High School Dropout Deception

A Budget that Reflects South Carolinians' Top Priority: Education

The House Ways and Means Committee recently completed a $5.8 billion spending plan that offers more funds for education, law enforcement, Medicaid, and restoring our state's trust funds.

It is a great day for South Carolina when parties who have held such differing views on past political issues have unanimously passed this budget out of the House Ways and Means Committee. The level of cooperation between the political parties and the desire to work together was unprecedented. Then again, it shouldn't be hard for legislators to agree on a budget that focuses on the issues South Carolinians tell us are priorities. What brought us together is a commitment to making the very best choices for South Carolina's future, and a spirit of cooperation that we have not seen in several years.

Education is the top priority of this budget. [As it has been every year for the past ten? years? And we are still on the bottom. Students in high school cannot read or write and elementary school students are out hugging trees and assisting in lobbying the Legislature. School starts earlier and earlier and pupils are in school LEARNING - less and less]During the past few difficult years, we said when times got better we wanted to focus even more on education, and we were pleased to announce that we are fully funding education to the Education Finance Act (EFA) level. At the same time, we are repaying trust funds, hiring more law enforcement officers, and giving raises to state employees.

With this budget, the total per pupil funding for South Carolina will be $9,826, which includes the "base student cost" being fully funded at $2,290. {Where are the funds that corporations and businesses contribute to school funds? Somehow that is never mentioned in the accounting of school dollars. Taxes are raised by autonomous school boards.]That is good news for students, parents and teachers. [Teacher certification based on NEA standards prove "Basic Education" is not what is taking place.]What's more, teacher supply money was increased to $250, and teacher salaries will be increased so that they will continue to be $300 above the Southeast average. Furthermore, the budget fully funds our state's scholarship programs: LIFE, Palmetto Fellows and HOPE scholarships and continues to provide funding for tuition assistance to two-year institutions. [check into the Lottery funds and see where it is REALLY going].

In addition to education, law enforcement is also a priority. The budget adds 100 new Highway Patrol officers, 124 corrections officers, 20 SLED agents, 118 SC Department of Juvenile Justice officers, 10 SC Department of Natural Resources agents and four new criminal prosecutors. State employees will receive a 4 percent pay raise for the first time in years with many law enforcement officers getting 10 percent raises, bringing their salaries more in line with the rest of the Southeast. Medicaid is fully funded. And, the House budget includes more than 170 of the Governor's cost-saving strategies, which require state agencies to operate more efficiently.

One very important aspect of this budget is that it completely restores forty of the trust funds from which money was borrowed over the last few years, including the Pinewood Fund, the Heritage Land Trust Fund, the Superb Fund, and the Patients Compensation Fund. In addition, the budget puts $25 million back in the Barnwell Extended Care Maintenance Fund. It is important that the General Assembly set a course to make sure that all trust funds are completely restored.

A strong educational system is critical to a successful economy. For our state to compete in the increasingly complex global economy, our citizens need top-notch training and academic preparation. The rules to become successful are changing. Most of today's jobs require higher-level skills and that means higher-level education. As South Carolina continues to attract better, higher paying jobs, we must provide the skilled workforce to fill those. [When will the SC Legislature admit their approach to more money to schools is not the answer? STOP the socialization of students and TEACH them basics. When students are not required to read before the third grade - it becomes abuse, neglect, and lack of integrity on the part of our so-called representatives.]

It all begins in the elementary, middle and high schools of our great state. While education initiatives will require additional resources from the state, the return on the investment will be significant and will help ensure prosperity for decades to come. [We have gone through plan after plan - all very expensive - not only in dollars but loss of several generations of students...changes have shown no progress in students knowledge......but the SC Dept of Education continues to fool the public and Legislature.]

When the budget is debated in a couple of weeks by the full SC House of Representatives, you will hear state officials negotiate budget priorities. Some of us will make education our number one priority. Others will focus on paying back trust funds as the top initiative. The bottom line is that both of these can and should be priorities.

It may look like a difficult choice to some, but it really isn't a choice at all. Our future depends on every South Carolinian contributing to the productivity of the state. We cannot afford to leave any child behind. [They were left behind a long time ago. The only ones not left behind have been the hard hit taxpayers. many of whom are having to pay double for their children's education]. It has been very gratifying to see everyone working so hard together on this budget. This is the first time in a long time that we have seen such unified and overwhelming support from virtually everyone in the House of Representatives. Democrats, Republicans, men, women, veterans and newcomers alike are pulling together to ensure that South Carolina's children are our top priority and are well prepared for the future. [If this statement was more than the usual rhetoric, we would see a complete turn around re. education in SC. Politicical hot air, same as last year, the year before....etc.]

Allow us to sum up in four words what took Nina Brook 700 words to accomplish in yet another State editorial today - Show me the money!

