|
Web posted Monday, May 10,
2004
|
 |
Herbkersman: Governor's plan not about
vouchers
By Bill Herbkersman
Special to the Carolina Morning News
From the House
There is
nothing we do in the Legislature more important
than supporting the education of our
children.
We in South Carolina have made
great progress in this area over the past 30
years. After inflation, our educational investment
statewide has increased some 130 percent over
those 30 years.
Unfortunately, we remain at
or near the bottom in nearly all measures of
success in this most crucial of our
responsibilities.
Governor Sanford has
proposed we confront our lack of success with
vigor and creativity. A part of his program is the
"Put Parents in Charge" plan.
This plan is
controversial. There are thoughtful, well-meaning
people on both sides of the debate. While I think
there are aspects of the program that might be
fine-tuned, I also know that what we have been
doing hasn't worked too well.
Let's give it
a good, clear-eyed, unemotional look. My sense is
there is something of value in the governor's
plan.
One of the distressing things about
the debate from where I sit is there has been a
lot of heat generated by both sides but not a
whole lot of light.
For instance, "Put
Parents in Charge" is often referred to as a
voucher program. It is not. The program is,
instead, a system of tax credits and incentives
for parents to be able to choose from a whole
array of educational possibilities. This includes
everything from home-schooling to parochial
schools, public charter schools, as well as
private schools.
The fundamental
distinction here is that vouchers are tax dollars
returned to parents, while tax credits allow those
dollars to remain with parents without having to
be collected, counted, appropriated and finally
dispersed (all at great expense) by the
government.
I have also heard, from
seemingly reasonable people, that "Put Parents in
Charge" would destroy public schools. While this
may simply be a rhetorical position, albeit an
inflammatory one, it was taken seriously enough
for Clemson University to put together an economic
impact report.
The Clemson findings report
that "Put Parents in Charge" would actually
increase per-pupil funding of public education in
South Carolina, currently (from all sources) at
around $9,260.
When we consider the median
private school tuition in South Carolina is around
$3,115 a year, we are confronted with the
unsettling fact that this is a full $6,000 less
than our current per-pupil expenditure for public
schools.
I know this doesn't tell the whole
story, but it certainly is an attention-getter of
a statistic.
Friends, when we add it all up
and subtract all the rhetoric and bluster from all
sides of this debate, what we have left is this:
"Put Parents in Charge" is not going to destroy
the public schools, or destroy educational
accountability, or only benefit the
rich.
It is simply a modest effort to
achieve what we have so far been unable to do,
which is to climb out of the dark cellar of
educational failure.
We desperately need
new ideas, new strategies, a little positive
momentum. We need something to build
on.
"Put Parents in Charge" may be that new
idea. I think we should give it a very close
look.
Go to my Web site,
www.herbkersman.com Click your browser on
"Government" in the left margin, "Web Resources"
on the following page, then "South Carolina
Legislature" and type "Put Parents in Charge" in
the search slot at the top. Click on "H4908" to
read the text of the legislation.
This is
where you can help. Call me, e-mail me, come by to
see me. Give me your informed opinions. This is
the part where I hear you, then speak for you in
Columbia. That's why it's called the House of
Representatives.
Bill Herbkersman
represents District 118 in the South Carolina
House of Representatives. He can be reached
through his Web site at www.herbkersman.com or by
telephone at 757-7900. He is assigned to the
agriculture, natural resources and environmental
affairs committees.
Other state
lawmakers are:
Sen. Scott
Richardson, R
District 46
52
North Calibogue Cay
Hilton Head Island,
S.C. 29928
610 Gressette
Bldg.
Columbia, SC 29202-0142
(803)
212-6040
SR1@scsenate.org
Committee
assignments: banking and insurance, general,
judiciary, rules and
transportation.
Sen. Clementa C.
Pinckney, D
District 45
P.O. Box
300
Ridgeland, S.C. 29936
613
Gressette Bldg.
Columbia, S.C.
29202
(803)
212-6056
CCP@scsenate.org
Committee
assignments: agriculture and natural resources,
corrections and penology, finance, medical affairs
and transportation.
Rep. R. Thayer
Rivers Jr., D
District 122
P.O.
Box 104
Ridgeland, S.C. 29936
532D
Blatt Bldg.
Columbia, S.C.
29211
(803) 734-3073
Committee
assignment: judiciary.
Rep. JoAnne
Gilham, R
District 123
21 Dune
Lane
Hilton Head Island, S.C.
29928
326C Blatt Bldg.
Columbia,
S.C. 29211-1867
(803)
734-2977
JG@scstatehouse.net
Committee
assignment: education and public works and
rules.
Rep. Catherine Ceips,
R
District 124
1207 Bay
St.
Beaufort, S.C. 29902
326A Blatt
Bldg.
Columbia, S.C. 29211
(803)
734-3261
ceipsc@scstatehouse.net
Committee
assignments: medical, military, public and
municipal affairs.
Rep. Walter P. Lloyd,
D
District 121
102 Rearden
Lane
Walterboro, S.C. 29488
(home)
549-5026
(fax) 549-1281
(office)
549-7586
434C Blatt Bldg.
Columbia,
S.C. 29211
(803)
549-5026
WPL@scstatehouse.net
Committee
assignments: education and public
works.
| | |
.gif){kind=spacer}
.gif){kind=spacer}