@ISIDEWITHQuestionseducationStarted 7yrs agoActive 4 days ago

Do you support charter schools?

Charter schools are tax payer funded K-12 schools that are managed by private companies. In the U.S. there are approximately 2.9 million students enrolled in 6,700 charter schools. Charter schools are approved and governed by city, county or state governments. Beneficiaries of private schools include real-estate investors who typically own the buildings and land where the schools are housed. Opponents of charter schools argue that they take money away from the public education system and enrich private companies and real estate investors who own the land where the schools are built. Proponents argue that students in charter schools consistently have higher test scores than public school students and note that there are millions of students across the U.S. who are currently on waitlists for private schools.

+
Expand
+ Settings x  District of Columbia

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 5.1k District of Columbia voters.

64%
Yes
36%
No
43%
Yes
26%
No
14%
Yes, but not at the expense of funding public schools
8%
No, we should focus on improving our public schools and increasing teacher wages instead
5%
Yes, but only if they are non-profit
1%
No, and education should not be privatized
1%
Yes, and our entire education system should be privatized

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 5.1k District of Columbia voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 5.1k District of Columbia voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from District of Columbia voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @8G4T258 from Oklahoma  answered…4yrs4Y

No, the reason the students have higher test scores is because those schools have more funding..take their funding and give it to public schools

 @6TJWFCFfrom Minnesota  answered…4yrs4Y

They shouldn't need to exist, the same quality of education should be available in public schools instead of needing to pay to get it in a private school.

 @95CJ5F5from North Carolina  answered…2yrs2Y

No, but education should be nationalized.

 @9S2PDWW from Virginia  answered…4mos4MO

I agree that charter schools must continue to be an available option for those who wish to consider it, charter schools have had better performance rates, and also have an ability to teach a unique curriculum that could appeal to people based upon culture, religion, or preference for their children. But it is important that these charter schools do not become a detriment to the public school system or that they become more available to All those who wish to Consider it. And it should be a priority that we Improve the wages of teachers in public schools and provide courses that will benefit graduates in finding jobs after they complete K to 12.

 @9HNC8JW  from North Carolina  answered…1yr1Y

Parents should be able to choose where their children go to school. More options = better education.

 @9GZDTYY from Maryland  answered…1yr1Y

Government funding should be focused on public schools and increasing teacher wages, but private institutions should still be able to run private schools for families that want private education for their child.

 @9L4Z23B  from Pennsylvania  answered…9mos9MO

Yes, and state should make it easier for more charter, magnet, college prep, and vocational/technical schools to be created in school districts and receive accreditation

 @95P6HN4 from North Carolina  answered…2yrs2Y

No, and all education should be nationalized.

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Charter Schools” news articles, updated frequently.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…7mos7MO

Texas School Funding Controversy: Calls for Investigation into Houston ISD Superintendent's Charter School Connections

The debate over school funding in Texas has taken a dramatic turn with allegations against Houston Independent School District (HISD) Superintendent Mike Miles. Accusations have surfaced that Miles may be improperly funneling Texas taxpayer dollars to charter schools he founded in Colorado, sparking a wave of concern and calls for a thorough investigation. This controversy centers around the Third Future Schools, a network of charter schools established by Miles, which expanded from Colorado to Texas under his leadership.Reports suggest that millions in taxpayer money from a Third Future School in Odessa, Texas, were sent to its sister school in Colorado to provide financial assistance. This has raised questions about the legality and ethics of such transactions, especially considering the strict regulations governing the use of public funds for education. Critics argue that if Texas tax dollars are indeed being used to support schools outside the state, this could represent a significant loophole in the law that needs immediate attention.The situation has prompted a strong reaction from various stakeholders, including parents, educators, and lawmakers, who are demanding transparency and accountability. The Texas Education Agency is under pressure to launch an in-depth investigation to ascertain the facts and determine whether any laws have been violated. The outcome of such an inquiry could have far-reaching implications for school funding policies and the governance of charter schools in the state.Superintendent Mike Miles, for his part, has defended the financial practices of Third Future Schools, emphasizing the network's commitment to providing high-quality education to students in both Texas and Colorado. However, with the controversy showing no signs of abating, the focus remains on ensuring that Texas taxpayer dollars are used appropriately and effectively within the state's education system.As the debate continues, the broader implications for the charter school movement and public education funding in Texas are becoming increasingly apparent. This controversy highlights the complex challenges of managing public funds in a way that supports educational innovation while maintaining strict accountability and transparency standards.

