Oklahoma is going backwards

Most Republicans simply want to wean everybody off of government, especially including poor people.
It appears that you missed the piece just above showing that the school voucher program is mostly a give-away to the wealthy and the Rs and Stitt want to take the cap off of it. That does not go with weaning everybody off government, just the poor.
 
It appears that you missed the piece just above showing that the school voucher program is mostly a give-away to the wealthy and the Rs and Stitt want to take the cap off of it. That does not go with weaning everybody off government, just the poor.
If they really cared about poor people, there would be an income limit. Since there is not, more high-income people than poor people are benefitting. And how is anybody supposed to benefit in rural areas where no suitable private school, religious or not, may be available?

If Republicans cared more about education, they would increase funding for education. Interesting, though, how Walters had suggested education be cut but drastically changed his mind and wants $100 million more for it. My theory is he changed his mind to further irritate Gov. Stitt who wants it flat. Or maybe it simply occured to Walters that the more millions that can go into funding state education, the more millions will be made availble to give to private schools.
 
Last edited:
If Republicans cared more about education, they would increase funding for education.
They are in a way, just more focused and only for private schools for wealthy families.

Funny thing is these are the same people that were super pissed about student loan relief. Apparently you can give families money for private school but you can't help people pay off loans for college.

If helping wipe out student load debt will incentivize higher costs for college then doesn't this do the same for private schools?
 
They are in a way, just more focused and only for private schools for wealthy families.

Funny thing is these are the same people that were super pissed about student loan relief. Apparently you can give families money for private school but you can't help people pay off loans for college.

If helping wipe out student load debt will incentivize higher costs for college then doesn't this do the same for private schools?
I work at an ultra conservative place.....power sector lots of highly skilled high wage non degreed workers in this field....I am constantly pointing out how horrible vouchers programs are an all the potential for unintended consequences and it floats like a turd in a punch bowl cause lots of them have kids in small church ran schools where they learn things about angels and how Jesus was a republican. The other day I set them all completely up with the same logic you used above. I chimed in a Biden bash fest about how dumb it was that they expected people that never went to college and achieved success to pay off a bunch of student loans for worthless degrees (a stance I share with them) and after the rah rahs subsided I said "yeah it's about like how stupid it is to expect tax payers without students or families without access to private schools to fund private school tuition for those that can already afford it at rates higher than public funding and take money out of community schools"......crickets.
 
It appears that you missed the piece just above showing that the school voucher program is mostly a give-away to the wealthy and the Rs and Stitt want to take the cap off of it. That does not go with weaning everybody off government, just the poor.
I look at it a little differently. I’ve seen where 99% of private schools in Oklahoma are affiliated w either a denomination &/or church. Only a few are truly independent.

The Oklahoman published a piece about a year ago that showed tuition before the scam and tuition after. Outside of a few schools every private school increased tuition and there is a direct timing implication that shows voucher scam implementation and tuition increase. Not $ for $ but it won’t take another yr or 2 before that happens.

So your take is correct but limited to 1-3 yrs bc true out of pocket will be the same if not more than before the scam.

What has happened is that we have transferred tax dollars to the churches that own the private schools.

Something like >95% of scam recipients’ kids were previously enrolled in private schools. We didn’t help more than a handful of kids transfer from public schools to private. And I would really like to know how many 1st time private enrollees were true transfers from underperforming public schools excluding kids who also came on athletic scholarships. I would bet that number is less than 25 statewide.

A truly interesting study would be to track those kids vs their peers who stayed in underperforming schools and see if there is truly an appreciable increase in performance. And to also compare them to peers in high performing public schools.
 
Last edited:
I look at it a little differently. I’ve seen where 99% of private schools in Oklahoma are affiliated w either a denomination &/or church. Only a few are truly independent.

The Oklahoman published a piece about a year ago that showed tuition before the scam and tuition after. Outside of a few schools every private school increased tuition and there is a direct timing implication that shows voucher scam implementation and tuition increase. Not $ for $ but it won’t take another yr or 2 before that happens.

So your take is correct but limited to 1-3 yrs bc true out of pocket will be the same if not more than before the scam.

What has happened is that we have transferred tax dollars to the churches that own the private schools.

Something like >95% of scam recipients’ kids were previously enrolled in private schools. We didn’t help more than a handful of kids transfer from public schools to private. And I would really like to know how many 1st time private enrollees were true transfers from underperforming public schools excluding kids who also came on athletic scholarships. I would bet that number is less than 25 statewide.

