Choices are limited to either the government monopoly, or home schooling. Charter schools are just another addition to the monopoly that they desperately throw out there to fool people into believing that there is true choice.
The poorest have even fewer choices, often they cannot afford to stay at home and educate their child. Their only option is one of the government monopoly schools.
I fail to see what this is about, probably because I didn't read the article. I am arguing for true choice for all regardless of whatever this article said, including the poor, rather than a choice between government monopoly schools and schooling at home. I use an example where it works very well and where students outperform ours almost universally. Choice breeds competition which drives better schools, parents to do more so their child can compete, students to do more.
Absolute and total garbage. In the example I give the funding is public, it is the government monopoly that doesn't exist. In those cases even the state run schools outperform ours as they compete for the education dollar.
Yes, it is a liberal policy to centralize everything, even powers that are not listed for the Feds to have, in a central government. That Bush was "liberal" on this issue doesn't change that it is not a "conservative" value (each defined by our current two party system that makes it so such labels are almost entirely misapplied).
