NE3: Education Reform Act (debating)

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: ClarkKent
Mr. Lt. Gov., you have 36 hours to advocate for your bill

[DKrol]

I offer the following amendment:

5. Low-income p Parents may request government-funded school vouchers to allow their children to attend government-approved private schools.

[Clark Kent]

It's clear that our education system needs to be reformed. However, just throwing money at it won't solve anything. Under my system, nobody should have to go into debt (many won't even have to pay at all) provided that they do their work; we invest in the future by paying for scholarships for the gifted scientists, engineers, and mathematicians of the future; and all children have an equal opportunity to receive a quality education. And of course, the veterans who bravely served our country deserve our help.

I offer the following amendment:

5. Low-income p Parents may request government-funded school vouchers to allow their children to attend government-approved private schools.

I respectfully disagree. All students deserve the same opportunities for education regardless of their parents' income, but paying for everyone would only make this more expensive. Besides, those who are from well-off families can already afford to go to private schools anyways.

[DKrol]

Could the sponsor please define what "low-income" and "medium-income" families are? What are the exact lines between these groups? Shouldn't there be a definition of these groups in the bill?

[Potus]

The nature of being a taxpayer is that you receive certain benefits for paying taxes. It's a social contract. You pay gas and income taxes, so you can drive on the roads and educate your children. What school vouchers do is tether your benefits to your child. It preserves the education benefits you are entitled to under the social contract if you opt for an alternative educational setting. Low income families don't have any more of a right to their education benefits than middle of upper income families.

Sorry to say that, while the bill is well intentioned, it's in need of a significant redraft in order to be put into law.

[Clark Kent]

Could the sponsor please define what "low-income" and "medium-income" families are? What are the exact lines between these groups? Shouldn't there be a definition of these groups in the bill?

Yes, there should. Unfortunately, I'm nowhere close to an expert on this, and I am hoping that one of the other representatives can propose a reasonable distinction between the two. As it stands, I'm currently leaning towards an annual income of $20000 for a family of four as the line between low- and medium-income, and $100000 as the line between medium- and high-income. However, I am very willing to change my mind on this and set different limits.

The nature of being a taxpayer is that you receive certain benefits for paying taxes. It's a social contract. You pay gas and income taxes, so you can drive on the roads and educate your children. What school vouchers do is tether your benefits to your child. It preserves the education benefits you are entitled to under the social contract if you opt for an alternative educational setting. Low income families don't have any more of a right to their education benefits than middle of upper income families.

Sorry to say that, while the bill is well intentioned, it's in need of a significant redraft in order to be put into law.

You are correct that citizens receive certain benefits in exchange for paying their taxes. However, this bill does not intend to replace or abolish public schools (which would still be free of charge to all children, regardless of their families' income), but to provide children from low-income families the opportunities to go to private schools which may provide a better education. Besides, we don't give food stamps to those who can afford food, simply because they don't need it.

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

Upon looking at the situation of the debate, debate extended for 24 hours

[Clyde1998]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I believe that universities are free in the Northeast, and indeed the whole of Atlasia, at present.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As per point one.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As per point one.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would need to see some funding figures - although I agree with it principle.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wouldn't support this, as I believe that the money would be better spent improving our current public schools.

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

What do you want to be the next step? Close or continue to debate?

[Clark Kent]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I believe that universities are free in the Northeast, and indeed the whole of Atlasia, at present.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As per point one.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As per point one.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would need to see some funding figures - although I agree with it principle.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wouldn't support this, as I believe that the money would be better spent improving our current public schools.

I'm not doubting you, but can you cite the law, please? I don't really want to look through ten years of history for it.

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

I'll give another 24 hours for debate. Then, we'll vote.

[Blair]

I always had a suspicion that college was free, apologies for not bringing up the relevant laws.

I'd be happy to turn this into a vocational bill designed at helping adults, veterans get back into the classroom and getting highly skilled jobs, and maybe a voucher scheme as long as it's well made

[Clark Kent]

The Senate is debating a law concerning student loans, so there's at least some parts that aren't funded by the government.

[DemPGH]

The STEM part I would support and something directed at vocational or skilled labor I would support, but I'd also need a refresher on national and northeastern law on this, so if this as presented comes up for final vote, I'll have to review before voting.

