SHJ reprints its tired old apology for Government Education
Well it seems like it to me, and I guess it does to you also. Sunday the Spartanburg Herald Journal reprinted the same editorial they print every time education reform in any form is demanded by SC voters. Filled with lies and NEA talking points. Think I’m exaggerating? Let’s check them off.
The lie that H4576 will take money from the government education system – CHECK.
The state’s primary responsibility is to support its public schools, to improve and build that system. It cannot afford to cut the revenue that supports that system to give tax credits to those who choose not to use public schools for their children.
As usual, it’s all talk about revenue / spending and no talk about savings. Simple math. For each student that migrates from government education to an education choice that the family decides is best for the student, there is a small tax exemption. The REMAINDER of the close to $12,000 spent on each student in SC remains in the public school. 1 less student yet the money stays in the classroom. Perhaps SHJ editors should have paid attention to English AND math in school.
The lie that tax credits hurt other taxpayers – CHECK
Parents who don’t send their children to private schools would be paying a greater share of taxes than parents who use private schools.
Well, not according to the Supreme Court…
In the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in ACSTO v. Winn, the court held that money spent and claimed as a credit against one’s taxes is private money, not government spending. Other taxpayers aren’t harmed by the choice of those claiming credits because the government isn’t spending collective tax revenue. In other words, the taxpayer, not the state, is presumed to own the fruits of his own labor.
The lie that tax credits only help wealthy families and that low income students are not helped. – CHECK
But tax credits are the least likely method to enable poor families to afford private schools. Tax credits benefit only those with enough income to have large state tax bills.
Let this graph speak for itself.
According to the Florida Dept. of Education, almost 30,000 scholarships were awarded in 2010 through a bill similar to H4576. Those scholarships are based on students eligible through free/reduced lunch program criteria.
So when your local paper’s editors print lies year after year, propping up government run education and dismissing parents’ rights to use their own earned monies in the form of tax credits, where can you go to get the facts?
You can come here. Oh … at a second glance, the editorial above MAY be slightly different than the editorial published last June 14, 2011. But not by much. Think I’m kidding? Take a look at the same tired lies from last year.
Here’s the retread of Lie #1:
The bill would not have improved any schools. It would have taken scarce resources away from the public schools.
Yep we’ve shown that’s not true. Not last year. Not this year.
Oh here’s a Lie from last year’s editorial that today’s editorial failed to include .. the dreaded “Voucher! Government strings” Lie:
Government money always comes with government strings. If this voucher bill had passed, it would have been only a matter of time before the General Assembly applied its accountability system and school report cards to private schools.
Anyone who read last session’s bill or H4576 just can’t take seriously a newspaper who allows lies to be printed from their staff editorial. Never has been vouchers in the SC school choice bills. Not last year’s bill. Not this year’s bill. When information is the product you sell, and your product is bad, business suffers. Say, how’s your circulation SHJ?
And then LIE #3. Here’s the lie printed in last year’s editorial:
Poor parents, who can’t pay the tuition up front and don’t make enough money to take advantage of the tax credit, would have been left out in the cold.
See graph above.
I heard that the Spartanburg Herald Journal was recently sold to new owners. Was the NEA the purchaser? Now THAT would explain everything!
Last Thursday night I asked for your help when next the media printed misinformation about school choice, or H4576 in particular. The editor’s name at SHJ is Mike Smith, here is his email address:
michael.smith@shj.com
February 6, 2012
Posted in: Uncategorized
6 Responses
Michele - February 7, 2012
What is the source of the $12,000 expenditure per student?
Wendy Clark - February 7, 2012
Karen, please explain how “The REMAINDER of the close to $12,000 spent on each student in SC remains in the public school.” Schools are given money by the state and federal government based on ENROLLMENT numbers. If the student is not there, the school does not get the government funds. Hence your argument that school choice SAVES money. So, I am checking off your statement as a “Lie” and SHJ’s statement as “Truth”. Your second noted “Lie” simply doesn’t make sense. How can the tax dollars belong to the parent? We do not pay taxes so that our own children can be educated. We pay taxes so that we can live in an educated society just like the SHJ said. Those of us without children or whose children are grown do not get a tax exemption for not using the system. Likewise someone who opts out of the system should not.
Karen Martin - February 7, 2012
Here is the source, Michelle:
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess119_2011-2012/appropriations2011/tap1b.htm#s1
“SECTION 1 – H63-DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION”
“…1.3… In Fiscal Year 2011-2012, the total pupil count is projected to be 690,111. The average per pupil funding is projected to be $4,834 state, $1,215 federal, and $5,705 local. This is an average total funding level of $11,754 excluding revenues of local bond issues….
Karen Martin - February 7, 2012
Ah Wendy, see there’s where your assumption of funds going to a particular school based on enrollment numbers leads you astray. There are 211 different funding sources that make up the $11,754 per student in SC. It’s based on input such as percentage of poverty in a county. Some are million dollar grants that don’t depend on any particular number of students either in a school or a county. From the averages of $4,834 state, $1,215 federal and $5,705 local, most of that money is apportioned to the schools NOT BASED on enrollment at all! Not even on countywide enrollment. A minuscule amount is actually apportioned to a school based on actual students enrolled in that particular school. So as I accurately stated … MOST of the money currently apportioned to a school STAYS in the school even if a student chooses to migrate to a school their family chooses as better for that student than their current government run school.
Karen Martin - February 7, 2012
As for the tax dollars belonging to the parent … perhaps you got bored or confused and didn’t read all the way down to the paragraph where the U.S. Supreme Court disagrees with you:
In the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in ACSTO v. Winn, the court held that money spent and claimed as a credit against one’s taxes is private money, not government spending. Other taxpayers aren’t harmed by the choice of those claiming credits because the government isn’t spending collective tax revenue. In other words, the taxpayer, not the state, is presumed to own the fruits of his own labor.
That is a pretty simple statement. However, if it is still confusing, I do know a few homeschooled kids who can explain it to you
Jane Price - February 7, 2012
People need to be aware that even students who are homeschooled are counted by the local school districts for funding purposes. The same system that denies my child any services can use my child for receiving my tax dollars. So, rather than letting me pay for my own educational choices, I am still funding the local public schools as well. As a taxpayer, the fact that the lion’s share of property taxes I pay go to public education gives me every right to seek reform of a mismanaged and broken educational system. As the daughter of career teachers, my parents warned me years ago of the demise of public education when the government turned schools into big business. People should be outraged over the mismanagement of a system in which administration is the priority rather than the classroom teacher and the student.
Leave a Reply