Palmetto politicians like to say there are no “silver bullets” when it comes to fixing what ails our state (on multiple fronts) … but as South Carolina continues to back itself into a corner economically and educationally, we’d better find some of this elusive ammo quickly.
With respect to our worst-in-the-nation public education system, one thing is for certain … dumping hundreds of millions of additional dollars into the failed status quo has clearly not been a silver bullet. Nor has dumping ten of millions of dollars each year into so-called “accountability” measures which have only served as a costly, taxpayer-funded cover up for government’s ongoing generational failure.
Also failing to turn things around? Billions of dollars in new facilities (paid for by local tax hikes), a massive expansion of administrative positions, the hiring of costly education “consultants” and teacher bonuses that have nothing to do with classroom achievement.
Oh, and then there’s the latest government ploy … “public school choice” … which has failed for the simple reason that it doesn’t actually provide choices.
Bottom line? None of these government-driven solutions have made a dent in our state’s historic academic under-achievement … in fact, our state continues moving in the wrong direction despite record funding increases and a host of other “education reforms.”
According to the latest data, our state’s overall graduation rate remains among the worst in the nation – improving by a meager 1.5 percent over the last decade (one of the worst percentage improvements in the entire country). That’s consistent with our rural graduation rate (which currently ranks dead last in the country) as well as our declining SAT and stagnating ACT scores.
And let’s not forget that as South Carolina continues to fall further behind the rest of America – the rest of America continues to fall further behind the rest of the world.
In a global competition for jobs and investment, that’s not good …
Making matters worse is the fact that Gov. Nikki Haley – a former sponsor of universal parental choice legislation during her days in the S.C. House of Representatives – has backtracked on her commitment to this key reform. So much for “transforming South Carolina in ways that have long been imagined,” right?
Fortunately, stepping into this void of leadership and glut of failed government solutions is a growing contingent of state lawmakers who are fed up with the status quo. On Thursday, these lawmakers rolled out their proposed alternative to decades of chronic, costly under-achievement – a universal parental choice plan that would dramatically expand academic freedom in South Carolina and finally force our state’s public schools to improve their abysmal performance.
Oh … and save money, too.
“Today is the day we begin the process of bringing real school choice to South Carolina,” said S.C. Sen. Larry Grooms (R-Berkeley), one of a handful of real Republicans in the S.C. Senate and a lead sponsor of this year’s universal choice legislation.
Joining Grooms in sponsoring the “Educational Opportunity Act” were several of the Senate’s staunchest free market advocates – Tom Davis, Lee Bright, Kevin Bryant, Phil Shoopman and Danny Verdin. Other co-sponsors include Senate President Glenn McConnell, Chip Campsen, Mike Fair, Mike Rose and David Thomas.
Also co-sponsoring the new legislation is S.C. Sen. Robert Ford (D-Charleston), who courageously withstood the slings and arrows of the establishment two years ago when he stepped forward to lead this “new civil rights struggle.”
Props to all of them … and we hope to see additional sponsors as this legislation moves forward. Also, a companion bill will be introduced in the S.C. House, with Rep. Bill Herbkersman (R-Beaufort) serving as the primary sponsor.
Like previous versions of parental choice, this new bill would permit all South Carolina families to claim a state income tax credit for out-of-pocket tuition expenses. Homeschooling families would be permitted to claim a credit for instructional expenses, and non-profit organizations would provide low-income children with tuition scholarships. To fund those scholarships, both individuals and corporations would be permitted to claim a state tax credit for donations made to Student Scholarship Organizations (SSO’s) – IRS-recognized non-profits that would be required to spend 95 percent of their contributions on scholarships for low-income students.
Expanded parental choice has proven successful everywhere it has been implemented – not only in terms of providing a way out for children trapped in failing schools, but forcing public schools to improve their performance (i.e. market-based accountability).
And given that the value of the new tax credits and academic scholarships are much lower than the state’s $12,000+ per pupil cost, the legislation would dramatically raise per pupil spending in South Carolina (while reducing class sizes).
“It means more money, without raising taxes, and more options for students who need them,” Sen. McConnell said.
In fact, in touting the new legislation lawmakers said that state auditors in Florida were reporting $1.49 in education savings for every dollar of school choice tax credits in that state. Expect to see this figure cited frequently as S.C. lawmakers grapple with an estimated $1 billion budget shortfall.
More importantly, public school students in Florida say significant increases in reading and math scores, as well as a rise in the state’s on-time graduation rate.
