[Lalalally]

Originally Posted by Henry10

Forced bussing? In Active Tense - Govt compels / coerces you to bus your white kid from Trumbull to Bridgeport.

I don't think it's a matter if we "believe" or "not believe in forced busing", and that it "needs to pass a political hurdle."

Let's suppose that I believe in forced busing, and law passes, because the poor from cities want it, although most suburban parents don't.

Wouldn't people leave, on foot carrying their mattresses, if necessary, like the Jewish Exodus from Egypt thru the desert -- to get out? I mean, unless we are in a state of lockdown nationally, how would that work? It wouldn't, of course.

Remember -- quality of schools is the number one reason of "white flight", which really is multi-color for most middle class parents nowadays. You take those schools away, they will go search other schools. But no way in hell most would dig in and take it. You'll have "CT flight" and huge erosion of tax base. It would collapse the state economy if "forced busing" is done in large scale.

I guarantee almost everybody here would pack up and leave.

I would pack up and leave for sure, no doubt, in a heartbeat... Don't get me wrong, I was raised and grew up in inner-city USA -- Brooklyn, NY, and mostly in the 1980s, well after early 1970s white flight. And I grew up mostly dirt poor, first generation child of immigrants --daughter of an immigrant who arrived in USA accompanied by a family of 6, and with all worldly possessions stuffed into 3 suitcases, and not speaking a word of English. And my story was no different than any of my neighbors... we worked hard though to get the hell out within one generation, God willing.. Yup, schools educated us good enough back then, but no where near the quality outside of the inner city. Values are just plain different, and that alone makes a world of difference to the majority of hard working families

[BicoastalAnn]

Originally Posted by Henry10

Forced bussing? In Active Tense - Govt compels / coerces you to bus your white kid from Trumbull to Bridgeport.

I don't think it's a matter if we "believe" or "not believe in forced busing", and that it "needs to pass a political hurdle."

Let's suppose that I believe in forced busing, and law passes, because the poor from cities want it, although most suburban parents don't.

Wouldn't people leave, on foot carrying their mattresses, if necessary, like the Jewish Exodus from Egypt thru the desert -- to get out? I mean, unless we are in a state of lockdown nationally, how would that work? It wouldn't, of course.

Remember -- quality of schools is the number one reason of "white flight", which really is multi-color for most middle class parents nowadays. You take those schools away, they will go search other schools. But no way in hell most would dig in and take it. You'll have "CT flight" and huge erosion of tax base. It would collapse the state economy if "forced busing" is done in large scale.

I guarantee almost everybody here would pack up and leave.

What I meant was there would be such a clear backlash that I couldn't even imagine it passing into law. All those people who would move would raise hell to make sure that didn't happen. Not something to be concerned about. It's not going to happen.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by BicoastalAnn

Though why would it make a difference whether it was done across districts or within districts.... the ruling was you can't bus kids in (presumably good) suburban schools into the inner city (presumably bad) schools. It doesn't specify whether that only applies if they're in the same city or not.

Students were bused from suburban-like parts of cities into worse schools in the same city. I was there.

[BicoastalAnn]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

Students were bused from suburban-like parts of cities into worse schools in the same city. I was there.

But are you sure that was not due to overcrowding, weird (to observers) school assignments within the neighborhood, or similar rather than a specific mandate to achieve racial balancing? I find it hard to believe it is the latter in this day and age. The other posters here also seem to be under the impression this is not happening? What schools was it, for some context?

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by BicoastalAnn

But are you sure that was not due to overcrowding, weird (to observers) school assignments within the neighborhood, or similar rather than a specific mandate to achieve racial balancing? I find it hard to believe it is the latter in this day and age. The other posters here also seem to be under the impression this is not happening? What schools was it, for some context?

Busing for de-segretation in Columbus, Ohio. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desegregation_busing:

Court-ordered busing to achieve school desegregation was used mainly in large, ethnically segregated school systems, including Boston, Massachusetts; Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio; Kansas City, Missouri; Pasadena and San Francisco, California; Richmond, Virginia; Detroit, Michigan; and Wilmington, Delaware.

And in Busing - Ohio History Central:

The school systems transported some white students to traditionally African American schools and sent some African American students to historically white schools. In the case of Columbus, approximately one-third of Columbus Public School students rode buses to school when the program was fully implemented.

