For years the education establishment has focused on government schools as the "one size fits all" solution to education. Almost 90% of California’s children have been channeled into these government schools, with _free_ education and _childcare_ as the carrot and compulsory attendance laws and punitive taxation as the stick.  This has come at the expense of education alternatives, which in most instances are proven to be far superior, and less costly. It has come at an annual cost to taxpayers in California which exceeds $50 Billion. It has infringed upon the rights of parents.

And, it has failed miserably in providing the skills necessary for many young citizens to fully participate in our flourishing economy without remedial tutoring.  It has prompted state legislation to fund "metal detectors" in these government schools, to make them safe for the inmates.  Have you had enough of this farce?

Now those in the establishment who truly care about children sit around contemplating their navel, unable to figure out what went wrong with the system.  Others, whose motives are less noble, see the establishment of Secular Humanism as the state religion. To solidify their position this cult constantly seeks more money for a morally bankrupt system, and, they would extend the K-12 system to three-year old children!

Don’t get me wrong! Secular Humanists have the same Constitutional rights as those of other persuasions. But none have the right to teach their religion in tax-funded schools.

Listen to some of the recommendations from the Universal Preschool Task Force convened by State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Delaine Eastin:

"Offer publicly funded universal preschool within ten years to all three- and four-year-old children in California for at least one-half day during the regular school year. ... Establish extensions and connections with year-round providers to offer full-day child care with funds available for that purpose. ... Fund universal preschool providers similarly to public school funding, with payments based on the average number of children served."

Consider this:  If we extend K-12 by two years, the lifetime cost at today’s level (in Y2K dollars) per child would be 15 x $10,000, or $150,000. Multiply that by 2.2 children per family, and we get $330,000.    Why not just give each family a brand new home? With room for a live-in tutor.

This latest effort to include three-year old children is the carrot to induce parents to give their children up to Hillary’s village. What parent of a three year old child would not jump at the opportunity to have "free" child care so that they could go to work and earn enough to pay their taxes? 

It should be a goal of policymakers, to seek a system of education which places government schools as the schools of last resort. Schools where children who have fallen through the crack can be educated. Parents should be restored to their role as consumers to whom providers of education and associated resources would be accountable.

In the past five years, half of the appeals to the Board of Education, made by parents seeking to have their children attend a school other than the one assigned by their local school district, have been denied. There is no reason why parents should be denied a choice in where their children are educated, so long as that choice does not involve added expense to taxpayers.

I  also suggest global public policy changes which would encourage families to assume full responsibility for the education of their children. Savings derived from the transfer of students out of "tax-funded" government schools could temporarily be used to provide tax credits to parents during the transfer. Families would experience long-term financial relief as tax collections are reduced. Key to this reduction is the Gann Expenditure Limit, which would rachet down the global limit, and taxes which support that limit, as the government schooling system shrinks in size.

Private Vouchers and Property Tax Credits

Private vouchers, which are growing in support, would be the natural, free-market solution for those whose finances are insufficient to effect the transfer. And, it should be remembered that education can occur anywhere. Teachers come in all sizes and shapes, and credentials do not guarantee competence. Teachers in retirement are now free to return to their chosen profession without fear of having their Social Security benefits taxed.  And, large class sizes do not prevent excellence in learning experiences. One need only read of the Marva Collins story in Chicago to understand what is possible.

Property tax credits should be created to allow taxpayers and parents a choice.  ANY property tax payer should be allowed to direct taxes, within limits, to students of their choosing with parental support.  Parents who can demonstrate that their children are being educated to acceptable levels of proficiency should be afforded property tax credits.

Far too often meritorious programs are not adequately funded by existing revenue sources because the gutless wonders we elected refuse to make the tough choices for fear of losing a special interest constituency.   Fine!  Let the voters decide!

I propose that all Meritorious Programs which do not receive adequate funding by our elected officials, from existing revenues produced by our economy and limited by Jarvis and Gann, be submitted to the electorate.   Upon passage by 55%, these Meritorious Programs would be funded, without a tax increase, from the General Property Tax (1%).  A vote in excess of 2/3 would qualify the Meritorious Program for support from a tax rate above the 1% limit.