That’s not surprising. Consider the latest data from Milwaukee, which is home to the nation’s longest-running parental choice program. According to a new report from the University of Minnesota, participants in the Milwaukee school choice program boast graduation rates that are 18 percent higher than those of students in Milwaukee’s public schools. Also the program, which now features more than 20,000 participants, “costs” taxpayers $6,442 per student – less than half of the $15,034 per student spent at Milwaukee’s public schools
Sound familiar?
Unlike black leaders in South Carolina (most of whom are content to continue shilling for the status quo), black leaders in Milwaukee got together twenty years ago and said “enough is enough.” Led by the daughter of a Mississippi sharecropper, they told the government “you’re failing these children – give us a chance.”
They got their chance – and the results are undeniable.
One of the standard arguments made by school choice opponents (who don’t dispute Milwaukee’s success) is that such a plan could not possibly work in predominantly rural South Carolina.
That’s not true, though. There are hundreds of private and parochial schools already operating in South Carolina – including many located in rural areas of the state. Schools like Cornerstone Christian School in Paxville, S.C., for example, where the tuition is $2,200 a year. That’s more than $10,000 less per child than what taxpayers shell out for public school students.
(You can read more about Cornerstone in this story, which was published last month in the Sumter Item).
Imagine how many of these schools there would be if our state actually facilitated the creation of a market for their services?
Obviously we don’t believe that choice is the “only” answer.
As Gov. Haley has correctly noted, our state must radically restructure its current funding formula to make sure that education dollars follow the child, not the bureaucrats. Pumping more money into a system that spends half of every dollar on non-classroom expenses makes no sense – and eliminating the administrative excess while “backpacking” money to each individual child is the best (and fairest) way that we’ve seen to address a host of inequities in our current system.
And while we consolidate funding, we must also open it up for inspection – requiring every educational expense to be placed in an online checkbook so that taxpayers can break down each dime of the record $9.5 billion they’re spending.
We must also scrap our state’s failed assessment and accountability “standards” and replace them with diagnostic tests that give teachers the ability to see what their students are (and are not) learning. These tests must also allow for apples-to-apples comparisons with other states, something we currently don’t have.
Additionally, we must implement merit-based raises for teachers as opposed to raises based on national certification – something that S.C. Rep. Bakari Sellers is beginning to move us in the direction of doing.
On a structural level, we must also get our government singing off the same sheet of music – namely by supporting the ability of our governors to appoint state superintendents as members of their cabinet. Our state must also champion consolidation at all levels of the public school system – including school district consolidation.
Of all these reforms, though, none would have anywhere near the impact of universal choice.
If our leaders summon the courage to pass it (and Gov. Haley makes good on her promise to sign it), it could be the “silver bullet” that saves our students … and our taxpayers … from yet another decade of increasingly costly failure.
THE BILL …
S.C. Educational Opportunity Act
THE BACKERS …
Larry Grooms Video
MORE INFO …
School choice FAQ
UPDATE: We’ve added this year’s school choice bill to a list of proposed “pro-South Carolina” reforms on our 2011-12 S.C. Legislative Scorecard. If you’ve got a vote that you think we should include on the scorecard, feel free to email it to us (or submit it anonymously on our contact page).
***
By Crooner January 21, 2011 at 10:29 am
Dude:
Why do you think there are hundreds of private and parochial schools in SC? Can you say Brown v Board of Education?
By Garrett January 21, 2011 at 10:40 am
So no government handouts (vouchers), no credits or scholarships of more than half state spending, and no existing private school kids get credits or scholarships until money is proven to be saved?
They should have done it that way to begin with…
Anyone still against this just has a hard-on for public schools simply because they are “public schools” and has long ago stop caring about the kids.
By James the Foot Soldier January 21, 2011 at 10:52 am
Gag me with an effin’ spoon
We already have school choice THOUGHOUT America. It’s called school district boundaries. If the school district sucks then move your fat ass out of the district and get your kids into a high performing school district.
Cost to WE THE PEOPLE = $0.
By Dude January 21, 2011 at 11:02 am
Hey Crooner,
Why do you think half the state’s counties have multiple school districts, with attendance lines gerrymandered on income and racial lines?
There is nothing more institutionally oriented to perpetuating inequity in South Carolina than the public school system!
By Allen Olson January 21, 2011 at 11:03 am
I am from Milwaukee, and went through Milwaukee public school system, and can say first hand what you say is true Willie. There are many things I disagree with you on, but this subjuct, you hit the nail on the head, thank you for posting this information.
By Katherine Jenerette January 21, 2011 at 11:04 am
The [Read: Rule] Role of Education in Society: You are what you know and whoever can control what you know will control who you are and what you can ultimately become.
