Narrow Search

Comment Archives: Stories: Last 30 Days

Re: “Someone In Phoenix Is Selling A Fence That (Might Have) Belonged To Barry Goldwater

i get the other 7 pieces

Posted by yo on 05/22/2017 at 7:11 PM

Re: “A 'Fat Cat Tax'?

Response to "Just Sayin'

Provide some evidence and logic other than expecting us to believe something just because you say it.

What do you believe will create a better education system and why do you believe it. What evidence do you have? What logic are you using? Just sneering and denigrating doesn't cut it and getting a mob to back you up doesn't cut it.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by on 05/22/2017 at 5:21 PM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

Amen brother! And the non establishment clause kept the government fro endorsing or establishing their own religion.

That's may be why they adopted the environmental theology. Most people didn't see it as religious, and were easily duped.

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Green Is Their Money Color Also on 05/22/2017 at 4:18 PM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

Betts Putnam-Hidalgo writes, "vouchers are clearly a way to drain public dollars that go to the schools that 80% of the population chooses." That repeats Democratic party orthodoxy, but is not an accurate way of characterizing what vouchers do. Vouchers are per-pupil funding that is transferred from the public school where it would have been applied in support of that child's education in that setting to a private school, which, if the child transfers, must bear the cost of educating that child. It's a zero sum game. The public school loses the expense of educating that child at the same time that it loses the per pupil funding. There is no "drain" on public schools involved. Public schools only get "per pupil" funding when the pupil chooses to enroll there, not when they withdraw.

In a context where the above-described transfer is not permitted through vouchers or tax credits or some other equalizing type of law or policy, what is actually going on is economic discrimination against families who want their children's academic instruction delivered in a context different from the public district or public charter schools. In states like Arizona where there are deeply troubled public school districts that have been permitted to mismanage the education of tens of thousands of students, when students transfer out of one of these troubled districts into a high-performing private, if there are no vouchers or tax credits, the state is able to benefit from better educated, higher earning, more productive citizens at no cost to itself. Voucher supporters believe the state should be asked to pay its fair share towards the education of all K-12 students. (It would be best if the state provided some way of verifying that the quality of education delivered in alternative institutions is at or above the quality of education delivered in publicly funded schools. Unfortunately, Arizona legislators have not seen fit to put in place any regulatory mechanisms that can accomplish this, and that is a serious flaw in the way the law and policy relating to this have been structured to date.)

The so-called "separation of church and state" which voucher opponents call in to service to back up their economic discrimination against families using alternative schools which happen to have religious affiliations shows a misunderstanding of the context in which the US Constitution was framed. The founders were trying to prohibit the kind of economic discrimination practiced in England against all those who refused to affiliate with the state-sponsored religion. They wanted to prevent the formation of a state-sponsored religion in this country. Allowing people to choose to apply the public funds available for the K-12 education of their children in whatever alternative institution they prefer -- religiously affiliated or not -- in no way limits the freedom of other citizens, constitutes the establishment of a state-sponsored religion, or discriminates against anyone who does not want to make the same choice.

Unfortunately, what is at the bottom of a surprising amount of anti-voucher advocacy is resistance to the entitlements citizens should have in a country that grants freedom of religious affiliation and -- even worse -- thinly disguised prejudice against organized religion. Citizens with religious affiliations have not always found the public district school system a "value-neutral" environment. For generations now, those who have chosen not to educate their children in contexts that show subtle and not-so-subtle forms of disrespect for their values and beliefs have carried an inappropriate economic burden as they have paid out-of-pocket for schooling that, if they had chosen to ignore the discriminatory flaws too often found in the public district system, would have been free. It's a good thing that this form of economic discrimination is now, in some contexts, being reversed. It seems unlikely that the citizens benefiting from these programs will fail to organize to support their continuance, if they come under threat in upcoming elections.