[Blair]

This is why I want to set out charters for all my departments, and plan on doing it on my train ride back home (fun times right)

Having a quick look through this it's free in the Northeast

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

We now move to a 48-hour vote.

[Clark Kent]

Actually, Mr. Speaker, since nobody has voted yet, I'd like to ask you to extend debate on this for maybe another 24 hours. I have some more to say when I get home (in about 4 hours).

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

Actually, Mr. Speaker, since nobody has voted yet, I'd like to ask you to extend debate on this for maybe another 24 hours. I have some more to say when I get home (in about 4 hours).

Regarding this, I've asked cinyc about this during the time that we're voting on "Right to Life Act" and I've got this response.

Once the debate period is over, it is over.  Voting goes on.  You can't reopen it.

I don't know how to interpret this if nobody has voted yet.

Perhaps, I'll ask cinyc again.

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

Actually, Mr. Speaker, since nobody has voted yet, I'd like to ask you to extend debate on this for maybe another 24 hours. I have some more to say when I get home (in about 4 hours).

In my opinion, say what you have to say if nobody has voted yet. .

[DemPGH]

I'm perfectly happy to extend the debate period if no one votes. There's a lot in here that's good and there's a lot of potential.

[Clyde1998]

I fine with an extended debate.

[Clark Kent]

I understand that higher education is free here. However, in [real life America], a college degree is all but mandatory to get a job these days, even for positions that don't (or shouldn't) require one. Making it free is just going to pressure undecideds or people who would otherwise have chosen a different path to waste four years of their life doing something they really don't want to do.

That's not to say that I don't think the government should step in to help. College is notoriously expensive, and burdens millions of people with tons of debt that can take decades to pay off fully. But that's the point of this bill.

In addition to improving vocation education (which seems to be supported by most of us), this bill would also allow anyone who passed high school to attend any public university of their choice with interest-free government loans. The difference between the current system and my proposal is that my proposal will eventually get us the money back, which we can then loan out again to the next generation without significantly raising taxes to subsidize their education.

I would also preserve the grants for A-students with an interest in STEM-related fields. Is this valuing some interests over others? Yes, but to be completely honest, an engineering degree is far more valuable (and useful) than, say, a degree in philosophy. We should be investing in the future, not trying to preserve the present.

I understand that my proposal to end free college for all will in all likelihood not be very popular, but it would fulfill the goals of keeping higher education affordable while also saving money and preventing college from being "required", as well as reforming the public schools system.

Thank you.

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

Another (last) 24 hours extension for debate

[DemPGH]

The one downside to college being "free" is that, yeah, you are going to have a lot of people there studying 'Basketweaving' or otherwise things that are virtually unemployable and which will have a hard time transferring over to anything else. I positively support the Humanities, and there are lots of people who gravitate to it, but it needs to also be understood that this is a changing world and a changing market. Sure, some people with their degree in Archaeology or Music will find gainful employment, but the vast majority will not, and same with your Religion PhD or your PhD in Anglo-Saxon. You know? I mean I actually know someone who is writing a dissertation about sending books to people in prisons. Like, really? Hey, that's great, but really?

Likewise, if we start pushing people really hard into STEM fields, they'll soon become inundated. So IDK, it's a fine line. To me it starts with incorporating principals of Business and Business Education into the general curriculum, but that might be a bigger, broader issue. I mean you just can't sit there these days and isolate yourself in a Humanities Department or a Music Department or whatever and expect to be relevant at all when you're done. That, I think, is the bottom line.

Anyway, I may offer an amendment this afternoon if I can piece it together in time.

[Clark Kent]

The one downside to college being "free" is that, yeah, you are going to have a lot of people there studying 'Basketweaving' or otherwise things that are virtually unemployable and which will have a hard time transferring over to anything else. I positively support the Humanities, and there are lots of people who gravitate to it, but it needs to also be understood that this is a changing world and a changing market. Sure, some people with their degree in Archaeology or Music will find gainful employment, but the vast majority will not, and same with your Religion PhD or your PhD in Anglo-Saxon. You know? I mean I actually know someone who is writing a dissertation about sending books to people in prisons. Like, really? Hey, that's great, but really?

I completely agree with this part.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You do bring up a good point here, and it's something that I hadn't thought of.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, I think that would be great.