By Lewis January 21, 2011 at 11:17 am
In Richland Dist 1, those students not in the most advanced classes have little, if any, homework because of the policy that many (most)students don’t have good support of their educational endeavors at home, so there is little extra work required outside the classroom. The old days of term papers, writing assignments and reading lessons before coming to class is quite rare in this pitiful district. Just herd them through is the mentality.
By Trey January 21, 2011 at 11:37 am
Maybe we should have figured this was coming a couple of hundred years ago when we decided to own over half the people in South Carolina. Kind of a “sins of the fathers” thing going on for some while now.
Trey
By James the Foot Soldier January 21, 2011 at 11:38 am
Lewis, is there a law prohibiting the parents of students in Richland District #1 from moving to a higher performing district?
By conservative1 January 21, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Honestly, Will Fols should be our governor, We would certainly be on the right track.
By SnakeMd January 21, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Katherine, you are absolutely right!
Smartness runs in my family. When I went to elementary school in SC I was so smart my teacher was in my class for five years. However, when I got to college I got tossed out of metaphysics class for cheating on my exam; I looked into the soul of the girl sitting next to me.
My grandaddy always said he thought the world would be a better place if it was run by C students.
By Katherine Jenerette January 21, 2011 at 12:53 pm
SnakeMD – Too Funny: “…the world would be a better place if it was run by C students…” BTW; my better half served with 1SFG(SAFASIA)also; in 1973-74 before the group deactivated.
By Huhhh??? January 21, 2011 at 12:59 pm
tax credit = state expenditure.
how can we afford it?
By Not Surprised January 21, 2011 at 1:36 pm
“A tax credit is a state expenditure?!”
Did you get a public policy degree from an online course at DeVry University?!
A tax credit is a way to incentivize market behaviors that reduce the expenditures and liabilities of governments. As in, they cause a reduction to state tax collections that are equal to, but most often smaller than, the reduction in what the government needs to spend achieving the same sort of goals.
By Joey Jo Jo, Jr. Shabadoo January 21, 2011 at 2:14 pm
Let’s do a test run on the credit. Give it to any family (refundable so income is not a factor) in Williamsburg, Allendale, or Dillon Counties that sends their child(ren) to a private school with an open door policy and tuition that it not greater than the amount of the credit. If you are a “true beliver” you’d take that deal. If you’re full of sh*t, probably not.
By so much for family values (again) January 21, 2011 at 2:22 pm
Private does not automatically equal good quality. I wonder whether some of those smaller Christian schools actually teach science.
By baker January 21, 2011 at 3:21 pm
Whooo-hoooo.
These school choice people have really got the propaganda down pat.
This is the “magic bullet” to help raise test scores and graduation numbers. And yet:
1. It guarantees nothing to the poor — only the hope of “scholarships,” which might materialize for some, but it’s all speculative.
2. But……would promise money to millionaires whose kids go to private schools that would not consider accepting poor struggling students.
To quote the great songwriter Lonesome Bob: “It’d be sad if it wasn’t so funny, it’d be funny if it wasn’t so sad.”
By William Hamilton January 21, 2011 at 4:24 pm
Choice will save huge amounts of money. Parents will pull their kids out of the public schools. With reduced public support public school budgets will be cut more and taxes will be cut. Then parents will discover that the voucher doesn’t cover the cost of private education. The state will continue to slash education funding and the amount of the voucher will be reduced or fail to keep up with the cost of private education. Parents will now be divided into several oppositional groups and be incapable of protecting their common interests. Working class families with strong employment skills will continue to leave the state, draining the state’s pool of competent, attractive labor, aggravating the state’s economic problems. The state will have less money, cutting the vouchers and surviving public school budgets more. Parents will complain they have no decent options. Libertarians and conservatives will tell them that it isn’t the state’s job to pay the costs of educating their children. They will tall parents that if they couldn’t afford their children, then they shouldn’t have had any.
Those families which can, will leave. The poor and incompetent will stay, gradually becoming an ever larger portion of the states population. A small wealthy and professional class will hang on here. They will send their kids to expensive private schools.
By Trey January 21, 2011 at 5:04 pm
Tote the load boys, tote the load.
By baker January 21, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Indeed, as Will Folks notes, one of the criticisms of “universal school choice” plans in South Carolina is that it’s hard to compare Milwaukee to rural South Carolina. But Will says those people are wrong, because there are plenty of private schools around the state.
Well, some counties have more private schools than others, but here are a few rural counties I looked up information on:
1 private school in Edgefield County
1 in Bamberg County
1 in McCormick County
1 in Saluda County
2 in Clarendon County
2 in Dillon Countty
2 in Union County
3 in Cherokee County (only 1 that goes through high school)
2 in Marion County
And I wonder how many of these have open admissions, meaning that they’ll take students regardless of achievement levels?
