Analysis of the Parental Choice in Education Initiative [electronic resource] : A Proposed Constitutional Amendment on the November 2, 1993, Ballot / Kim Connor and Melinda Melendez.

The Parental Choice in Education Initiative was defeated by California voters in a statewide special election in November 1993. The stated purpose of the initiative was to enable parents to choose their children's schools. This document summarizes the provisions of the initiative, analyzes its...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Online Access: Full Text (via ERIC)
Main Author: Connor, Kim
Corporate Author: California. Legislature. Senate. Office of Research
Other Authors: Melendez, Melinda
Format: Electronic eBook
Language:English
Published: [S.l.] : Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, 1993.
Subjects:

MARC

LEADER 00000nam a22000002u 4500
001 b6229521
003 CoU
005 20080220151949.0
006 m d f
007 cr un
008 930701s1993 xx |||| ot ||| | eng d
035 |a (ERIC)ed365004 
040 |a ericd  |c ericd  |d MvI 
088 |a Senate-Pub-720.S 
099 |f ERIC DOC #  |a ED365004 
099 |f ERIC DOC #  |a ED365004 
100 1 |a Connor, Kim. 
245 1 0 |a Analysis of the Parental Choice in Education Initiative  |h [electronic resource] :  |b A Proposed Constitutional Amendment on the November 2, 1993, Ballot /  |c Kim Connor and Melinda Melendez. 
260 |a [S.l.] :  |b Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,  |c 1993. 
300 |a 46 p. 
500 |a ERIC Document Number: ED365004. 
500 |a Availability: Senate Publications, California Legislature, 1020 N Street, Room B-53, Sacramento, CA 95814 (Senate Publication Number 720.S; $4.50 plus 7.75% California sales tax).  |5 ericd. 
520 |a The Parental Choice in Education Initiative was defeated by California voters in a statewide special election in November 1993. The stated purpose of the initiative was to enable parents to choose their children's schools. This document summarizes the provisions of the initiative, analyzes its policy and fiscal impact, and reviews supporting and opposing arguments. Legal issues and the roles of the legislature, school districts, and state board in implementation of the initiative are also examined. Proponents of the voucher initiative argue that it reduces the ills of monopoly; creates healthy competition; promotes economic equality; eliminates double payments (of tuition and taxes); reduces the burden on private schools; establishes a simple funding scheme; and encourages private innovation and diversity. Opponents charge that the initiative undermines the public school system; may discriminate in admission policies; provides inferior services in low-income areas; unfairly benefits the wealthy; facilitates state support for religious instruction; increases costs to an unknown degree; and does not assign administrative and fiscal accountability. Lists of supporters and opponents are included. (LMI) 
650 1 7 |a Access to Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Educational Equity (Finance)  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Educational Vouchers.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Elementary Secondary Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Equal Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Open Enrollment.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Private Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Private School Aid.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Public Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a School Choice.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Selection.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Tuition.  |2 ericd. 
700 1 |a Melendez, Melinda. 
710 1 |a California.  |b Legislature.  |b Senate.  |b Office of Research. 
856 4 0 |u http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED365004.pdf  |z Full Text (via ERIC) 
907 |a .b62295214  |b 07-06-22  |c 10-10-10 
998 |a web  |b 10-24-12  |c f  |d m   |e -  |f eng  |g xx   |h 0  |i 1 
956 |a ERIC 
999 f f |i 345cd9ce-77bb-59c3-89a5-4e1b13d13266  |s f39e9c3f-5f93-5ae4-b361-112ed88cb595 
952 f f |p Can circulate  |a University of Colorado Boulder  |b Online  |c Online  |d Online  |e ED365004  |h Other scheme  |i web  |n 1