2007-09-10 10:46:01 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
No, because that could only be done with tax dollars. The government needs to get out of the business of education. If that happened, competition would take over. The schools that provided the best service for the cost would dominate. The price of education would drop.
You could completely socialize education - make it free for all people. Would it then really be free or just difficult to tell how expensive it is since it would be paid for with taxes?
2007-09-10 10:51:13 · answer #1 · answered by Joe S 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
God no. If a nominee claimed he'd do this, I wouldn't vote for them based on it alone. Just more unneeded government bureaucracy. Nothing good comes out of this. Takes out competition, which will raise tuition at a higher rate. Plus this is a state issue if I ever heard one.
2007-09-10 19:00:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well that's not hardly an issue to be a swinger. Talk to me about the war or the economy. So no, I would not vote for someone based on that one issue of tuition reduction.
2007-09-10 17:49:56 · answer #3 · answered by Flatpaw 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Depends. What does "legal citizens of heritage" mean?
2007-09-10 17:49:53 · answer #4 · answered by A Plague on your houses 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. Neither a president nor a presidential candidate has that authority and that is the way it should be.
2007-09-10 17:51:38 · answer #5 · answered by rhymingron 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes. He'd have to reduce it substantially, though...
2007-09-10 17:49:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Maybe.
Will it be Free????
Oops. No, the Taxpayers will pay for it.
2007-09-10 17:54:35 · answer #7 · answered by wolf 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think that would be a horrible litmus test!
2007-09-10 17:54:43 · answer #8 · answered by Wounded Duck 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