Folks, of course, touts the “market forces” that could lead to the opening of new schools. There could be some new schools….but the notion that there are anywhere nearly as many private school options in rural South Carolina — where, by the way, transportation is generally a lot more challenging than in cities with public transportation infrastructure — as there are in Milwaukee seems totally absurd.
By Soft Sigh from Hell January 21, 2011 at 5:13 pm
“A small wealthy and professional class will hang on here. They will send their kids to expensive private schools.”
As South Carolina becomes Central America.
By Soft Sigh from Hell January 21, 2011 at 5:22 pm
“the world would be a better place if it was run by C students”
As Conservative Republican Senator Roman Hruska once said, mediocre people deserve representation too.
(Unfortunately he said it of Harold Carswell, a conservative Supreme Court nominee, who later became the first well known Republican restroom romancer in the manner of Sen. Craig.)
By Old Bike Dude January 21, 2011 at 6:08 pm
Hey snake before you and Kathy start swapping spit in the shower let’s have a brief time out for a SC school system history lesson. You see our current disaster of a state BOE started it’s downward spiral 50 years ago when some of Strom’s black kids wanted to go to school with his white kids. Well now Big Daddy could have none of that. Sooooo……….
By Luke January 21, 2011 at 8:11 pm
Nice article so you use a school that has just opened as an example of how low tuition could be? We don’t even know if this school will successfully educate students and something doesn’t add up, did you read the article? Even with 25 students that school is going to gross $55,000 yet they have 3 teachers to pay, supplies to buy and facilities to pay for or rent. Now maybe they are not paying one of the teachers as he is the minister and perhaps they’re not paying for any facilities as they may be part of the church, just seems like you could have selected a better example. Maybe take a look at Heathwood Hall costs for comparative purposes. http://www.heathwood.org/admission/admissionsdocs/TuitionFinancialBulletin.pdf
By Katherine Jenerette January 21, 2011 at 8:34 pm
Hi Old Bike Dude!
Hope you are well! With four (count them ladies and gentlemen)kids in the SC Public School System I think about Schools and Education Policy as it affects them each and every day. There has got to be a better way or a combination of better ways to do the Math and the English and the Science in SC.
But, right now I’m at Ft. Dix doing a winter wonderland Army thing; but to blame Strom for SC education is a bit over the top.
There are a whole bunch of things that could use some ‘fix’n’ for our SC children; which equals SC’s future. Anyway, I’m kind of distracted from the discussion so I’ll stick to my original thought: …whoever can control your education will control who you are.
vr Katherine
P.S. Isn’t Drafting another cyclist during a triathlon outright illegal? I need to do another triathlon soon! Draft, draft, and draft some more.
By Enough already January 21, 2011 at 8:50 pm
Nice, I can finally stop just funding the public schools with my tax money, but make sure I am effectively funding the private schools (and private choices of other individuals) because they will additionaly be getting a tax credit – which may be bigger than the portion of taxes they pay anyway – and all the burden falls to us now.
The roads here aren’t that great, so can I take a toal road and just get a tax voucher to pay for it? Pretty please? Oh, by the way, I don’t like public transportation, can I get a tax voucher to help pay my car payment? Pretty please? I have a legal dispute, I don’t want to file in the public courts I want to get a mediator or arbitrator, can me and the other party get a tax voucher/credit for doing it? Pretty please?
Could these school choice idiots STFU already about wanting to expand public spending to cover private schools as well? Pretty please?
By Adam Smith January 21, 2011 at 9:05 pm
Why not consolidate our 97 state college and university campuses?
USC has TWO in Beaufort alone.
No kidding.
By PoliticiansFML January 21, 2011 at 9:26 pm
this:
“Gag me with an effin’ spoon
We already have school choice THOUGHOUT America. It’s called school district boundaries. If the school district sucks then move your fat ass out of the district and get your kids into a high performing school district.
Cost to WE THE PEOPLE = $0.”
and this:
“tax credit = state expenditure.
how can we afford it?”‘
Come on Will, are you proposing some sort of socialist program here?
By Old Bike Dude January 21, 2011 at 9:54 pm
Katherine you should know that I could not live without sarcasm and exaggeration. I put 5 in public school and college. I’m a public school advocate. That doesn’t mean I agree with all they do just that I believe in the ideal. My youngest is 2nd year college and my next to youngest leaves for Afghanistan next month.
