I have not heard a plausible argument against vouchers. This argument by Sen. Clinton falls into the category of being woefully inadequate for it plays on the extreme without really addressing the crux.
Instead of playing to fears, why do we not have an open an honest debate on this issue? Capitalism is not a perfect system, but the freedom to choose inherently built into the system spawns individuals to seek the best. As your humble pundit has discussed before, our capitalistic system has never been perfect throughout our history, but the freedom of choice built-in to our economy has been a driving force since our inception. This correlates well with the idea of vouchers, because this same freedom of choice would be built in to our education system. Not only would parents be able to have a more commanding role in the education of their children, but an incentive of educators to act in the best interest of children would be fused with the system.
2:06 pm
[…] Publius Rendezvous […]
3:33 pm
Ah, the pundit discusses the pros of capitalism while just the other day he dismissed the sale of privately owned goods to other private companies. Interesting how capitalism is good for voucher, but not for companies from the Middle East. Which is it, pundit?
4:17 pm
If you were not so clever in trying to entrap your humble pundit, and focus on the substance of your assertions, then you would not have failed to address how these two issues can be easily distinguished.
One pertains to national security, and one can be relegated to domestic policy.
9:34 am
But pundit is not national security a form of domestic policy? I concede that they are distinguishable but, remember when conservatives actually liked “free market capitalism”? My major problem with “Port-gate” is it reminds me of when the government tried to interfere with Unocal’s sale to the Chinese company. Why is the federal government geting invovledin the sale of private businesses to other private businesses?
12:16 pm
That is a very poor example of ‘interference.’
I am one of the biggest proponents of the free-market. It has made us who we are in the world today, but there are times it is not the best solution.
How can you rationalize the Unocal deal as being ‘good?’