LETTERS: Public schools need cooperation, not competition
As a teacher and parent of students in the Clark County School District, I would like to respond to John Matsis’ July 15 letter about Education Savings Accounts.
First, Mr. Matsis’ statement that public funds will not be disseminated to private schools because they are funneled through the parents first is disingenuous. The result is the same and deserves legal scrutiny. Second, his description of the school district as a “failed, one-size-fits-all public school system” is overly simplistic. Our low ranking compared with other states is largely due to the higher rates of poverty, transiency and English Language Learner needs among our students.
Nevertheless, we do have many students and schools with impressive success stories and results. We offer a variety of magnet programs and advanced courses. Students in the school district become National Merit scholars, pass AP and IB exams and attend elite colleges. Do we have the same percentage of these students as private schools? Of course not. Private schools are more likely to have well-off and involved parents and are less likely to accept high-needs students with learning disabilities, physical handicaps or behavioral issues.
Because of this, I do agree with Mr. Matsis that forcing private schools to use the state’s star-rating system is pointless. I also challenge his assumption that “only competition can initiate improvement.” First, the school district cannot compete with private schools, which have selective admission practices and small classes, especially since the state is giving us $15 less per student for the 2015-16 school year. Also, competition is the wrong model for public schools. In a “race to the top,” some students will win and others will lose.
Vouchers and charter schools dilute the stability of the public system, further segregating the “haves” and “have nots.” This is undemocratic. When parents are dissatisfied with the performance of their child’s school, they need to address their concerns to an administration that is accountable to the public, a scenario not possible in charter or private schools, which may simply advise that student to leave. Cooperation, not competition, is what is needed. Parents, teachers and officials must do their best to support, not dismantle, public education.
Regina Rothwell Roybal
Henderson
Uber, Lyft and cabs
In response to your July 31 editorial “Cab competition”:
As a cabdriver in Las Vegas with almost 17 years of driving experience, I welcome Uber and Lyft. It will help local people who need rides, seeing how most senior cabdrivers do not like taking radio calls.
However, eliminating geographically restricted cabs, restricting when certain cabs can be on the streets and adding an additional 20 cabs per company will only make it more difficult for a driver to make a living. Unlike Uber and Lyft, whose drivers can be at home or doing whatever else they want to do until they are called to pick up a fare, cabdrivers must sit in their cabs during their shifts, waiting in line at a casino or driving around from casino to casino or sitting in “the pit” at the airport waiting for a fare.
When it is really slow, such as in the months of November and December and certain times during the summer months, cabdrivers have to show up to work every day or lose their jobs. With Uber and Lyft, it won’t matter.
Yes, there are definite advantages to being a cabdriver and working for one of the 16 cab companies in Las Vegas. We get paid vacation and health benefits. Most employers offer 401(k) plans, and the drivers do not have to be responsible for vehicle maintenance and repairs. With Uber and Lyft, the cab companies may be forced to change their lousy attitudes toward their drivers and shorten their shifts from 11.5 hours to 10 hours. It will also put the brakes on the Taxicab Authority which, up until now, has had the power of life and death over drivers.
Gerald W. Mazur
Las Vegas