▲  97 replies

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Donald Trump nominates Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General

Former President and 2024 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has announced his intention to nominate former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General of the United States, should he reclaim the presidency in the upcoming election.Bondi, a prominent figure in Republican politics, served as Florida's Attorney General from 2011 to 2019. She gained national attention for her legal battles on issues such as health care reform, consumer protection, and opioid abuse litigation. Known for her steadfast support of Trump during his presidency, Bondi also served as a key adviser during his first impeachment trial, where she defended his administration against accusations of abuse of power.In a statement released by his campaign, Trump praised Bondi’s “unwavering commitment to justice” and her “track record of standing up for everyday Americans against the abuses of Washington’s elites.”“Pam Bondi has been a fearless advocate for the people, and she embodies the principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law that are sorely needed to restore trust in our justice system,” Trump said. “She is the right person to lead the Department of Justice into a new era of integrity and excellence.”While Bondi’s nomination has been met with applause from conservative circles, it has also reignited criticism from Democrats and ethics watchdogs. Her acceptance of a $25,000 donation from the Trump Foundation in 2013, which coincided with her decision not to pursue an investigation into Trump University, has drawn scrutiny in the past and resurfaced following the announcement.Democratic leaders have already voiced opposition, questioning Bondi’s ability to lead the Department of Justice independently. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) called the nomination “a political power play” and urged a focus on “restoring integrity, not entrenching partisanship.”

▲  2317 replies

Active 3 days ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Kamala Harris is considering running for president again in 2028

Kamala Harris has been lying low since her defeat in the presidential race, unwinding with family and senior aides in Hawaii before heading back to the nation’s capital.But privately, the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”She is expected to explore those and other possible paths forward with family members over the winter holiday season, according to five people in the Harris inner circle, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. Her deliberations follow an extraordinary four months in which Harris went from President Joe Biden’s running mate to the top of the ticket, reenergizing Democrats before ultimately crashing on election night.“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”Harris concedes: 'We must accept the results of this election'SharePlay VideoMost immediately, Harris and her advisers are working to define how and when she will speak out against Donald Trump and reassert her own role in the Democratic Party. Closing out her term as vice president, she’s set to preside over certifying the November election she lost to Trump, and then appear at the once-and-future president’s inauguration on Jan. 20.“There will be a desire to hear her voice, and there won’t be a vacuum for long,” a person close to Harris said.At the same time, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, will have a long checklist to plow through before they leave the Naval Observatory for good.They have to decide whether they’ll take up permanent residence at their home in Los Angeles, or establish a base elsewhere. No matter where Harris and her family live, some around her have expressed concerns about safety, as her Secret Service protection expires six months after stepping away.

▲  1023 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3 days3D

Elizabeth Warren Walks Back Murder Comments

Congressional Democrats broadly denounced the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson Friday morning, after Republicans started accusing Sen. Elizabeth Warren of excusing violence.“No one's condoning this,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.). “Violence never is the right answer for anything. And it was a horrible murder, a tragic loss for his family.” Warren this week condemned the shooting, but added that people “can be pushed only so far.”"We'll say it over and over," Warren said on MSNBC’S “The ReidOut.” " Violence is never the answer. This guy [Luigi Mangione] gets a trial who's allegedly killed the CEO of UnitedHealth, but you can only push people so far, and then they start to take matters into their own hands."In a statement to POLITICO, Warren said, “Violence is never the answer. Period. I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.” Top Republicans denounced Warren's comments and the walked-back rhetoric, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) calling it “inappropriate and dangerous.”Some House Democrats asked about the incident on Thursday pivoted the conversation to discuss policy options on health care or gun safety.“I don't really know that this is really a space that Congress normally weighs in on,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). “But at the end of the day, I think it’s an opportunity, because now people are talking about health care and to talk about the fact that this industry has honestly not been as helpful as it could be.”“Violence is never the answer,” said Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.). “We know that there are people suffering, there’s great challenges in healthcare. There's great challenges, and people have, in fact, been wronged, but a process of governance is the way to address that, not violence.”And Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) who denounced the murder, said the killer should be prosecuted and that “I do know that allegedly a ghost gun was used, and we should also ban ghost guns. There's no reason for them beyond the streets.”

▲  1614 replies