The Utah Foundation released a study today on historical trends in taxation and spending in Utah. They included this graph on education spending.
I really didn’t know that education funding had been in such a decline relative to our state’s economy or the rest of our state’s government spending over the decades (see the whole summary report). It is a lot harder to be impressed when our legislature brags about education increases when one notes that education spending as a percentage of our economy has declined to such an extent over the years. It is also harder for me to sympathize with those who stubbornly argue that Utah can’t afford to do better than last in the nation when it comes to per pupil spending when the information from this graph is considered.
Thanks legislators for the increases in ‘08 and ‘09. Would you mind bringing relative public education spending back in line with what was being spent in 1991 when I graduated from high school? I’d sure like it if you tried a little harder not to shortchange my kids.
Check out the whole Utah Foundation Report and Summary.
H/T KVNU’s For The People
UtahTeacher has done a great job breaking down the political hack job our legislature is doing to public education through use of an omnibus bill containing many pieces of legislation that likely couldn’t pass if voted on individually. Republicans stuck these ugly measures together with all the positive legislation the public education system needs so they could avoid having to debate the wrongheaded bills.
I understand that politics can be ugly but this is ridiculous. Several of the items stuck in this bill have already been voted down in committee or on the floors of the house and senate this year.
Have we really gotten to the point where the legislature can’t get business done in a way that allows the people to know what is actually being voted on? Cramming all education legislation into an omnibus bill at the last minute does a diservice to Utah’s taxpayers and voters. Legislators should have the courage to give each measure an up or down vote.
It is ironic that Sen. Stephenson, president of the Utah Taxpayers Association, is one of those evangelizing about how great an idea this is. You’d think someone interested in what taxpayers think would want each measure that will cost taxpayers to be considered individually on its merits.
Its been a while since I could say that I completely agree with the Republicans but…
Amen and amen.
I stopped actively participating in the voucher debate quite a while before the election. I just hated the idea of arguing for the status quo when it clearly isn’t that much better than the flawed laws our legislators gave us in the forms of HB148 and HB172.
Truth be told I really don’t have a great answer for what needs to be done to improve our education system if vouchers aren’t the answer. Utah has a history of providing a public education that is better than what is provided in most other states but is that good enough? I mentioned earlier that I don’t like being associated with UEA because I agree with many on the right that the union doesn’t put my kids’ best interests ahead of its own agenda. We need new solutions like merit pay for teachers, year-round school, more charter schools, and greater flexibility for parents in regards who which public schools they can send their kids to. The huge herd of kids headed for Utah’s schools over the next decade won’t be well served by refusal of the education establishment to budge from the status quo.
It is Wednesday now. The election is over and the voucher plan is dead. We’ve worked so hard fighting (righteously I think) against one proposed solution to our system’s problems. What solutions do we have to offer for the problems that our state faces in educating our kids over the next couple decades? I don’t know but I think it is important that the conversation continue and that we consider real changes from business as usual.
UPDATE: 11/07/2007 8:51 AM
My biggest fear, post election, is that people will treat this vote as a mandate for the status quo. That would be a tragic defeat for children.
–Randy Smith of DavisParents.org
AMEN to that!
UPDATE 10/20/2007: It looks like David at Pursuit of Liberty has come to much the same conclusion as Paramaphil and I. A vote against Referendum 1 makes more sense than a vote in favor of fiscal irresponsibility and poor implementation of a voucher program.
———-
Paramaphil over at Green Jello has had a change of heart on vouchers after what seems to be a lot of study and consideration. I agree with his hopes and concerns about the future of school choice. I think it will be possible to develop some form of school choice in the future that isn’t as blatantly unfair as the current plan and that is more fiscally viable as well.
Paramaphil’s defection from the pro-voucher camp is a good event to bring up another topic. Voucher supporters have resorted to ad hominem attacks on me and other voucher opponents associating us with the teachers’ union. Not everyone who disagrees with HB148 is a UEA stooge. Some of us are just interested bloggers who see a bad plan and are opposed to it. I’m glad UEA has played such an active role in working to defeat this voucher plan but I have to admit that I’m still not a big fan of the union. I think there are many things UEA has done to deserve the bitterness with which it is viewed by many small government activists. Their opposition to merit pay and several other clearly needed reforms is harmful to our schools and needs to be beaten down. I just want the record to be clear that my distaste for HB148 doesn’t make me a big fan of UEA’s tendency to sometimes act in its own best interests instead of the interests of the children our public school system is tasked with teaching.
