Fox News reports.
Excerpt:
The Justice Department is trying to stop a school vouchers program in Louisiana that attempts to help families send their children to independent schools instead of under-performing public schools.
The agency wants to stop the program, led by Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal, in any school district that remains under a desegregation court order.
In papers filed in U.S. District Court in New Orleans, the agency said Louisiana distributed vouchers in 2012-13 to roughly 570 public school students in districts that are still under such orders and that “many of those vouchers impeded the desegregation process.”
The federal government argues that allowing students to attend independent schools under the voucher system could create a racial imbalance in public school systems protected by desegregation orders.
Jindal — who last year expanded the program that started in 2008 — said this weekend that the department’s action is “shameful” and said President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder “are trying to keep kids trapped in failing public schools against the wishes of their parents.”
The Justice Department says Louisiana has given vouchers this school year to students in at least 22 of 34 districts remaining under desegregation orders.
Jindal called school choice “a moral imperative.”
Vouchers are a way of helping poor, minority students to get a quality education by letting them choose to attend better schools – any school the parents choose.
This lady from the Cato Institute explains in a 5-minute video why vouchers are a good thing.
A longer video featuring John Stossel is here:
You can learn more about vouchers below.
Related posts
- Indiana voucher program offers hope to low-income students
- Secretary of Education rescinds previously awarded D.C. vouchers
- Arizona Supreme Court rules voucher program unconstitutional
- New study: private religious schools outperform public schools and public charter schools
- How two moms halted the Common Core curriculum in Indiana
- Wayne Grudem explains what the Bible says about parents and schools
- Good news: school choice victory in Indiana, pro-life victory in North Dakota
- Atlanta public schools caught helping students to cheat on standardized tests
- Republicans in Florida, Indiana and Pennsylvania push school choice
- Do public school teachers want to give children a quality education?
- Sex-education video prompts mother to transfer out 7-year old daughter
- 10% of US students are subject to sexual misconduct by school staff
- How Obama’s new 2011 budget fails the poorest children in two ways
- How teacher unions lobby government to block educational reform
- What helps kids to learn? Parents, teacher unions or education bureaucrats?
- New study reveals how school choice benefits the poorest students
- Eleven schools teaching children to praise and worship Obama
- Do teacher unions care about providing high quality education?
- Does the education system discriminate against boys?
- NEA lawyer explains the real goals of teacher unions: money and power
- Are teacher unions interested in helping your children to succeed in life?
- Economist Walter Williams evaluates whether teachers are earning their huge salaries
- How teacher’s unions make war on charter schools
WINTERY KNIGHT 
Dismembering babies: Pro Choice!
Choosing where the ones that didn’t get dismembered go to school: No Choice!
Yeah, that makes sense.
LikeLike
I know this is a little off-topic but I think there is a larger issue here, namely that we should be paying to educate people at all. There is something about this that doesn’t sit right with me. It has always seemed to me that public education is seen as a good thing because the public at large believes that all people are educable. This is inherently incorrect. The majority should not be in schools and we should not be wasting our tax dollars on this. Not only that, this is yet another case of the wealthy subsidizing the poor: by and large, most of these minority students live in apartments and their parents contribute nothing in property taxes toward their education. As a property owner, I’m tired of wasting my money.
(Please note that I make these comments about education as a former middle school and high school teacher.)
LikeLike
I agree with you. Most jobs don’t require a college degree. I don’t think that the people who choose to go to trade school or straight into the workplace should be subsidizing the degrees of people who just go to college and get average grades and come out with a pack of student debt and then get a job that doesn’t even require the degree.
LikeLike
We’re on the same page concerning college degrees but my point is even more radical. I think that a majority of those in lower school shouldn’t be there. Education isn’t for everyone, in fact, it should only be for those who can really use it and those people aren’t as plentiful as most would like to believe. Beyond teaching basic reading and math skills, we are essentially paying for state-mandated daycare after a certain point (I would say about the fifth grade). These students are never going to understand beyond a certain basic level and I think it’s time we quit subsidizing them.
LikeLike
I am worried that a population that is not educated will be easily led by tyrants, but it’s not like the current public school system is doing a good job, even though we are throwing tons of money at them.
Look at this chart of spending vs academic achievement from the libertarian Cato Institute:
http://www.cato.org/blog/public-school-spending-theres-chart
By the way, Captain Capitalism linked to this funny article about a woman who did a degree in Women’s Studies and Feminist Theory and can’t find a job now:
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-academian-rationalization-hamster.html
I think we agree that this woman should not have gone to college for a degree like that. She started off in English, too. Yuckers.
LikeLike
Of course they banned it! They are anti-choice extremists. Unless you want to kill your baby.
LikeLike