Discussion Issue:
   Replacing Public Education with Charter Schools

Facts, factoids, concerns, considerations: Public education is tax supported. [1] Parochial church schools and elite private schools are funded by parents, friends, and other supporters. Many parents feel that their children are not strong enough to make the right decisions.  They believe exposure to the wrong things [beliefs not held by the parents], or to the wrong people, would be detrimental to their children.  Consquently they turn to non-public schools.   All schools are expensive, but private schools are particularly expensive. Parents who chose to send their children to private schools dislike having to pay twice, once as taxes for public schools and again as tuition to their private school.   Tax dollars had long been off limits to Roman Catholic parochial schools because of "separation of church and state" issues - as well as non-Catholics who had differing views not wanting to support the Catholic schools. In more recent years, fundamentalist Protestants have been developing their own "church center" schools where they could teach their children such things as "creationism" and (hopefully) avoid exposure to such ideas as the theory of evolution.   A "fully predictable result" has been private schools wanting to get subsidizes from taxes.  (The demand has come from both ultra-liberals and ultra-conservatives.) The idea is to take public education funds and divert them to privately owned and run schools.  In recent years, the idea [buzzword] of "charter schools" has sprung up.    Private schools have the option of turning away students (who are ill-behaving, who's parents cannot affort the cost of tuition, are unlike the children to which the school wishes to educate.
The PRO's: - -
Liberal concerns: - -	Conservative concerns: - -
The CON's: - -
Questions: What would be a fair solution? What would King Solomon have done? What would John Galt have done?

References:
[1}] ---, "-," 2008-
[2] ---, -
[3] ---, "-," 2009-2010-