Skeptical of John Taylor Gatto’s premise in his book, “Dumbing Us Down,” that there is a deliberate effort to keep public school children uneducated in this country?

How do you explain Barack Obama’s recent decision to eliminate vouchers for the public school students in the Washington D.C. area? Obama’s decision allows students currently enrolled in the voucher program to continue to receive federal funding until they graduate, but no additional students will be allowed to enter the program. The five-year school voucher program is scheduled to expire after the school year ending in June 2010.

The voucher program has proven successful, providing a better education at lower cost than the public schools.

“The program, with per-pupil costs that are a third of what D.C. public schools spend, is producing solid gains for the 1,700 predominantly poor and minority children it serves. Indeed, the first batch of children who received vouchers from the program for private schools is now 19 months ahead of its public school peers in reading–which is why there are four applicants for every available slot.”  Source: Forbes.com

Why eliminate the opportunity for these children to receive a higher quality education?

The only argument I’ve seen against it is that it only benefits a small number of students. Okay, so the answer is to force all the students to receive a poor education? Wouldn’t it be more logical to expand the voucher program, rather than eliminate it?

Could Obama’s decision have anything to do with the $50 million dollars contributed to his campaign by the teacher’s unions?

References:
Juan Williams, Fox News
Forbes.com