The State's answer to everything seems to be more money, more money, more money. While trashing the Put Parents in Charge tax credit education reform proposal as no way to help children (particularly poor children) caught in an underperforming system, Ms. Brook offered the following forward-thinking solution - use the House Ways and Means Committee to restore per-pupil funding.

I guess we can all go home now since Ways and Means fully funds students in next year's budget. We will no longer have the worst SAT scores in the nation or the lowest graduation rate or the highest dropout rate. We will no longer have an achievement gap between the blacks and whites or the rich and poor. Thank goodness The State has solved our education problems.

Unfortunately for Ms. Brook, she seems to have forgotten to do her homework. Since 1996, state spending has gone up 40%. That's in addition to a 58% increase and 37% increase in federal and local spending respectively. We're now at close to $10,000 being spent per pupil per year. About $5,000 of that is state money. Over the past 40 years, South Carolina has increased education spending 426%, the highest increase in the nation.

The question is, how much is enough? When will The State and reform opponents realize that more money is not the only answer? Certainly, the state needs to continue funding public education, but South Carolina also needs to implement some real reforms in order to see real improvement.

Ms. Brook acts as if she has stumbled across some hidden truth by proclaiming this is a tax break, and proceeds to proclaim a tax relief bill cannot accomplish the stated purpose of this legislation. She's dead wrong. Tax relief will make schools accountable to parents by giving them control over where their child is educated; tax relief will expand educational opportunities to children in poverty; and competition resulting from tax relief will improve public school performance.

Yes, Ms. Brook - PPIC is a tax relief proposal. It's a targeted tax cut that directs the cut itself to education while increasing the amount available for children remaining in public schools. It enables both low-income and middle class families, people that might not otherwise have the necessary funds, to choose where and how their child is educated.

Ms. Brook contends that low-income families will not benefit from either a tax credit or the scholarship program element of this proposal, but fails to acknowledge scholarships have been a tremendous success elsewhere. Why would they succeed in other states and not here? Depending on the state, individuals and corporations have donated generously to help low-income children achieve more through school choice. Here are some facts she fails to mention: Pennsylvania reached their statewide scholarship limit of $27.5 million in just 6 weeks; Arizona taxpayers have made 170,000 donations, raising $52 million for scholarships since 1998, resulting in more than 76,000 scholarships for low income families; and Florida was able to grant scholarships to 16,000 low income families in 2002.

So, while South Carolina's low-income and middle class children continue to be held captive in a system that isn't meeting their needs, other students across the country are benefiting from the educational opportunities being offered them. We can act now and implement real reform or continue to wait for The State and reform opponents to come up with their magic number that will cure our ills.

In his latest editorial The State editorial page editor Brad Warthen proves again that while he may lack facts, he's always ready to offer an opinion. Warthen attacks Gov. Mark Sanford for daring to look outside the state's borders in order to find the best solutions from around the country to improve South Carolina schools.

Warthen is unhappy with Sanford's comparison of Milwaukee's success with Marion and Allendale Schools. He says it's unfair to those South Carolina districts and that "many great things are going on in [Allendale and Marion] schools." Here are the facts. According to the state administered PACT tests, less than 4% of 8^th graders in Marion 7 are proficient in English, only 1% are proficient in Math, and 0% are proficient in Science or Social Studies. So I have one question: Has the system worked for the children in Marion 7?

Warthen then attacks the Put Parents in Charge plan for not being identical to the Milwaukee voucher plan. But no one ever claimed it was! For one thing, the Milwaukee plan is a voucher, while Put Parents in Charge is a tax credit. As Warthen himself notes, "In Wisconsin, the state sends tuition payments directly to the participating schools" while in South Carolina, parents get to keep their own money for education expenses. Why does Brad Warthen prefer giving government money to private schools rather than letting parents keep their own money? It seems like Warthen trusts anyone more than parents when it comes to educating children.

From there, Warthen's avalanche of distortions only picks up speed. He claims that the Wisconsin voucher plan provides for transportation while PPIC is silent. Wrong. These tax credits can be used for education-related transportation expenses. Warthen complains that our state can't afford to maintain school buses when in truth the state-run school bus system is costing us an extra $250 million over what it would if it were not state-administered (as is the case in 49 other states).

Warthen complains that families would have to pay the difference between the size of the credit (which he mistakenly paints as $400 lower than it is) and tuition. But not necessarily. Scholarships and financial aid are commonly used in private schools. Furthermore, it's fundamentally dishonest for The State to claim that the size of the old credit was unaffordable and the size of the new credit is inconsequential. This sort of heads-I-win-tails-you-lose debating style is typical of The State's approach to Put Parents in Charge.

Their recent coverage of the issue-from every slanted, jaundiced, underhanded perspective they can come up with-has proven that they are engaged in a holy war against this piece of legislation. It remains a mystery why this newspaper continues to spend its rapidly diminishing credibility in opposing a bill that would let families control their own dollars, provide parents with increased choices, and expand hope and opportunity for children throughout the state.

Against the Grain