4 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by ... and some don't want public funds spent on failing TUSD. on 05/22/2017 at 2:09 PM

Re: “Awe, Nostalgia

Will they be selling heroin and throwing up fucking pancake batter at the show? Asking for a friend.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Peabo on 05/22/2017 at 1:48 PM

Re: “Best Musical Instrument Store

I have always loved the Chicago Store. I do miss the old, much bigger location, though. It was a real Tucson institution. Phil and Joe Levkowitz started my loyalty 'way back in time and my loyalty continues with Mark. The eastside store has many large photographs from the old days that really make me nostalgic and remind me that this is still the Chicago Store. Long live the Chicago Store!

Posted by Bill Winkelman on 05/22/2017 at 11:59 AM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

You also cannot abbreviate the name of the city, or write with anything other than a blue or black ball point pen. And yes, cursive letters that go below the line will make your signature invalid. The intent of the lege is on full display.

3 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Pima Mujer on 05/22/2017 at 10:41 AM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

If and when this thing gets on the ballot, expect millions of dollars from the pro-voucher movement to pour into the State to defeat it. That said, I hope the people prevail!

5 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Michael S. Ellegood on 05/22/2017 at 8:36 AM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

Vouchers are clearly a way to drain public dollars that go to the schools that 80% of the population chooses ... in order to fund private schools. I am not at ALL convinced that public schoolchildren are being sacrificed (or held as "economic hostages") in order to save public schools (in fact I think its really offensive)--nor am I convinced that we should all overlook the religious side of Catholic education just because the schools are well organized. I would not expect public monies to send my student to a madrasa, to a Jewish school, nor to a Catholic or Bible school. Kudos to them if their schools are so-called "good schools"--public monies going to religious entities goes against the separation of church and state that this country is supposedly founded on. But who cares about that?!

7 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by Betts Putnam-Hidalgo on 05/22/2017 at 7:37 AM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

If you get rid of vouchers, you end up with the status run by a government sanctioned monopoly. Being a monopoly, their solutions tend to be in their own self interest. There will no doubt be a call to lard up budgets and raise taxes on " the rich". If you want to look at other states for inspiration, try California. High taxes and approval of many education bond issues. Studies show most of that money goes to the education monopoly bureaucrats and not the classrooms.
The biggest objection to vouchers is that it rewards motivated parents. Maybe we should encourage more motivated parents.

7 likes, 9 dislikes
Posted by bsinn on 05/22/2017 at 6:41 AM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

The Recall Diane Douglas people only gathered 100,000 signatures in 120 days and no one knows how many were actually valid. These people don't have a chance to get the needed amount in 90 days without paid signature gathers which they don't have the funds to pay for. Not a chance.

2 likes, 11 dislikes
Posted by Cynthia Weiss on 05/21/2017 at 10:43 PM

Re: “A 'Fat Cat Tax'?

PS Let me be more concise:


Thank you.

4 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Just Sayin' on 05/21/2017 at 2:06 PM

Re: “A 'Fat Cat Tax'?

Clearly, the abundant far-right commenters, who feel no responsibility to anyone -- anyone American, let alone Arizonan -- until they themselves get stuck, are targeting The Weekly for special scrutiny. Their strategy: destroy the media's credibility (personalize the attacks if you can), state and repeat lies and half-lie as if they were the truth, and eventually the populace will be softened up enough to belief their reactionary crap. Only, it doesn't work. Note that every far-right bleat gets three to four to a dozen times the Dislikes as Likes. Still, they keep at it. Except for their pathetic attempts to soil The Range and The Weekly, they have no way of fundamentally doing anything about life here in AZ; being consistently negative is what keeps them feeling important and potent. What a pathetic lot.

4 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by Just Sayin'.... on 05/21/2017 at 1:59 PM

Re: “The New Teacher Certification Rules: Is Everyone Else Wrong, or Am I?

The plan is to water down the quality of teaching to the point that all schools "fail." Then corporate raiders can take them over, collect tax money and close them down and transfer their loot offshore. We can stop this now. Get out and vote!

3 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Shirley Willis on 05/21/2017 at 1:24 AM

Re: “Seth MacFarlane and His Peculiar Distaste For Tucson

Whenever I'm in Tucson and ask someone there if they like Tucson and they respond with oh I just love Tucson. I have to ask myself where the hell are they from? Chicago or maybe Detroit! All the dumb baseless arrogance. The best thing that ever came out of Tucson was interstate 10!

