This page was last updated on May 19, 2004.

Veon opposes misguided referendum idea; State Rep. Mike Veon; May 11, 2004.

In summary, Mr. Veon does not trust local voters to make the right choices with respect to public education.

“Public education is one of Pennsylvania’s greatest success stories, but I believe this proposal is the greatest threat to that success in a generation.”

[RWC] A great success story?  If I recall correctly, Gov. Rendell’s Plan for a Rust Belt Pennsylvania cited tons of education reforms because performance was so bad.

A quote from a press release issued by Messrs. Veon & DeWeese said they would “not accept the status quo that has forced thousands of children to go without a quality education...”¹

Another joint press release said, “the majority of schools did not meet one or more of the targets necessary to pass, or make ‘Adequate Yearly Progress,’ toward meeting the NCLB goal of having 100 percent of Pennsylvania students proficient by 2014.”²

“The fact that 51 percent did not meet the No Child Left Behind standards should be alarming to all Pennsylvanians.  The red flags ought to be up there as big and bold as possible.” -- Gov. Ed Rendell; August 13, 2003.³

Are these descriptions of a great success story?  Which is it, Mr. Veon, failure or great success?  If Pennsylvania public education is one of our great successes, no wonder our economy trails the nation.

When there appears to be “danger” that voters will take back their schools, career politicians tell us how wonderful our schools are.  When that danger does not exist, politicians tell us how bad those same schools are to justify ever greater taxing and spending.  Not too transparent, is it?

“He [Veon] said a referendum requirement in Ohio has driven educators there to worry more about marketing themselves to voters than about educating children.  ‘This is not the way to achieve a quality education for children, and it is certainly not the way to improve funding equity among the 501 districts in Pennsylvania.

“Imposing a referendum mandate will especially hurt poorer school districts and smaller school districts.  They already are on the negative side of funding equity in Pennsylvania and this would only expand the divide between rich and poor areas.’”

[RWC] The translation for the first sentence is, “School boards must justify their spending to the people paying the bills.”  This is how it should be.

You have to love that funding inequity lie.  In just one example, the “poor” Aliquippa School District spends more per student than neighboring “rich” Center Area School District.  In addition, the vast majority of Aliquippa funding comes from outside the district; the vast majority of Center funding comes from district taxpayers.

“Failing to purchase textbooks and computers or maintain buildings, even canceling sports programs, are some of the steps districts will be forced to take if they are denied the right to set realistic budgets.”

[RWC] Translation: Mr. Veon says voters cannot be trusted to do what is right for their school district.

1. House calls on Senate to negotiate on Rendell education plan; State Reps. DeWeese and Veon; August 3, 2003.

2. PA’s academic achievement report highlights need for Rendell education plan; State Reps. DeWeese and Veon; August 12, 2003.

3. Rendell: Test results alarming; action sought soon on education plan; Johnna A. Pro; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; August 14, 2003.

© 2004 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.