I tip my hat to Mr Hall and his rose colored look at the issue of funding autism treatments and therapies.
The Ohio program on the surface looks wonderful. Yet when you peel back the covers of this program, you will find a different story. Question to Mr. Hall. Why are not all parents of autistic children eligble for this program and why many parents simply do not want to be a part of this program? The other issue is why is Ohio agressively seeking an insurance mandate similar to Nick's Law?
Also, this program will do nothing to resolve the delivery of service problems in OK and along with address the acute shortage of practitioners in this state.
Nick's Law would address those issues, but this program would not.
Mr. Hall and others that want to protect the insurance lobby, keep stating without any facts, that this mandate will drive up costs and lead to greater numbers of uninsured. One word - PROVE IT. Do not quote theory from some think tank. I can show that from other state's insurance commissioners offices, that this type of mandate has not had any significant increases in the cost of insurance nor lead to any increases in the # of uninsured.
However, the scholarship program can be a part of the total solution for Oklahoma. Nick's Law is a must and will be the cornerstone for systemic change in the way we provide care for our autistic children and adults.
This blog, dedicated as it is to the issue of school choice, takes no position on insurance mandates. But it is encouraging to see the chief promoter of Nick's Law say that a school-choice program for autistic children "can be a part of the total solution for Oklahoma." And indeed, if Mr. Rohde is correct that Ohio's program is not expansive enough, then Oklahoma policy-makers should make sure that Oklahoma's scholarship program exceeds Ohio's in terms of eligibility and funding.
School choice refers to any education policy that allows parents to choose the safest and best schools for their children, whether those schools are government-operated or privately operated. As Oklahoma state school Superintendent Sandy Garrett has correctly noted, “We have a lot of choice already in Oklahoma.” Our state is fortunate to have interdistrict choice, intradistrict choice, charter schools, magnet and specialty schools, virtual schools, privately funded K-12 scholarships, a thriving homeschool sector, and more. Unfortunately, we don’t yet have what many other states have—vouchers or tax credits which allow thousands of students to choose privately run schools.
The goal of this blog is to create an open discussion about education reform (most notably parental choice) in Oklahoma. Comments will be posted which add information, opinions, and ideas. All opinions are welcome as long as they include the commenter's name and don't violate the common rules of netiquette.
2 comments:
I tip my hat to Mr Hall and his rose colored look at the issue of funding autism treatments and therapies.
The Ohio program on the surface looks wonderful. Yet when you peel back the covers of this program, you will find a different story. Question to Mr. Hall. Why are not all parents of autistic children eligble for this program and why many parents simply do not want to be a part of this program? The other issue is why is Ohio agressively seeking an insurance mandate similar to Nick's Law?
Also, this program will do nothing to resolve the delivery of service problems in OK and along with address the acute shortage of practitioners in this state.
Nick's Law would address those issues, but this program would not.
Mr. Hall and others that want to protect the insurance lobby, keep stating without any facts, that this mandate will drive up costs and lead to greater numbers of uninsured. One word - PROVE IT. Do not quote theory from some think tank. I can show that from other state's insurance commissioners offices, that this type of mandate has not had any significant increases in the cost of insurance nor lead to any increases in the # of uninsured.
However, the scholarship program can be a part of the total solution for Oklahoma. Nick's Law is a must and will be the cornerstone for systemic change in the way we provide care for our autistic children and adults.
This blog, dedicated as it is to the issue of school choice, takes no position on insurance mandates. But it is encouraging to see the chief promoter of Nick's Law say that a school-choice program for autistic children "can be a part of the total solution for Oklahoma." And indeed, if Mr. Rohde is correct that Ohio's program is not expansive enough, then Oklahoma policy-makers should make sure that Oklahoma's scholarship program exceeds Ohio's in terms of eligibility and funding.
Post a Comment