And drafting is only illegal going uphill. How about the SC half come October? Ooohhhrahh
By Bob Dalton January 22, 2011 at 9:27 am
If vouchers and/or tax credits are such a great thing, why do you have to dress up the concept with names such as “universal parental choice” and “educational opportunity act?”
By Ups-tater January 22, 2011 at 9:56 am
The comments that are critical of this proposed bill ase their criticisms on several assumptions: either that those left in public schools will suffer more as a result of this bill, or that funding for public schools will be reduced.
Let’s focus on those students who, for whatever reason, can’t or don’t take advantage of the credit and remain in public schools. As a result of those who do leave the public school system, class sizes drop, hence student-teacher ratios go down, That’s positive, right?
And if I understand correctly, school districts still get at least 50% of the per-student state appropriation, meaning the student population drops much more quickly than the funding level does, effectively raising per-student funding. That’s a good thing, right?
And in theory, the pressure to maintain student populuation in public schools will offer a much-needed incentive for administrators to improve those schools. That’s good, right? Seems like a win-win to me.
Perhpas these critics of the proposed bill really do understand that public education is failing many students, and that essentially increasing funding and providing improvement incentives won’t help them. I believe that’s true. I believe that the problem with education in SC is NOT generally with the schools or teachers or administrators (though they do blow through a crapload of cash). I think the problem is the “raw material” – many kids show up at school not prepared, able or willing to learn. No amount of money can change that. So the critics say it’s not fair to provide a way for some to escape this trap. “These are public schools,” they say, which means everyone should suffer. Misery loves company.
If you support smaller classes, higher per-pupil funding and incentives to improve public school, then you should support this bill. If you don’t support it, then you’re essentially throwing in the towel on public education.
By baker January 22, 2011 at 10:26 am
“Enough already” raises a good point — and this is a serious question I have.
If a family pays roughly $2,500 in state income taxes — no more — then does that family get the full $2,200? That leaves only $300 from that family to be put toward roads, parks, DHEC, jails, economic development, etc., right?
So doesn’t that have to be made up somehow in the overall budget? Does that not mean that other taxpayers will be, in effect, subsidizing the tax credit for such a family?
By baker January 22, 2011 at 1:23 pm
Ups-tater:
I think your assessment is incorrect. The problem is that fewer students — with half or even most of the current funding level per child — doesn’t necessarily mean that costs and class sizes go down. There are fixed costs that remain even if a school loses students.
For example:
XYZ Elementary School has 3 sections of 1st graders with 20 students in each — 60 kids in all. If 7 students leave to go to a private school, that leaves 53 students. The school has lost roughly $15,000 along with those students.
But the school doesn’t spend a precise amount of money on each student. So, when the 7 students leave, it’s likely that no costs are really cut. The school can’t lay off a librarian and probably can’t cancel a bus route. It’s doubtful that a lunchroom worker or custodian or teacher’s assistant job can be cut.
So, where is that $15,000 made up? Sure, class sizes have dropped by 2-3 students, which is great….but it’s at a cost of $15,000.
The only potential major cut would be if the school laid off a 1st grade teacher. But that would leave 53 students for two classes — and class size would grow from 20 to 26/27.
Now, the math might be different if far more students left. If 20 1st graders left — one-third of the 1st grade population — then the school could realistically lay off a teacher and possibly save some money. Although, even at that the school would be losing more than $40,000 (20 students times $2,200), which may or may not be more than a teacher’s salary.
So, the math is not at all simple — and not at all what private school choice proponents claim.
By Katherine Jenerette January 22, 2011 at 4:14 pm
This entire posting and argument is kind of lame and tame. Forget the dollars for the moment – and look at what works.
And, education works like this guys – whether it is private or public, the student is black or white, or rich or poor is really immaterial:
#1) The ideal classroom ratio is one teacher to 11-13 students. STOP – no more!
#2) Math basic skills must be in place in students by 4th to 6th grade
#3) Language Arts/English skills must be in place no later than 7th grade
#4) Abstract reasoning – ie: If – Then –Else – Logic kicks in about 8th-9th grade
#5) and, the greater majority of our Public School Teachers can meet these educational goals if the Bureaucrats and Administrative busywork-paperwork is moved out of the way.
#6) Let Principals hire and Let Teachers TEACH!
Bottom Line: Let Principals run their schools and hire – private or public – and let teachers teach.
By baker January 22, 2011 at 4:38 pm
Well, I pretty much agree with that, Ms. Jenerette.
And I think public school folks would be THRILLED to have more politicians advocating class sizes of 11-13!
By Soft Sigh from Hell January 22, 2011 at 5:55 pm
Ms. Jenrette’s main point, when generalized, applies to many non-education agencies and programs as well. The meddling (often clueless, always bureaucratic) of middle and upper management is what divert the efforts away from the primary and necessary or else simply drag the efforts to a near stop.
