In a comment on their own blog The Senate Site linked to this analysis done by “non-partisan staffers” in the legislature. It provides a good summary of what the proposed voucher plan does, what its costs will be and what legal problems may be encountered.
Here are some important clips. The first describes fiscal analysis of the plan the second discusses legal issues:
Based on certain assumptions, the Legislative Fiscal Analyst estimates that the Parent Choice in Education Program will cost the state:
• $5,500,000 during the Program’s first year; and
• $71,000,000 during the Program’s 13th year, after all private school students in Utah have become eligible for a scholarship.
These costs will be paid from general state tax revenues.
These costs far exceed projected estimated savings for school districts listed in the same document. The Legislative Fiscal Analyst very clearly anticipates that this program is a new entitlement the taxpayers are being saddled with…not an opportunity for saving taxpayer money.
Under the Parent Choice in Education Program, public funds will be used to provide scholarships for students who attend private schools, including private religious schools. The use of public money for students attending private religious schools may conflict with federal or state constitutional provisions that prohibit the use of public money for religious purposes. In addition, other aspects of the Program may conflict with equal protection provisions of the federal or state constitution or with state constitutional provisions relating to the State Board of Education’s authority or the scope of the public education program. Because of the Program’s unique characteristics and the lack of a directly applicable court ruling, it is unclear how a court would rule on any of these issues.
Not enough mention has been made in the voucher debate about the strict restrictions on the use of public funds for religious education that have been written into Utah’s constitution. It seems pretty clear that the current voucher law likely violates those restrictions. Any cost estimates for the voucher program we’ve heard up to this point don’t include the millions of dollars the state will end up spending trying to defend the program in court.
Kudos to Ric at The Senate Site for publicizing this document. Too bad he stuck it into a comment on a post criticizing the teacher union instead of giving it its own headline. This document is worth more to voters than any points made in a post about political sniping.
I caught the tale end of Scott Fisher’s broadcast today as he substituted for Bob Lonsberry on KNRS. I don’t know what the context was within the program but Fisher read an entire commentary that Lonsberry wrote in 2005 describing his opposition to tuition tax credits. Everything Lonsberry wrote two and a half years ago applies equally to the currently debated voucher plan.
Here’s a clip:
A great many people don’t like the public school system. That is their prerogative. They generally feel that it isn’t safe or is academically inferior or isn’t respectful of their religion or values.
And so they will choose to send their children to private school. That is their right.
Where they go wrong is when they start inventing reasons for the government to pay for it.
Some make their stand on the issue of “school choice.” They claim for themselves the “freedom” to put their child in any school they choose.
Which they absolutely have.
As long as they pay for it.
You have the freedom to choose your child’s education, and you have the responsibility to pay for it. You have no claim whatsoever on your fellow taxpayers to pick up the bill.
Read the whole thing…there are many excellent points. I’m normally not a big fan of his but in this case Mr. Lonsberry is absolutely correct.
I’m more interested in discussing the current Utah voucher plan on its merits than in getting involved in ad hominem attacks or name calling. That said, it is important for everyone to know how we ended up stuck with this whole mess. Referendum One at Accountability First is doing an excellent job investigating where the PCE money came from that was used to buy enough pro-voucher legislators in our state to get HB 148 passed.
I believe everyone has the right to spend their money however they want in order to advocate for policies and politics they support. I have no grudge against out of state billionaires who can easily buy legislators with huge campaign donations in our small state. I just think it is important for everyone to know that normal Utahns didn’t give us this ill conceived law. Utahns have defeated private school subsidy schemes every time they’ve been brought up in our state for 20 years. We’re in this situation because of a few wealthy out of state ideological crusaders who decided our state would be an inexpensive place for them to buy some legislators. They found their candidates and we got stuck with enough house members who were willing to go against the oft expressed desires of most Utahns in order to get a voucher plan passed here. For more details on how all that happened click here.
The Tribune had an article today about some people who’ve decided to advocate for a Utah version of Proposition 13. Here are 3 quick reasons why Prop 13 is a stupid idea for Utah…then I’ve got to get to bed:
1. Utah’s “Truth in Taxation” law works. “In the twenty years since Truth-in-Taxation, property tax revenues have grown at a 5.4% rate, equal to the combined inflation and population growth rate of 5.4%”(UTA). For more information on Truth-in-Taxation Check out UTA’s blog (yes…from time to time they do take a break from their relentless voucher blogging to advocate for things that are actually useful!)
2. Prop 13 would create the most inequitable distribution of the property tax burden possible. Growing families would be penalized with a much more substantial share of the tax burden than would be fair. It is bad policy to stick the largest share of the tax burden with those who are typically least able to pay.
3. Utah is a non-disclosure state and is likely to stay that way. Realtors benefit from the fact that market data on the sale of real property is not tracked by government. Utah’s non-disclosure law in essence grants Realtors a monopoly on real property sales data and they won’t easily give that up (Realtors practically own our legislature). Without disclosure of sales data to government there isn’t a way for a prop 13 like law to work. (In the near future the topic of Utah’s non-disclosure status will be covered in much more detail on this blog)
Derek Staffanson at A Liberal Mormon has completed his three part series on the topic of Social Justice.
Post 1: The Need To Help The Poor - We need to help the poor. We don’t usually do that. That is a problem.
Post 2: The Moral Conservative Criticism of Social Justice - Conservative hypocrisy supports little basis for a moral criticism of social justice…whether publicly enforced or privately donated.
