5 ms·

"Should only people with school-age children be allowed to vote on school board members?" This is an obvious no. Apart from the issue of taxation without repre

• mcculley 6y ago
  Where he wrote, "although I understand the arguments against", I interpreted that as the obvious no.
• ianbicking 6y ago
  While I wouldn't support the restriction, most voters at this local level are not voting with any real information and often no real opinion on the issues relevant to the position. Even if someone has some general principles they'd like to express in the voting booth, mapping that to school board candidates is very difficult.
  • pg_bot 6y ago
    If this is the way you feel why stop at school board elections? Why not restrict voting for the legislature, governor, or president? We live in a democracy, that means the "uneducated" have the same ability to vote as the "educated" on the issues. If you have a problem with that you can run for office yourself.
    • marcinzm 6y ago
      I feel at some point choice paralysis sets in and voters choose people at almost random. We also do not live in a democracy but a representative democracy. Very big difference. Having the elected legislature or mayor choose the school board is perfectly in line with a representative democracy.
    • retrac 6y ago
      This argument runs the other way too. Why stop at electing school boards? Why not the public water company's board, and the animal control office? Why not elect the janitors at City Hall? This can be extended until anything but total direct democracy is undemocratic. I live in a jurisdiction with elected schoolboards as well, and I find the notion odd and somewhat anachronistic. It seems only natural to me that public schools should be handled by the municipality's government, or maybe the provincial one directly. (The provinces have, in practice, assumed much of the responsibility anyway. I understand it's the same in the USA with state laws, and state funding, being very involved in public education.) Even municipal elections are marginal enough that many people don't take them seriously here. No one knows anything about the schoolboard elections. I have to actively research quite a bit just to find out anything about the candidates. I often abstain out of ignorance despite trying to inform myself!
      • toast0 6y ago
        > It seems only natural to me that public schools should be handled by the municipality's government, or maybe the provincial one directly. At least in California, school districts are independent from cities, and while most are wholy within one county, some aren't. The school district is the municipality. California municipal districts for the most part have elected boards, although the elections don't have to be run if there aren't more candidates than seats. Pay attention when a California mayoral candidate says they're going to fix the schools. That's a sign that they either don't understand how schools in California work, or they think you don't. School districts aren't subordinate to cities, so mayors have no power over them. With a slight caveat that because San Francisco is a unified city and county, the mayor of SF is also on the SF county board, and counties have some power over school districts, but not a whole lot.
  • notafraudster 6y ago
    The problem with school board elections is emphatically not that too many people vote with low information; it is instead that they are decided by small cadres of reliable voters which make up <10% of the electorate.