Letters: DN editorial on charter-reform measure is misleading

THE EDITORIAL, "Proposed charter reform - cloudy with a chance of crisis," does nothing more than distort the true nature of House Bill 530, while sidestepping the fact that most charter schools serve as the only viable public-school option for students served by low-performing school districts.

This legislation, which takes a giant step forward in accountability and transparency of charter schools, goes to the heart of what education is about: students, and their right to receive a high-quality education.

This bill doesn't "take control away from school districts"; it codifies existing law by requiring districts and charter schools to agree to enrollment caps or grade expansions through the amendment or renewal process.

Most important, this proposal creates a commission to study how charter schools are funded, which has been the focus of many across the state for a number of years. Similar to the Basic and Special Education Funding commissions, the commission, within one year, would issue a report and recommendations to the governor and General Assembly.

This bill also puts into place a process to create a performance matrix to assess every charter school throughout Pennsylvania. Districts would use the matrix for annual monitoring of charter schools, as well as during the charter renewal process.

Statewide, nearly 100,000 students (64,000 in Philadelphia) have left the local failing traditional public education system in favor of high-quality charter schools, with tens of thousands of students forced to remain on waiting lists for the same opportunity. Unfortunately, the editorial board prefers maintaining the status quo at the expense of our children.

Tim Eller, executive director

Keystone Alliance for Public Charter Schools

I would like to thank the Daily News for running a very fair and balanced pair of articles about Archbishop Chaput's policy on Holy Communion. However, I would like to comment on one statement by Ronnie Polaneczky, which I believe might give some readers the wrong impression. She writes that "Christians follow the teachings of Christ; Catholics follow Christ's teachings as interpreted by the Catholic Church." I have no problem with the second part of the statement. However, in the first part, she gives the impression that non-Catholic Christians are pure and simple believers who directly follow Christ's teachings.

In reality, Protestantism has several theological traditions based on the teachings of their founders. This does not even take into account the various schools of thought within these traditions, such as the numerous versions of "dispensationalism" currently the rage in evangelical circles. Eventually, some Protestants engage in private interpretation separate from any authority: Each individual, in effect, creates his own Jesus.

So, in summary, I have no problem with Polaneczky's statement that authentic Catholics give assent to the church's definition of Christ's message.

However, she is giving readers the wrong impression by denying that Protestants do the very same thing.

When a person leaves the Catholic faith, they often stop obeying the pope, only, to paraphrase Mark Twain, to follow one of "the local Popes," including themselves.

Fulton J. Waterloo

Aston, Pa.