Bob Bernick Jr. did a great job in this piece making what I think is the best argument against Referendum 1.
The cost of vouchers for students who never would have gone to public schools in the first place will likely far exceed any savings promised by this plan’s supporters. That means we will be using tax money from the general fund to subsidize many students from families who historically haven’t needed any public help paying for private school. Why should taxpayers be stuck with paying for this new entitlement?
Vouchers are a bad idea for Utah.
Hat Tip: Democracy For Utah
Here is a news story that discusses some of the potential benefits and pitfalls of year-round school. On the whole I think implementation of this idea would be a pain in the rear for me and my family but I think I support the idea for my school district because the financial benefits that could result from this plan for taxpayers and public schools seem too good to ignore.
I don’t know why but some Board of Education members seem to be against this idea…I suspect the story above may be blowing the disagreement way out of proportion.
I can understand the consternation of some school officials at having yet another mandate shoved down their throats by the legislature. In the end though taxpayers deserve a break and if something like this could really help the state deal with some of the scary demographic statistics we face in the near future than I don’t have a problem if their egos are a little bruised. Of course I haven’t seen all the information available on the idea or heard all of the potential problems but from what I have heard a year-round school calendar seems like a pretty good idea.
Grudging Hat-Tip: Mark Towner’s Political Spyglass…it is beneficial to readers and original content providers if bloggers provide links to articles instead of copy-pasting the whole things on their web pages.
From an email today:
Did you hear the new pro-voucher radio ad? …I have heard it two or three times now and have to laugh at it. It paints the NEA as a Nazi liberal Clinton following camp, hoping that we’re all idiots who won’t realize that the NEA is being kind enough to step in to help our underpaid Utah public teachers.
My question in response to this ad is, do you think our current public school teachers, (who are vehemently against the voucher system) are in it for the money? Or do they really care about our children as a whole.
Lately the pro-voucher campaign’s main argument for vouchers seems be the fact that the UEA is against them. Why would they think this point will resonate with voters? I’m certainly no fan of many of the things UEA advocates but I do recognize that if the vast majority of Utah’s teachers are against vouchers maybe we should hear them out.
I shouldn’t complain about the self-destructive campaign PCE is waging but when I see them do stupid things I can’t help but wonder why they think they’re on the right track. Here’s some free advice for PCE/ACM and other pro-voucher campaigns. We Utahns don’t hate our educators nearly as much as you do. Spending money on ads which demonize our public school teachers will never convince us that this voucher plan is a good idea.
Here’s a great post from Ed at Part Of The Plan on the ethical problems with the whole idea of vouchers, whether for private school students or private golf club members.
Paul Mero recently published a 44 page propaganda piece attempting to use early Utah and LDS church history to support his contention that Utah’s taxpayers need to subsidize private school students. I don’t think the piece will succeed in convincing many people of the benefits of the current voucher plan but it does make for some interesting reading.
Mero’s defense of Mormon theocracy in the late 1800’s and his contention that the territory government was doing everything right with its schools and everything else in the years right after pioneers arrived here is my favorite part of his argument. It shows just how out of touch he really is. You’d almost think after reading his screed that Mero would prefer that Utah still be a state run by an LDS church from the 1850s. Mormons would still participate in polygamous marriages, church run schools would be paid for by taxpayers and we’d all live in the Nation of Deseret instead of the United States of America. That we don’t live in that blessed state of existence is all due to the fact that the U.S. brought its blasted public schools to Utah and forced a willing populace to send their kids there.
Thanks Mr. Mero…but I’ll pass.
For more response to Mr. Mero’s piece check out:
“Paul Mero - Armchair Prophet” at Utah Amicus
“Why Exploit Religion For Politics” at Accountability First
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.
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.
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.
