I'm doing annoted bibliography for a class, and im still on the lookout for more sources if you know of any.
Jost, Kenneth. "School Vouchers Showdown." CQ Researcher 12.6 (2002): 1-144. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. 8 Feb. 2007
The in-depth report tried to remain unbaised as it helped the reader think through how the Supreme Court was likely to rule in an upcoming voucher case. The report referenced other cases, and brought up many “recent” (from the perspective of when the report was writtin in 2002) points and revealed data sets on both sides of the the issue.
Paley, Amit R. "New Spending for No Child Left Behind." The Washington Post. 6 Feb. 2007. 8 Feb. 2007
The newspaper article puts a Democratic spin on Bush's latest Education proposal. Paley mentions that the bill would add $300 million to school vouchers and cut special-education grants to states.
'No Child Left Behind' Prompts Subtle Standoff." CQ Weekly 64.46 (2006): 03168. CQ Public Affairs Collection. CQ Press. 8 Feb. 2007
The report gives lots of outside information on Bushes stance on education, including that he proposes vouchers to fun transfers of low-income children to better schools. It does not mention that democrats explicitly oppose vouchers, but it does portray them as resisting the renewal of No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
Spellings, Margaret. United States. Secretary. Department of Education. Building on Results: a Blueprint for Strengthening the No Child Left Behind Act. Jan. 2007. 8 Feb. 2007 <http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/nclb/buildingonresults.pdf>.
This gives information on the actual proposal for renewal of the No Child Left Behind Act. The word voucher is not used but it does say it is essential to give states flexability in finding creative solutions to problems. It specifically mentions funding succesfull state methods.
Scharrer, Gary. “Thousands rally for school vouchers.” Houston Chronicle. 8 Feb. 2007. 8 Feb. 2007.
The feel of the article is that people want texas to fund vouchers but it probably isn't going to happen. He qoutes both sides formally then cites a stories of people who need the money.
Carmody, Susan. “School vouchers are only a Band-Aid.” SMU Daily Campus. 8 Feb. 2007. 8 Feb. 2007. <http://www.smudailycampus.com/home/index.cfm?event=dislayArticlePrinterFriendly&uStory_id=5d480db4-6cff-4d21-aba9-78b5fc7b0dda>.
The article just informed me that NCLB expansion includes $4,000 “Promise Scholarships.” Then she goes on to say that improving public schools has been working, while providing vouchers for people to leave them has not beein improving grades.
“Indiana School Choice.” The Heritage Foundation. 2007. 8 Feb. 2007.
<http://www.heritage.org/Research/Education/SchoolChoice/Indiana.cfm>.
The article has a bunch of odd statistics at the start. The bottom has a history and summary of all bill concerning vouchers, including ones that never made it through Indiana's congress.
Dana, “The governemnt we deserve.” Principled Discovery. 1 Feb. 2007. 8 Feb. 2007. <http://gottsegnet.blogspot.com/2007/02/government-we-deserve.html>
Dana brought a refreshing view to the topic of school vouchers; that the federal government should not be invovled in education in the first place. She mentions that it is not stated as a federal responsibility. She doesn't really follow how nice it would be if the government did not tax-to-pay-for or fund education, but instead notes how most people just look and wonder which way is the best way for the federal governemnt to make their cheap education more effective.
