Hat tip to SC Huckster.
In following the lazy pattern of much political discussion, I’ve heard the silly charge the Mike Huckabee opposes school vouchers because he rejected one notion of them. I have not found the article to which SC Huckster is referring, but since I don’t get the magazine and am not heading to the library to find it, but I’ll deal with this one here and in general, and hopefully we can put the whole thing to rest.
Mike Huckabee supports choice in public schools, homeschooling, and private schools. It is true that he has come out against using school vouchers for parochial schools, but for a very good reason which many private school advocates share — government money comes with strings.
Churches are threatened with penalties if they dare to preach against sinful behavior. The Boy Scouts have had to defend themselves. If tax exemption has been used as an excuse to impose regulation, how long do you think it will take for that tax money to come with demands against teaching abstinence, Creation, church history, religion, and the like?
I don’t want to see the government interfering in the religious, or otherwise private, schools.
It is that which Gov. Huckabee actually opposes.
In fact, he has done a lot which conservatives should applaud in terms of education — the Home School Legal Defense Association has endorsed him, citing that Gov. Huckabee was the first governor to appoint a homeschooler to the state Board of Education.
I would encourage you to check out Mike Huckabee’s Issues page on education. So, here’s the link again.
I would also invite the press to examine statements for meaning, rather than looking to see what kind of controversy can be stirred by pulling a single sentence or vote out of context. That is inexcusably lazy, and it doesn’t serve the public interest in any way, or by any stretch of the imagination.
November 26, 2007 at 12:02 am
Thanks for bringing this lazy attitude out into the open, Wickle. It does seem as if the media is more interested in what they can stir up, instead of reporting the full story. Very good article.
November 26, 2007 at 1:01 am
Regardless of candidate, I feel that there aren’t nearly enough people checking out the actual positions in issues, even though it’s as easy as going to their website.
November 26, 2007 at 5:10 am
I’d think a better way would be to remove taxes on private/parochial schools.
Do public schools pay taxes?
No!
So why should private/parochial schools?
November 26, 2007 at 8:35 am
Thanks, Larry. The press is more interested in exciting headlines than meaty stories … so to take a conservative and say he’s against school choice sounds great. Never mind that it’s false.
And, yes, ChenZhen, sometimes it is as easy as looking at a web site, but too many people can’t be bothered.
And I’m with you on taxes, econ grad student. We could certainly do a lot to level that field, and I think that granting credits to educational institutions is reasonable and fair.
(Disclosure: My wife teaches at a private emotional-growth boarding school, so her employer would benefit from ending those taxes.)
Thanks for the comments.
November 26, 2007 at 7:28 pm
It seems to me that Huckabee represents nearly all that the Religious Right would want in a candidate. Better yet, he actually understands the dangers of consumptive consumerism and how it violates the teachings of the gospel.
Yet, it appears that a group that could truly make history, will once again stay home, or vote for candidates that hold fewer evangelical-friendly positions, than Huckabee does.
November 26, 2007 at 10:27 pm
I think that you’re exactly right, Jim. Gov. Huckabee is what the Religious Right should want in a candidate — he’s an actual, believing Christian who hasn’t sold out parts of his faith (the love and compassion) for political gain.
Thanks for the comment.
November 26, 2007 at 10:40 pm
I’d think a better way would be to remove taxes on private/parochial schools.
Do public schools pay taxes?
No!
So why should private/parochial schools?
Because public schoolsa re federal and state funded. Private/parochial schoolsa re “for profit” therefore, taxed.
I think churches should be taxed. Ooops, lost alot of friends with that one didn’t I?
November 27, 2007 at 7:13 am
Okay, I’ll bite …
Why would you want to tax churches? They aren’t for-profit institutions.
November 27, 2007 at 9:11 am
I don’t think it warrants furious debate, just my opinion. I feel that if a church has any member with outstanding medical bills, it is not doing its job, if the pastor, preacher, whatever they call them, is living in a million dollar home on the lake and driving a Lincoln Towncar. Something is wrong. Churches in general, I am not saying all of them, but I feel a very large portion, are for profit.
No offense Wickle, we just disagree, I think they are VERY much “for profit”.
November 27, 2007 at 3:23 pm
Nope, no need for argument.
Bear in mind that as a supporter of the Fair Tax, I think churches should pay taxes, too.
I also agree that a lot of churches are for-profit. An interesting standard you apply, and one I’d not considered. If the church fails in its duties (and I’d expand that past members — churches are called to serve the community, not just themselves), does it deserve tax exemption?
Hmmm … I’ll be giving this much thought.
Several years ago, I heard a story about a homeless man who died of exposure on a church building’s front steps. There’s a convicting irony there.
Much thought …
December 12, 2007 at 12:35 pm
The quote comes from the Club for Growth White Paper. Club for Growth is anything but intellectually lazy. You may want to check out the Wall Street Journal, who calls him the leader of the “Christian Left”. Intellectual laziness is when one relies on a stereotype of a Southerner who is an avowed Christian pro-lifer to conclude that he is a conservative. The Gov. is not conservative.
December 13, 2007 at 12:45 pm
To accuse Huckabee, who supports vouchers, of opposing vouchers because he opposed one particular bill is profoundly lazy — whether it’s the CFG, Wall Street Journal, or anyone else doing it.
December 22, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Thanks for referring folks to my blog. Once again, though, National Review’s Robert Novak has publicized the same lie. Visit National Review Online and refute the claims.
Sincerely,
SC Huckster
January 12, 2008 at 9:47 am
To TRM…I have a pastor (now in his 70’s) who through his own effort and money has, over the years, built homes and resold them for a profit. He now lives in a nice home and drives a Lincoln Towncar - all paid for I might add. He did this with his own funds, effort, sweat and designs. Please don’t lump all your “Pastors for Profit” in the same category.
Misuse of a churches money is one thing and on this I think we agree. Being a good steward and having a biblical work ethic is another.
On vouchers: Seems to me the Fair Tax would deal with this issue rather nicely. So, yall just go read the bill, buy the book and see if I am close to being right.
I have read several of the proposed Voucher Bills and they all have (as near as I can tell) some common flaws or details left out. One common flaw is the Government Intrusion issue. A good Voucher Bill would include a provision making it illegal for the Government to even attempt to put “strings” on the voucher moneyl. The other common flaw I have noticed is the creation of yet another bureaucracy to “track” the dispensation of funds to the individual students and parents of these students. Can you spell - IRS Audits and harassment potential?
The Fair Tax does away with all this potential ugly and provides the school systems their money and us parents our money to do as we please with our children’s education.
And that’s about all I have to say about that.
January 12, 2008 at 3:01 pm
JHM,
I took great pains to avoid lumping all preachers into the crook category. I would say they are the majority though…