I am still weighing the pros and cons of the legislation, and even if I vote against the final draft, I want Clarence and everyone else to understand that at least I looked at both arguments and based my judgment off of that instead of simply having a knee-jerk attitude against it.
Is that what you think I've done? Sorry, I've actually researched how this bill would affect the status quo to reach my conclusion. There is no compromise that could make this function practically.
Let's take a look at what this bill does. It gives money to school districts to provide transportation to any school from any neighborhood. Buses can't just pick kids up from a neighborhood and go from school to school. Many schools start at the same time, so that's a lot of buses and buses are expensive. That's a lot of miles, and gasoline is expensive. That's a lot of kids to a lot of schools. I really feel like I'm the only person who has thought about the impact of this bill. Now, as I said, it gives money to school districts, but it doesn't fund
transportation. $1 billion is not nearly enough money to cover the costs incurred. Considering the cost of buses and gasoline and the number of schools per district, my estimation is that at least forty times that is needed to actually work, and that is a lot of money.
Now let's focus on the merits of this bill. Yes, allowing parents to send there child to the school they want to is a good idea but on who's dime? Does the outcome justify the cost? Most school districts are small- it isn't as if you will find really good schools and really bad schools within a single district very often. So what tangible benefits will be seen from this bill, and how in the world could they outweigh a $40 billion price tag?
You- on the other hand- seem to have such an inflated view that you alone are right and if one doesn't agree with you, he or she is dead wrong and either must adopt your point of view or else is not worth it.
I do believe that in regard to this bill, quite strongly in fact. I encourage you to explain how this bill would do anything other than create chaos. You haven't provided any argument as to why this policy should be adopted: the only favorable comments you made of the bill I've shown can't really apply- the racial diversity and overcrowding arguments don't align with the reality of our education system.
Clarence has compromised by moving one disastrous policy to another. Quite a low standard if you ask me. I really hope it doesn't become a trend for this Senate to ignore common sense because the sponsor of a bill expresses a willingness to compromise. After all, the Fugitive Slave Act was a compromise.
Your second statement there is clearly a personal attack and your last statement is what makes it such a vile commentary overall...
Senator, that second statement is in no way a personal attack and cannot even be stretched or twisted into such. Quite clearly, I stated that your willing to compromise (which is respectable, but in this case, impossible) has resulted only in making a bad policy into a different bad policy, and saying that is a poor standard on which to judge legislation. This is in response to a Redalgo post which has since been edited out of the form my response was to. The point was that compromise is good, but you can't vote for a bad policy just because compromises were made to get there. Voting on legislation should be about the policy itself and not the process- and this process has been dreadful by the standards of this esteemed body.
The last statement was included to demonstrate that compromise in and of itself is not a virtue, and does not make something worthy of becoming law. Compromise can be good, compromise can be bad, just like anything else.
I believe that working to improve a bill is a good thing but I understand this bill is unworkable in any form if the goals Senator Clarence has set out are to be achieved, so I recommend not spending more time on it. In no way is this an attempt to stifle debate. See the problem Clarence is that there hasn't been any debate (maybe that's what made it enjoyable?), and no one was, until I spoke out, focused on the merits of the policy itself. Hopefully we can now reach a decision on this by considering the relevant facts and realize not every bill was meant to be passed.