That's ONE THIRD; up from approximately zero. And it definitely included busing kids from their local good school to a bad school in another part of the city. If you didn't put your kid on the bus to the gang-infested school, you were breaking the law.

The net effect over time in all these cities was (at first) private schooling, and eventually migration to places beyond the reach of the court orders for the people who had their kids bused to worse schools. When the overall futility of the process became more apparent (segregation increased, not decreased) the courts tended to give up on it because the rulings could only take place inside a school system.

My guess is that the people who thought it was a good idea in the first place still do think that, and if they can get it so that the busing can be mandated across school district boundaries, they will push for it.

[Henry10]

Originally Posted by BicoastalAnn

What I meant was there would be such a clear backlash that I couldn't even imagine it passing into law. All those people who would move would raise hell to make sure that didn't happen. Not something to be concerned about. It's not going to happen.

At state level, I think it is plausible for such a law to pass. Remember, suburban "middle class" is no longer the winning constituency in CT. Cities are.

I can see politicians and many of their drones accuse suburbanites of being racists if they oppose such law.

[Henry10]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

Busing for de-segretation in Columbus, Ohio. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desegregation_busing:



And in Busing - Ohio History Central:



That's ONE THIRD; up from approximately zero. And it definitely included busing kids from their local good school to a bad school in another part of the city. If you didn't put your kid on the bus to the gang-infested school, you were breaking the law.

The net effect over time in all these cities was (at first) private schooling, and eventually migration to places beyond the reach of the court orders for the people who had their kids bused to worse schools. When the overall futility of the process became more apparent (segregation increased, not decreased) the courts tended to give up on it because the rulings could only take place inside a school system.

My guess is that the people who thought it was a good idea in the first place still do think that, and if they can get it so that the busing can be mandated across school district boundaries, they will push for it.

Very helpful info.

[Raider111]

What do all these people do that are going to just "pack up and leave" in a heartbeat?
quit jobs, abandon their homes and mortgages?

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by BicoastalAnn

But are you sure that was not due to overcrowding, weird (to observers) school assignments within the neighborhood, or similar rather than a specific mandate to achieve racial balancing? I find it hard to believe it is the latter in this day and age. The other posters here also seem to be under the impression this is not happening? What schools was it, for some context?

Look at it this way, if we begin busing inner city students into suburban schools, those schools will become more racially balanced but also more crowded. As crowding increases, the state or regional school district could look at the inner city schools and realize they are still racially imbalanced and have capacity to accept school children from the crowded suburban school. They could think, "hey it is cheaper to put kids on buses and ship them to a school that has capacity in a city than add onto or build a new suburban school". Suddenly we are in a position of forced busing to racially balance and ease crowding in our schools. Of course this is all conjecture but it is certainly feasible. This is why I am so against regional school systems. The control and accountability is lost in large regional school systems. It would be a lot easier to force busing and dilute the quality of education. Of course the wealthy would not care since they send their kids to private schools anyways. The poor do not care since they view it as an improvement to them. That leaves the middle class being forced to accept and pay for this. Maybe the upper middle class won't care as much because they may be able to pay for private schools but the working middle class won't have much choice or much say in the matter.

What gets me angry about this is that Connecticut schools overall do a very good job of educating their children. Sure there are failures but the successes far exceed the failures so why do we need to change the system we have. As far as I know, there is no better system in this country. Find me one and I will then consider it but until they do I will strongly oppose making a change. Jay

[Raider111]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Look at it this way, if we begin busing inner city students into suburban schools, those schools will become more racially balanced but also more crowded. As crowding increases, the state or regional school district could look at the inner city schools and realize they are still racially imbalanced and have capacity to accept school children from the crowded suburban school. They could think, "hey it is cheaper to put kids on buses and ship them to a school that has capacity in a city than add onto or build a new suburban school". Suddenly we are in a position of forced busing to racially balance and ease crowding in our schools. Of course this is all conjecture but it is certainly feasible. This is why I am so against regional school systems. The control and accountability is lost in large regional school systems. It would be a lot easier to force busing and dilute the quality of education. Of course the wealthy would not care since they send their kids to private schools anyways. The poor do not care since they view it as an improvement to them. That leaves the middle class being forced to accept and pay for this. Maybe the upper middle class won't care as much because they may be able to pay for private schools but the working middle class won't have much choice or much say in the matter.

Think of the hundreds of buses joining in on the fun of I95 and the Merritt everyday going in and out of Bridgeport, that would be awesome.