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Rickie Garrat on 05/20/2017 at 9:08 PM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

Lets see. District schools were designed by racists to keep Catholics and minorities out. They are very effective at doing that - 99% of the public is excluded from these schools. To call them "public" schools in two ways. First, they are not open to the public.

Second, there has never been an experiment to test as to whether they are really schools for children in poverty neighborhoods. To do that, you would have to randomly assign students, one to a district school, one to a detention center to see which one would end up with greater academic achievement.

Arizona is the only state in the nation to have a legitimate claim to have a public school system. Every school in our state is open to every student through our public education system.

Now, you want to vote to exclude some of those from some of those schools.

Two different visions for public education. Some people who want to ensure that the worst teacher in the worst school in the worst school district has a full classroom.

While some of us want to ensure that there are so many choices that every full classroom is evidence of a teacher who is among the best in the world.

7 likes, 15 dislikes
Posted by on 05/20/2017 at 5:11 PM

Re: “A 'Fat Cat Tax'?

Patriot 2

You didn't add the 15.3% for Social Security and Medicare taxes or the 13.3% California income tax and the 8% sales tax when you go to spend the money you make.

2 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by on 05/20/2017 at 2:26 PM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

Why would parents vote against their own self interests? Let it go.Your desire for public school domination is unreal.

11 likes, 21 dislikes
Posted by Give a kid a chance on 05/20/2017 at 6:17 AM

Re: “Can Voters Defeat the Vouchers-For-All Law?

The lay of the land is different in Utah. They do not have as extensive a Catholic schools network as Arizona does, and so one significant interest group that will put its collective efforts behind defending vouchers is absent there.

You assert that all the adult voters in the households of the 92% of students enrolled in public schools before the ESA bill passed will see an anti-voucher vote as something that promotes their "self-interest." However:
--Among the 92% enrolled in public schools before that bill passed will be some who intend to use the ESAs to leave public schools.
--There will be some families with a child or children in privates and a child or children in publics as well. It seems unlikely that they will vote against ESAs.
--Hard as it may be for you to believe, there are actually some people all of whose children are in public schools who don't want to use the children of other families as economic hostages to the dubious goal of supposedly "saving" troubled public school districts. They recognize that it is in the community's best interest if other people are able to place their children in schools where they will thrive and succeed. There are, for example, a lot of parents of children in well-managed public school districts in Southern Arizona who don't think anyone's children should be imprisoned on sinking ships like TUSD, and who would be happy if families within the boundaries of TUSD were given the opportunity to spend their per pupil funding anywhere they chose -- in another school district, in a charter, OR in a Catholic or Independent school, if that is the family's preference.

Framing education policy the way you do -- in broad categories like "PUBLIC DISTRICT" vs. "CHARTER" vs. "PRIVATE" -- and then assuming these categories have constituents whose policy aims and opinions are unified as they defend what you imagine to be their "self-interest" oversimplifies to the point of absurdity a landscape in American (and Arizonan) education that is considerably more complex, diverse, and difficult to interpret than you make it out to be.

But I guess, after the embarrassing gaffes of the past year (so-called Democrats' and supporters-of-public-schools' active support of 123 being the most conspicuous among them) folks who were previously duped and led astray have to have something to contemplate that cheers them up. Simplistic fantasies about how things will play out in our collective political future may be helpful as a mood-altering supplement to the daily depressing dose of reality that the news-feed from Phoenix provides.

14 likes, 13 dislikes
Posted by Weak analysis; try again. on 05/19/2017 at 6:57 PM

Re: “Small Town Big Business

I've had the misfortune to eat here a few times recently with relatives and I can safely say that the food at Old Chicago is truly terrible and likely comes frozen out of a Sysco truck. Preparation and presentation are lacking. The servers have been nice, though.

6 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Tucson resident on 05/19/2017 at 10:02 AM

© 2017 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation