously. The guy uses the word, "standards" like Bush used, "freedom."
If the Democrats are so nice to the teachers' unions, they should listen to what those unions have been saying all throughout this: high stakes testing is absurd, corrupt, detrimental to education, and harmful to every student.
My whole point in posting this is to say that adding vouchers to the mix would be like adding binge drinking to chain smoking. Neither one's good, but a person doing one doesn't have much to say to a person doing both.