A truly interesting study would be to track those kids vs their peers who stayed in underperforming schools and see if there is truly an appreciable increase in performance. And to also compare them to peers in high performing public schools.
I’d like to see an educational study that differentiates outcomes between wealthy and poverty stricken students (adequate food, adequate shelter,parental support). I can’t even begin to count the number of meals I’ve bought students in 35 years. How much of an advantage private school students enjoy by not having truly special education students in their classrooms, and any lasting discipline problems being promptly sent back to public schools. It’s already an uneven field of play for the vast majority of our students. Vouchers are just another “tax” break for the rich. Some private schools supporters probably invented the NIL . They’ve got the best teams money can buy. Sure they have to play up one class, but more and more religious and private schools seem to dominate those feckless public teams. Private schools already enjoy advantage over public schools. We don’t need to violate our constitutional just for the sake of wealthy people IMO.
 
$70 MILLION FROM THIS PROGRAM GOES TO OKLAHOMANS WHO MAKE OVER $150K PER YEAR$40 million to 150k and higher earners and $17 million to $250k and higher earners


Data reveals Oklahoma school choice program sending significant share of funds to wealthiest families

Link



1000004149.png
 
$70 MILLION FROM THIS PROGRAM GOES TO OKLAHOMANS WHO MAKE OVER $150K PER YEAR$40 million to 150k and higher earners and $17 million to $250k and higher earners


Data reveals Oklahoma school choice program sending significant share of funds to wealthiest families

Link



View attachment 10024
So households making over 49k are wealthy? A lot of folks, including teachers, would find that an interesting take.
 
It says 30% went to families making less than $75K/year and about a quarter went to families making over $225K. The pic says $49K is the average salary in the state. I'm not sure what your point is.
Just trying to determine what is considered wealthy. 60% went to households making under 150k. I don’t think most would consider those rich people. 77-78% went to households under 225k. Again, very much middle class job income especially if it is a two income household. So 225k is the line, households above that are rich folk?

I find it a little deceptive that the article fails to mention the program was tiered (the higher the income, the less you got) based on household income and about 9k applicants got denied and got nothing because the funding cap was hit. So the true “wealthiest/rich” folk whose kids are going to Heritage Hall or Casady likely got nothing, but that is not what the article would have you believe.
 
Last edited:
Just trying to determine what is considered wealthy. 60% went to households making under 150k. I don’t think most would consider those rich people. 77-78% went to households under 225k. Again, very much middle class job income especially if it is a two income household. So 225k is the line, households above that are rich folk?

I find it a little deceptive that the article fails to mention the program was tiered (the higher the income, the less you got) based on household income and about 9k applicants got denied and got nothing because the funding cap was hit. So the true “wealthiest/rich” folk whose kids are going to Heritage Hall or Casady likely got nothing, but that is not what the article would have you believe.
 
Markwayne Mullin intentionally calls Justin Trudeau “Governor” instead of “Prime Minister,” making it clear it wasn’t a slip-up but a deliberate jab.

 
Sen. Mullin simply has faith in believing that Oklahomans will think Trump caused inflation will be a lot better to live with than Biden caused inflation. It will be interesting to see how that works out for the rest of the year, especially if there is a recession.

Or as a CEO of a metal parts plant in Tupelo, MS says, "I look at that like taxes. Everybody's got to pay it, you know, so just get used to it. I don't believe the tariffs are an economic tool. I believe they are a political tool. As the investment in new plants and equipment comes into the United States, which is what the intent is, I think we'll all be fine. And in the long run we're going to be a lot better off." So, coming from Mississippi, not too surprising people there would be well for Trump for now. Or in other words, get used to it.

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/04/nx-s...6prTx9uZVKDIRfPiwA_aem_EiNfg01rZjsf9zSGbVuVvA
 
Last edited:
Oklahoma bill aiming to bring change to citizen initiative petition process advances. I suspect Republican legislators fear it would be too easy to get enough signatures on a petition for abortion rights by focusing on the urban counties. Besides that, Republican legislators never forgave us for passing legal medical marijuana. Also, the passage of extended Medicaid from the people was far from welcomed. Again, highly unwelcomed was the rejection of the question to make changes to the Oklahoma Constitution that would allow them to restore the 10 Commandments to the State Capitol. The vote wasn't even close.

The changes may work to force Oklahomans to try obtaining more funding from organizations outside the state for petitioning, with Republicans reminding people where that money came from. At least Republicans couldn't say the petition for SQ788 relied on funding from pro-marijuana groups outside the state, like NORML. All $35,000 of its funding came from donors in Oklahoma.

https://okcfox.com/news/local/oklah...s-senator-david-bullard-margaret-kobos-voting
 
Last edited:
Back
Top