By BIN News Editorial Staff January 22, 2011 at 11:04 pm
sic(k) willie and Howie the Voucher Clown really have put together a Band of Boneheads.
They keep puking up the same voucher scam rhetoric.
They are not interested in helping all children. They know vouchers will do nothing to help those who need help the most.
In fact, they know the voucher scam would only leave those who need help the most even further behind.
Come on sic(k) willie. Talk about the real problems facing public education in S.C. You know!? The poverty. The latent racism.
And the brazillions of social problems that go along.
Fix the real problems facing education, and then, maybe, just maybe, our Funding Editor will be willing to talk Howie’s voucher scam.
Until then, vouchers are dead in S.C.
(Particularly in this economy.)
A Midlands’ elected official said so.
BIN News Editorial Staff
Flare and Balanced
P.S. Great to see Katherine “Sweet Toes” back on sic(k) willie’s porn site. Our Funding Editor was worried she made a jump with her static line unhooked.
By RAS January 23, 2011 at 4:15 pm
Anyone who wants to send their offspring to a private school already has freedom to do so. This proposed legislation just gets the state government to subsidize what is, for the most part, white flight and religious fundamentalism.
It’s about money, not freedom of choice.
By SnakeMd January 23, 2011 at 5:50 pm
Old Bike Dude, Katherine and I were not “in the shower…” as you infer. You Devil Dogs always seem to belly up to the bar just when things are getting interesting. We were just trading pleasantries since I haven’t been here lately. 1st SFG is having their reunion in Tampa on 17 JUN 11, with a golf outing at MacDill AFB. Of course, home to SOCOM.
Katherine, since I’ve retired I have been fortunate enough to pick up some DOD contract work, but I need to start leaving that to the younger operators of your rank and file. I did do some consulting work with Eric Haney, the series creator of CBS’s, “The Unit” and with Fire Ants Films from 2006 – 2009. I get .25 cents every time Dennis Haysbert, Sergeant Jonas Blane says, “Go ahead Dirt Diver, this is Snake Doctor.”
Since Lifetime’s, “Army Wives” has been filming in and around Charleston Naval Base I have been fortunate to work occasionally with the producers regarding the fictional 23rd Airborne Division and other DOD designations when referring to specific Combat Applications Group matters.
Old Bike Dude, the music for the first and second season of, “The Unit” was “Fired Up” by Robert Duncan and is an adaptation of a Marine Corps running cadence called “Fired Up, Feels Good.” So every morning when I do my pushups, while listening to Hey, Bobba Rebba, I’ll think of you, my friend. Semper fi…
By Katherine Jenerette January 23, 2011 at 6:19 pm
Dear BIN. BIN. BIN. Three times!
Happy New Year. I’m so glad you didn’t forget me completely – my toes are older and wiser now and I’ve had to keep them covered in US Army Regulation Boots for a while.
Anyway, if we just remove ‘Howie’ and ‘Vouchers’ from this education ‘silver bullet’ discussion then how do we throw out a large enough net to pull into mainstream those kids who don’t stand a chance unless we make some sudden and radical changes in the SC education maze?
Stop focusing the argument on Howie and Vouchers. They really mean nothing.
I’m a ground zero thinker and doer and it all starts with one teacher and one student, in private or public school…so, take it from there, because, like it or not we will always have poor students, we will always have racism, we will always have a bazillion social problems in South Carolina. We have to figure out how to go around the barriers, under the barriers, through the barriers and deal with them one way or the other.
I measure things from the lowest common denominator and the critical key question to answer is: How do we educate one single South Carolina child who comes into any school system, anywhere in our state from the uplands to the coastal region with all of the odds against him or her?
When we can answer that question for that one student the rest will fall into place.
I know you hate this Army stuff, but, a unit on a 12-mile road march can only move as fast as the slowest person in the formation – and we ultimately have to apply that reality to our schools. If we can figure out how to educate the one student who needs education reform the most we can educate all of our children, not just some of our children.
Step One: Get out of the way and Let Teachers Teach.
That’s all for now – Katherine
P.S. Take a look at my Tree Jump Blackhawk photos my static line was hooked – now there is one less thing for me to be afraid of. Airborne! Oooohrah: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=2001810&l=7c7f3a6074&id=1366095868
By It is about money.... January 25, 2011 at 2:23 am
It’s amazing how many of those against tax credits/vouchers talk about things like “can the state afford it”…calling it an expenditure. The gov’t has to take your money first before spending it….so which is it? The chicken or the egg?
