I stopped by for a cup of Edspresso yesterday and witnessed an attempted take-down of Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia's nonvoting Congressional representative. It seems Edspresso couldn't follow her reasons for opposing vouchers. 

So I tried to follow Edspresso's reasoning, particularly in this section:

"Privately funded vouchers have existed in D.C. since 1993, so there has been more than enough time to detect any benefit from school choice programs in D.C.  And as it happens, this 2002 study which involves the D.C. choice program reports that African-American choice students produced better grades than their public school counterparts; their families were much more satisfied with their new schools; and the new educational environment was a vast improvement over what they had seen in public schools [emphasis added].

Really?  That's what the study showed?  Let's click and see.  Here's what I found in the study: 

"The most uncertain results for African Americans came from Washington, D.C.  As can be seen in Table 4, no significant differences were observed in year one, a large impact was observed after two years, but no impact was observed at the end of year three."

A blip in year two, no impact after three years, "uncertain results" -- that hardly makes a strong case for vouchers.  This is the second time I've clicked on an Edspresso link and found some monkey business.

Edspresso may leave behind a bad taste, but it does get your blood flowing and has a certain addictive quality.  Welcome to the blogroll.