TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:100 years ago when I was in law school, there was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that held there is no constitutional right to be provided an education. However, if a state chooses to provide public education, then it must do so without discrimination. (I'm not talking about Brown v. Board of Education.)

The problem I see is the State mandating a public school system that is successful in suburban areas, but an abject failure in major cities. Overall I view public school systems as a failure in that we are graduating kids who cannot read and write on a 12th grade level and who have virtually no math skills. Our goal seems to be maintaining a public school system (whether or not it works), not educating our children.

What's my answer? Privatize and let competition in terms of cost and quality generate a system that works. It would have to be tax supported, or education would not be available to low income families.

Chas.

This is exactly why I support school vouchers. I don't know why the liberals, for the most part, don't support this...ok, yes I do. It takes away from maintaining their monopoly on public education and indoctrinating the masses with what they want to teach.

I find it very telling that the same politicians in Washington DC who keep voting down school vouchers by saying we have excellent public education then turn around and send their children to private schools.

Universal education is beneficial to society as a whole, and a good education is beneficial to a person as an individual, and for these reasons publicly funded education should be provided. Even people with no children who pay, through taxes, for the education of all children benefit from this.

That said, it's not a right.

Having government provide police and fire services is also something that benefits society as a whole, but also is not a right.

I would argue that government services such as police, fire, and education are means for the government to provide the societal framework for us to pursue the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as these services prevent societal slide into anarchy.

And before you ask, no, being provided health care services is not a right, though I may argue that ACCESS to health care is. A right is something which, when being exercised, requires nothing of anyone else. As soon as what you want requires another person to provide their time and talents to provide it to you, it ceases to be a right and becomes a service.