Some of you are confused people in that it’s not the state’s money that is being spent it’s OUR money and the question that is being debated is whether they should be taking it from people who’d like to “opt out” of the gov’t monopolized system of education.
One of the earlier complainers of allowing more freedom and choice said “It’s all about the money”; He’s right.
It’s all about me keeping more of my money and not having to pay for someone else’s kids crappy education while providing my own with a better option. It is particularly biting when my family has made huge sacrifices to educate our kids on our own and at our own cost in ADDITION to carrying the burden of all the public school children.
Call me selfish, but yes I’d like to keep more of my own money to help make my kids into better people than the gov’t run schools could ever accomplish.
As for improving test scores in SC and giving raises/bonuses to teachers in SC-it is very simple. Lower the standards. It happens all of the time. Students, Parents and Teachers all feel great when those nifty scores come back.(Why do you think the teachers are cheering “merit based” pay? It’s easy to teach to tests.)
The dirty little secret about the Columbia area is that there is already a HUGE home schooling population that is growing by leaps and bounds. Parents that really give a shit about their kids have been pulling them out of a broken system in increasing numbers; especially the last few years. The YMCA and many other local organizations are already catering to them by having “home school” days. Every time my wife goes to a home school function she tells me how they are all growing in size and scope. Even the area study groups are filled and on some there are waiting lists! Parents are understandably fleeing the gov’t run schools. Of course certain districts will be fine, like Lexington locally and others throughout the state but they are the exception not the rule.
Enrollment into public schools in this state is only going to go down in comparison to the ratio of home schooled and private schooled children and given what the outcome in public school has been that should be a good thing for our state in the long run.
By baker January 25, 2011 at 8:02 am
“It is about money”:
Since you’re talking about “keeping your own money,” I will repeat this scenario. If a pro-school choice person wants to respond, I’d be interested….
If a family pays roughly $2,500 in state income taxes — no more — then does that family get the full $2,200? That leaves only $300 from that family to be put toward roads, parks, DHEC, jails, economic development, etc., right?
So doesn’t that have to be made up somehow in the overall budget? Does that not mean that other taxpayers will be, in effect, subsidizing the tax credit for such a family?
By baker January 25, 2011 at 1:23 pm
Seems like one of ya’ll might want to answer that question. Because, if you want to get “universal school choice” passed, I think these kinds of questions are ultimately going to come up in the Statehouse. Well, if our lawmakers are thinking things through then they will.
By It's a simple answer Baker January 25, 2011 at 1:30 pm
No Baker, it means that someone is cooking the books.
If there is only $300 left over for running the SC programs as you list(which I don’t beleive) then that the first problem is how is the State is running gov’t at all.
I’ve seen figures bandied about that SC is spending between $8500 and $12500 per student to “educate” them.
So how many people are subsidizing the “education”(or lack thereof) of other peoples children?
Either way you’ve got some explaining to do-because even if you take the lower figure of $8500 a student you should be cheering on every parent that wants to home or private school their kids as even AFTER the deduction it saves the state $6000 per student. Meaning it’s actually gaining revenue…not losing it.
Even if you want to claim that certain “fixed costs” reduce the savings(like buildings, librarians and the like) it is still a FAR greater savings versus the money paid no matter how many “fixed costs” you come up with. You’d still have to find $6000 of those costs PER STUDENT to justify your argument of not giving parents the choice having some of their money go to an institution of their choosing…and that assumes that the do nothings in school administrations just sat back and threw their hands up.(not a bad assumption, but I digress) Someone actually motivated to save money would naturally do what any business man wanting to stay in business would do…cut CUT CUT!
The problem is that gov’t run schools can’t even conceptualize of shutting down buildings, laying off teachers,cutting back expenses, etc. et al because they always have their hand out for more and usually get it. It’s quite obvious to me that many people received a better education when mutliple grades were taught together out of a wood stove heated school house with no electricity.
Even with your funny math you can’t claim a “taxpayer subsidy” when by your numbers(wherever you got them) because $300 is still go to SC gov’t programs. For it to be a subsidy, like corn for instance…the gov’t would actually have to be stroking checks back to people that totaled more than what they take from those same people…not cutting back on what it’s taking from people.
The bottom line is that it’s MY MONEY. Not SC’s. Though it’s taken forceably the least I should be able to do is get a REBATE on some of it for the mutual interest of saving the inept gov’t money and giving my kids a better education.
By baker January 25, 2011 at 5:35 pm
There is so much conflict with reality in “it is a simple….’s” post that I hardly know where to start.
But….