Post 3: The Libertarian Criticism of Social Justice - Libertarians are against enforcing social justice through use of government’s guns…they should make louder and more frequent arguments for private charity or else get out of the way of government efforts at social justice.
Go check out his thoughts and join the discussion. Major props to Derek for all the thought and excellent writing skills he expended on this effort!
This story belongs at The Onion like that last post.
Orem City is going through with the prosecution of the 70 year old great-grandmother their police officer cuffed and arrested last month because she hadn’t been watering her lawn…and she didn’t want to give the policeman her name when he was writing her a ticket.
Yeah…cause Utah County doesn’t look stupid enough already…
I love houses that are different. Here’s a great one. It is a water tower that has been converted into a seemingly cozy home. Very cool but I’d sure hate to have to appraise it!
H/T Boing Boing
KCPW has a choice story up on their site today about Paul Mero’s proposal to eliminate public high school athletics in order to make private schools more palatable to Utah’s parents and students. I wonder if Parents for Choice in Education will add this idea to their telephone push poll script? Not likely I’ll bet.
I’d be interested in getting more details about this story.
The initial violation of the law doesn’t seem to be that big a deal especially since the money was paid back. The fact that they tried to cover the whole thing up deserves a lot of attention. That these jokers would cause themselves so much trouble over a few hundred dollars for a parade float is absurd.
While I disagree with accusing specific individuals without enough evidence I completely agree with Wayne Holland’s take on all of this: ““When you have had unchallenged power in place for too long, arrogance and abuse of power is the inevitable result…That’s especially the case with Republicans in Utah County…”
Republicans took for granted that they could rely on publicly funded entities to help them out with a parade float. Who do they lean on for stuff that is actually important?
Other areas with lopsided balances in political power should pay attention to this story and beware.
Davis County government has proposed a tax abatement for people whose property values rapidly appreciated last year.
Even if we look past problems with the specifics of the proposed abatement as reported in the press this is a very lame deal. The abatement amounts to a giveaway of public dollars to people in the areas of the county that have experienced the greatest benefit from appreciation in the value of their property. Even worse, the people who have benefited from being under-assessed over the past 5+ years are also being paid off with public funds. Why are we rewarding home owners in Bountiful and NSL because their houses are worth more this year than last? Why are we subsidizing home owners who haven’t been paying their fair share in county property taxes over the past 5+ years because their homes were under-assessed?
This whole plan represents an attempt by scared politicians in the County and the School District to buy off many of the county’s wealthiest (and most vocal) taxpayers with public funds that should benefit all of us in the form of better government or a tax cut.
Tyler Farrer said it best: The problem is not assessments, but taxes…The only real solution is to reverse last years tax increase!
He’s right…and this proposed abatement is a scam.
Thanks to David Miller for posting this. It is nice to read thoughts on Immigration that are based on reason rather than envy and racial/cultural intolerance.
Voucher proponents have already begun digging into their bag of dirty tricks and its only August. Pathetic? Yes. Surprising? No.
It will be interesting to see how low the pro-voucher movement will go in pushing this lost cause on Utah’s voters. I’m betting they’ll go much lower than this latest push poll as the election gets closer.
Of course I have to admit that our side hasn’t been guiltless when it comes to stupid ad hominem attacks. It is disheartening that both sides of the political spectrum have so little faith in the abilities of Utah’s voters to decide an issue on its merits.
Utah Taxpayer Association has done a lot of work on their blog arguing that school vouchers will save taxpayer money. What they don’t tell you (until recently) is that their numbers are basically meaningless because if the current voucher plan is adopted its legislative supporters will likely have to increase voucher amounts before most Utahns can use the program. If they do this much of UTA’s pro-voucher propaganda is invalidated.
Under the current plan even the most generous vouchers aren’t enough to cover anything near full tuition at 90% of Utah’s private schools. When extra fees and the costs of uniforms are considered (these aren’t covered by vouchers) few Utah families will likely decide they can afford to use school vouchers to pay for their kids’ education.
I pointed this fact out to Utah Taxpayer Association in the comments on this blog post last week. Here’s how they responded:
Coupled with financial assistance from private schools themselves and private organizations, vouchers will be sufficient to cover tuition. If not, then the Legislature will simply increase the voucher amount. Easy fix.
Republicans, Parents for Choice in Education, and the Utah Taxpayer Association are trying to sell us on a voucher plan which they understand won’t work. If we end up buying the plan we will be stuck with this broken plan or we’ll have to pay for all of the improvements the legislature decides are necessary before we’ll have something typical Utahns can actually use.
Raising voucher amounts isn’t an “easy fix” because it makes a lie out of all of the economic arguments voucher supporters (especially the Utah Taxpayers Association) have been using to try to sell this plan. We don’t need another government entitlement program that ends up costing millions more than voters were promised when the plan was originally proposed. You’d think the folks at UTA who are normally more skeptical of government expenditures would agree.
Shame on UTA. If they really wanted what was best for taxpayers they’d abandon this ideological crusade for education vouchers.
I doubt that I’ll ever be an elected official. If I am ever in that type of a position I think I learned more about the necessary qualities of a local government leader in my hour and a half at tonight’s hearing than I’d ever learn from any civic leadership manual or book.
Here are a few things I learned about effective/ineffective leadership, accountability, demographics, and mob psychology at tonight’s hearing:
(more…)
