Almost $50 Billion, half the state budget, supports California’s K-12 government schools. Yet, many of the 5 million students require remedial instruction when they enter institutions of higher learning.

Businesses, which depend upon a skilled workforce for their survival, have thrown in the towel and acceded to the demands of the education monopoly. Witness their support of a reduction in the 2/3 vote requirement for bond measures. And, the Chambers of Commerce have done likewise.

Government schools have become day care centers and virtual prisons in the eyes of many taxpayers, parents and students. Loss of self-esteem is one result. Violence another. Who is to be held accountable?

They have served as distribution centers for drug dealers whose only reason for existence is "big money" in the black market enabled by the continued illegality of the commodity they pitch.

Is anyone held accountable for the opportunity cost to students whose time would be more productively used for gainful employment? It does not take a rocket scientist to observe that many students derive little benefit from incarceration in the classrooms of our government schools.

Who is to be held responsible for introducing the joys of Ritalin to parents and their children? Our prisons are full of others who have pushed drugs in our society. It is a sorry state of affairs.

As a taxpayer’s advocate, I would be the first to demand "accountability to the taxpayer" for the nearly $50 Billion a year which subsidizes 5 million K-12 students in California. Most childless taxpayers would join in the chorus.

Parents of school age children, who are virtually forced to turn their children over to the indoctrinators, have a right to demand accountability to themselves and the children for whom they speak. Unfortunately, many have grown fond of free babysitting, an entitlement bestowed upon them by a benevolent government. Elitist educators would hold parents accountable, blame them for failures of the system and demand that they participate. More force is not the answer.

Recent debate over test results is the latest round in a futile attempt to force accountability on the entrenched education monopoly which runs our government schools. There is something about force which seems inappropriate in the halls of education in a free society. And, there is something about our system of government schools which defies a solution.

There seems to be no end to the ways in which the government education monopoly extracts money from the economy. The latest ploys involve subsidies for public school teachers.

What about private school teachers? Or homeschooling parents? Nurses are caring people also. Janitors? Gardeners? What chance do they have to share in the political largesse, when teachers are given time off to attend lobbying rallies in Sacramento, and students are used as couriers to send the message home to parents?

Politicians have a difficult time resisting the temptation to buy votes by handing out the taxpayers money. The enormous budget surplus has created a feeding frenzy at the public trough, and, with fingers in the air to test the winds of public opinion, legislators are responding.

Suggestions that the cost of government schools is far too high, even if they were successful, are scorned as politically incorrect speech. When one suggest that teachers, with class size reduction from 30 down to 20, and three months off in the summer, might not actually be underpaid, it is seen as blasphemy.

Ever notice how enrollment projections are inflated in advance of bond measures for new facilities? I have.

The Redwood City Elementary School District is a classic when it comes to scams.

Preceding their 1993 Bond and Parcel tax proposals, their 1992/93 proposed budget projected that enrollment would exceed 10,000 by 1998. Fortunately the measures failed. In subsequent years, to regain credibility, the projections for 1998 were adjusted downward reflecting reality. Actual enrollment in 1998 was 8950.

In the 1996/97 proposed budget, the projection for 1998 enrollment was once again inflated, this time to a more modest 9540. Coincidently, they District floated a $44 million Bond Measure. This time the public was fooled and the measure passed.

Today, we find Superintendent Ron Crates boasting about the near completion of their $90 Million construction project.

Ever notice the portable classrooms at schoolsites around the state? One would think that new school construction was not keeping up with enrollment. Guess again.

In what can best be described as CYA legislation, the politicians provided school districts with a mechanism to artificially fill their schools beyond capacity. It’s called "Class Size Reduction". It seems that the government educators have discovered what homeschoolers have known since time immemorial.

And, given the option of fulltime or parttime implementation of the reduction, the districts chose the one which most exacerbated the facility shortage. The phrase "underutilization of resources" comes to mind.

Can government schools ever be held accountable? In the mind of this writer, that’s an oxymoron.

There are two voucher Initiative measures currently being pursued in California.

The first, by venture capitalist Tim Draper, would preserve the government school system and guarantee minimum funding not less than the National average. This measure will be on the November ballot.

The second, currently circulating, is a Performance Accountability Voucher for Education, which would remove the stigma of compulsion and presumption of parental incompetance. My proposal ensures complete restoration of family responsibility and authority for the education of their children within a 20 year period. (see www.PAVE2000.com)

Jack Hickey, is a retired Senior Research Scientist and Inventor and 35 year resident of San Mateo County

He is currently the Chair of the Libertarian Party of San Mateo County, and a Candidate for State Senate.

He can be reached at 650-368-5722 or e-mail at jackhick@cwnet.com

Jack’s websites are: www.PAVE2000.com and http://users.cwnet.com/jackhick

Don’t abolish public schools (Don Havis letter to the Editor - 1 July, 2000)

Editor:

I would like to comment on Jack Hickey’s June 21 guest opinion on public schools. According to Hickey, our public schools are "virtual prisons" which serve as "distribution centers for drug dealers." The whole enterprise of public schooling is described as an "expensive, ineffective boondoggle," which is accountable to no one.

Hickey's libertarian (i.e. no government is good government) solution is not to make corrections or reforms, but to simply abandon the whole system and return to about the late 18th century, when pretty much everyone home-schooled their children, if they were able to do so.

Fortunately, reality is much brighter than Hickey perceives it to be. I have observed in a great many schools in San Mateo County that our school personnel are working with great diligence at a very high level of professionalism, and not always with all the resources they need, nor under ideal conditions.

I believe we should applaud and support our public schools even more than most of us do now, not trash them and abandon them as Hickey would have us do. And, by the way, public schools are by law entirely accountable to the public. Contact your local school board members or school superintendent if you would like to "look over the books," or at least get an explanation of how our tax money is spent.

San Mateo

Editor:

I thank Don Havis for accurately stating my assessment of government schools, which he refers to as public schools. However, their is a distinction between the two.

Consider public libraries, which citizens are free to use if they so choose. Contrast that to our government schools where choice is virtually non-existent and "compulsion" is the norm. That’s not my idea of "public".

Don’s statement that "Hickey's libertarian (i.e. no government is good government) solution is not to make corrections or reforms, but to simply abandon the whole system..." is misleading.

Certainly their are some libertarians who come across as being anarchist, but they are a small minority. Most libertarians support a strict interpretation of our Constitution, which admittedly is not perfect. At least it provides the framework for the limited government intended by the Founders.

Regarding abandoning the whole system, a reading of my PAVE2000 website will reveal a plan to eliminate the government schooling monopoly and privatise those schools over a five year period. It will also remove the tax subsidies, for an industry which can best be served by a free market, in twenty years.

It is the unfair competition from that monopoly which has put many of the alternative schools out of business. How can they compete, when the government system is guaranteed students at nearly $10,000 per student?

Havis says "I believe we should applaud and support our public schools even more than most of us do now, not trash them and abandon them as Hickey would have us do".

One need only observe the political TV commercials used by the government schooling monopoly to see the already trashed condition of our taxpayer funded schools.

I agree that concerned citizens should "look over the books" of school districts. I have done that for years. More importantly, demand that these servants of the people post the books up on their websites in searchable form. Ask your Assemblyman or State Senator to include such posting in an amendment to the Public Records Act.