**Yes, a lot of people subsidize the public schooling of other people’s kids. It’s called public education. Some people — many people — don’t use that service directly. But maybe I don’t drive on roads as much as you do, or vice versa. Maybe some gated subdivision has its own security guards. Maybe some member of a country club doesn’t use public parks. Are going to give people “their” money back in each of these cases?
**In the case of wealthy people, getting the tax credit may not have an effect on non-education aspects of the budget. The scenario I’m curious about is when a family, again, an income tax bill close to the amount of the proposed tax credit. If they get ALL (or close to it) “their” income tax money back to pay for their kid to go to private school, then it would seem to me that money they’ve paid that used to support roads, jails, parks, etc. is no longer available…..so someone else is forced to make that up. Am I not correct?
**The numbers and concepts behind fixed costs vs. individual student costs are really pretty simple. I don’t think it needs to be explained again.
By Answers for Baker January 25, 2011 at 8:33 pm
Yes, you should should give everyone their money back that’s forced to pay for a monoply “service”, especially when they don’t use it. Are you so morally bankrupt as to not understanding the concept of theft?
Once again I’ll explain that taking less of someones money for opting out of such a service(which actually saves the gov’t money in the case of schooling) actually lessens the burden on others. If you cannot understand such basic concepts it is a waste of time arguing with you.
By baker January 25, 2011 at 11:47 pm
Perhaps this “answers” and “It’s simple” guy is a parody poster out to show just how silly the hardline right-wing is on this stuff.
On the other hand, maybe he or she will soon be pressing politicians to give tax breaks to members of private country clubs who don’t need to use public parks — after all, there could be some sort of savings to the government when a few less people use the parks.
Can we get this onto the GOP platform.
By Now you've got the idea Baker! January 26, 2011 at 10:31 am
Which is sillier Baker, spending money you don’t have until the fiscal insolvency shuts everything down or calling suggesting someone is “silly” for wanting to not have his money taken who suggests the closure of failed gov’t programs some hope of return to fiscal solvency?
You seem to forget that it was only 100 years ago when the entire federal gov’t operated on tarriffs and user fees…with no income tax.(or maybe you didn’t know that to begin with…the more likely scenario)
The GOP platform is irrelevant to the discussion as not only do most Repugnican’s ignore it as it’s written…it still yet doesn’t go far enough for freedom.
I think it would have been perfect for both Dems and Reps to have went ahead and sat together for the SOTU address…as there is very little to seperate them when it comes down to action(not rhetoric).
Both are for big gov’t, fiscal insolvency, economic planning(with our money), etc. The only difference is which of their buddies get the money stolen for others. As Mencken put it: “Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.”
By baker January 26, 2011 at 10:55 pm
Allrighty, hoss.
By Heritage.org January 28, 2011 at 10:11 am
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/01/28/morning-bell-the-left-must-end-their-war-on-school-choice/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Pingback: Nikki Haley: Parents Deserve Choice | South Carolina News Press | South Carolina Breaking News Headlines | SC
Pingback: SC Tea Party Rallies Behind Parental Choice
By Daniel May 3, 2011 at 10:45 am
“If a family pays roughly $2,500 in state income taxes — no more — then does that family get the full $2,200? That leaves only $300 from that family to be put toward roads, parks, DHEC, jails, economic development, etc., right?
So doesn’t that have to be made up somehow in the overall budget? Does that not mean that other taxpayers will be, in effect, subsidizing the tax credit for such a family?”
I think you misunderstand the nature of the program. There is no way that the state can fund the full amount of the private school tuition, as there are hardly any schools that cost less than $4,000 a year, even in rural SC. The government cannot take that large of a hit. I am guessing that the tax credit will be $1,000 or $1,500 at the most. Also keep in mind that the credit will act as a partial reimbusement for expenses already incurred by the taxpayer throughout the year.
As far as your question, if someone is only paying $2,500 in taxes, they are already being subsidized. Chances are that quite a few taxpayers are picking up their child’s tab. Keep in mind that not everyone will be able to afford the unsubsidized portion of private school tuition and that private schools will not open their schools to floods of public school students. While a number of students would benefit from the program, it would be ridiculous to assume that there will be a mass exodus of students to private schools. It would also probably happen over a long period of time as more private schools are built or the existing schools expand to handle the influx.
While public schools will be forced to bear the burden of funding cuts, I don’t necessarily think that is a bad thing. The public school system is so bloated these days that finding ways to cut down on the massive overhead would be hugely beneficial to the students they serve. Clearly the “educrats” need to seriously reevaluate how their state funding is appropriated if 50% is being spent on non-critical items. Leaner school systems will be better off in the long run.