IBJNews

Senate OKs plan aimed at expanding charter schools

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana Senate has approved Gov. Mitch Daniels' proposal aimed at expanding charter schools, marking the first piece of the governor's sweeping education agenda to clear both the House and Senate.

The Republican-led Senate voted 29-20 for the bill, which would allow more entities to authorize charter schools. The bill allows charter schools to cheaply buy unused buildings owned by traditional school corporations and increases accountability rules for charters, which are public schools free of many state regulations.

Supporters said more charter schools would mean more options for Indiana parents looking for the best education for their children.

"We have a responsibility to help those parents help themselves," said Sen. Brandt Hershman, R-Lafayette. "What are we afraid of, offering parents that choice?"

Seven Republicans joined Democrats in voting against the proposal. Opponents say charter schools siphon money away from traditional public schools.

"There's only so much money in the pie," said Sen. Vaneta Becker, R-Evansville. "When you add unlimited charter schools to that equation, you get less money for the rest of the schools."

Sen. Tim Skinner, D-Terre Haute, said the bill is part of a larger attack on traditional education by Daniels and State Superintendent Tony Bennet, both Republicans. He said teacher morale is low across the state as the GOP pushes an aggressive education agenda, which includes the expansion of charter schools.

"We have done irreparable damage, in my opinion, to our public schools," Skinner said.

Supporters point out that charter schools get support from both Democrats and Republicans. U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who serves under Democratic President Barack Obama, is scheduled to hold a town hall meeting with Daniels Friday at an Indianapolis charter school.

Bennett said the state has 62 charter schools serving 23,000 students — but that the state needs more charters because demand far exceeds capacity.

"Right now, thousands of Hoosier children sit on charter school waiting lists," Bennett said.

The bill previously had cleared the GOP-ruled House on a 59-37 vote. The Senate made several changes to the House proposal, so the legislation will return to the House for consideration of the latest version.

Sen. Earline Rogers, D-Gary, said the Senate tamed the House version of the proposal, which she described as "a charter school bill gone wild."

The Senate version of the bill kept House provisions that would allow a new state board and some private colleges to create charter schools in addition to the current authorizers of school districts, public four-year colleges and the mayor of Indianapolis. But the Senate removed a part of the House bill that would have allowed mayors of smaller cities to create charters. And it removed a provision that would have forced traditional schools to share transportation funding with charters after opponents argued it would be too much of a burden on traditional public schools struggling with budget cuts.

House Speaker Brian Bosma, a Republican from Indianapolis who is the House sponsor of the bill, said he hasn't decided whether to simply accept the Senate changes or continue to work on a compromise. But he said he was pleased the bill cleared the Senate and that the major parts of the plan remain intact.

The bill is the first piece of Daniels' education agenda to clear both the House and Senate. Daniels' other education proposals would:

— Create the nation's most expansive voucher program directing taxpayer money to private schools. The bill has cleared the House and is scheduled for a Senate committee vote Wednesday.

— Restrict teacher collective bargaining. That bill has cleared the Senate and is pending in the House.

— Implement merit pay for teachers by requiring student achievement to account for part of teacher evaluations. That bill has passed the Senate and is scheduled for a House committee vote Wednesday.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Tom, you are wrong!
    Tom, what you miss in all of this discourse is the fact that what you and Daniels want is a separtation of educational systems for the children in Indiana. No! This will lead only to a dysfunctional population. The children in public schools will have a lesser education; the children in charter schools will have a "superior" education, according to Daniels and you and others who support the drive to increase the number of charter schools. I do not believe this is good for any of us and particularly for the children. We need to improve the public schools but NOT to separate them from any other system. A public school system is basic to the American system of equal opportunities and to separate this philosophy into two systems where one economic group has one system and another economic group has another is a recipe for disaster...no, a recipe for total destruction of the American equal rights philosophy. We all know that not all children can afford charter schools and to act like it is not true is dishonest and misleading. Let's try to be honest about the problem; let's improve public education and not change it into private education.
  • Get Real!
    I don't believe what I'm seeing! "Can You Believe This" says "More effort to remove an education from the children of lower and middle class families to allow the more affluent families the quality education that all should get." Um, since when? I drive a bus for a charter school, and I'd say the socioeconomic background of the kids I transport are no different than what I saw driving for IPS. The same will be true of vouchers. The idea is to improve ALL schools for everyone, not pour scarce tax dollars into yet another "kiddie warehouse system: where the graduates are functionally illiterate. again, quoting: "Opponents say charter schools siphon money away from traditional public schools." I certainly HOPE so! The money should stay with the student, not the ISTA. Quoting again: Sen. Tim Skinner, D-Terre Haute, said the bill is part of a larger attack on traditional education by Daniels and State Superintendent Tony Bennet, both Republicans. He said teacher morale is low across the state as the GOP pushes an aggressive education agenda, which includes the expansion of charter schools.

    "We have done irreparable damage, in my opinion, to our public schools," Skinner said. endquote. I certainly hope so, again! Traditional public education has failed, especially in the larger cities. Dump the failed model and go on. And is it "teacher morale", or "ISTA morale"????? There's a difference. Real teachers want the kids to succeed, and go out of their way to make it happen. Regardless of whether or how much they are or are not getting paid. The "damage" to the public schools was done LONG ago, and not by the GOP. (holds mirror up to ISTA) If it's really "for the children", the teachers should be singing Hallelujah! over these proposals. Nuts!
  • I believe it
    The reality is there is not a lot of money being funded to school systems at all and it can not rest all on the shoulders of our decision makers that we vote in. The reality is the taxpayers, for obvious economic reasons, are not approving funding and passing referendums for school districts. The taxpayers are not investing into our own future and economy.

    Also, when businesses (big and small) have to become leaner due to increased expenses and/or decreased revenue, while at the same time struggling to be competitive, they have to be flexible enough to make the appropriate decisions to stay competitive. If Charter schools can do that for us then we have helped our cause for our children and future.
  • "we don't need no education"
    More effort to remove an education from the children of lower and middle class families to allow the more affluent families the quality education that all should get. Anything the legislature enacts should help all children. But we live in the city that supports pro basketball and football teams yet does not have a public library on Thursday. There is something very wrong with the priorities that our current decision makers make.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT