POWER PLAY: MY CHOICE FOR SCHOOL CHOICE IS NO CHOICE

I must say I enjoyed former Vice President Dan Quayle's speech Monday at the Show Me Center.

Although he spouted off traditional conservative themes while offering little new insight or ideas, he did it well.

During his tenure as the country's best known benchwarmer -- a position also known as vice president -- Quayle was portrayed by the national media as a complete buffoon. That characterization, it seems, was an unfair one.

Unfortunately, that is one of the pratfalls of being a modern public figure, particularly a politician.

Everything that those in the public eye do or say is scrutinized to an extent that few of the rest of us can understand. And any missteps are instantly transmitted throughout the known universe for all to criticize, or at least make fun of. Politicians get hit the worst because everyone relishes in slamming politicians for anything even remotely slammable.

Quayle, of course, knows this very well, but since returning to private life he has developed a sense of humor about it. During his speech Monday he even joked about the famous incident when he misspelled "potato" while judging a grade-school spelling bee.

The Cape Girardeau crowd loved every word of the ex-veep's speech, which is not surprising considering that this area is to conservatism what Ghengis Khan was to population control.

Along with lowering taxes, ending welfare and other items all good conservatives embrace, Quayle talked about school choice. Poor families, he said, should enjoy the same opportunities as rich families.

If he means everyone deserves the same protections and responsibilities under the law without regard to economic status, he's correct; however, if he means the poor have the right to all the opportunities money can buy, just like the rich, he's not.

Public education is based on the belief that an educated citizenry benefits society. To achieve this common good, members of society are obligated to pay for it.

Private schools are expensive luxury cars to the Ford Escort that is public education. Whether one is actually better than the other is open to debate.

A recent survey conducted by the Missouri Partnership for Outstanding Schools asked which are better -- public schools or private schools? Civic leaders leaned 59 percent to 27 percent in favor of private. The general public leaned 44 percent to 33 percent in favor of public.

Surprising no one whatsoever, 79 percent of educators found public schools are superior. Only 13 percent gave the nod to private institutions.

Either way, if the added financial burden were not a factor, I suspect more parents would put their children in private schools. However, money is a consideration.

When you are rich you can afford to take long vacations in Bora Bora, buy a decadently huge house or ship the kids off to private school. When you aren't rich, you can't. It's as simple as that.

Public versus private is basic versus luxury. Giving vouchers to parents to subsidize tuition is no different than cutting them a check so they can buy a Rolls Royce instead of a Chevy.

If I ever have kids (which is extremely unlikely) and if I can afford it (which, if I stay in this business is even more unlikely) I will send my kids to private school.

That is not a rip at public-school teachers, who as a group do a very fine job. However, private schools are free to do things as they see fit without government interference. Those with crackpot educational theories need not apply.

But if you start funneling tax money from public schools into private ones, the public system could collapse, or at least suffer, as that money has to come from somewhere.

If people are unhappy with how their local public school district operates, the answer is not government subsidy of private education. People should instead work to make the district change how it conducts the business of educating.

Marc Powers is a member of the Southeast Missourian news staff.