This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Feb 25, 2005
Modified school choice bill no simpler
Robert W. Dalton
Staff
Writer
COLUMBIA -- A new version of Gov. Mark Sanford's school
choice plan introduced Thursday was designed to allay the fears of the
opposition.It didn't work."Put Parents in Charge" version 3.0 is just as
confusing and just as controversial as the two previous bills.The new bill
reduces the income tax credits parents can take to cover the cost of sending a
child to a private school.Middle-income parents could take 51 percent of the
per-pupil state spending on K-12 education, or $2,600 assuming state spending of
$5,000 per pupil, according to figures released Thursday.The numbers were
arrived at by taking the figures Sanford used in his executive budget: $3.3
billion -- including $585.3 million in federal funds -- divided by 676,000
students, with some "off-budget spending" added in, according to Larry Marchant
Jr., president of The Palmetto Policy Group, an organization lobbying for the
bill.For students eligible for free or reduced lunch, the tax credit would be 64
percent of per-pupil state spending, or $3,200. But those families, in
actuality, wouldn't have enough income to qualify for any tax credit and would
therefore have to rely on Scholarship Granting Organizations that the bill
creates to cover the cost of the tuition.Families with less than $75,000 in
taxable income and two exemptions would be eligible for the credits. The income
cap goes up by $5,000 for each exemption.To have $75,000 in taxable income, a
family would have to earn more than $90,000.Under the previous bill, the tax
credits could not exceed the lesser of 80 percent of the tuition, or 80 percent
of $3,200 for kindergarten, $4,000 for grades one through eight and $4,600 for
grades nine through 12.House Speaker Pro Tem Doug Smith, R-Spartanburg, the
bill's primary sponsor, said the changes were designed to address the concerns
of public education officials that the plan would take money from schools and of
legislators who feared it would put a crimp in the state budget."This third
draft clearly shows our commitment for education choice for all South
Carolinians of all income levels," Smith said.Smith said lowering the tax
credits would leave more money with the school a student exits, thus providing
more money for public education. All federal and local money would remain with
the school -- about $7,400 based on spending of $10,000 per pupil from all
funding sources.Jim Foster, a spokesman for the state Department of Education,
said the math just doesn't add up."Unless there's a mass exodus so that many
teachers can be laid off, there will be no savings," Foster said. "They're using
a calculation that looks fine in some consultant's air-conditioned office, but
it doesn't work in the real world."If you think Standard & Poor's had a
problem with the income tax plan, wait until they get a load of this," he added,
referring to the credit rating agency that on Tuesday cited Sanford's proposal
to reduce the state's income tax rate for a negative outlook on the state's
borrowing power.Foster's boss, state Superintendent of Education Inez Tenenbaum,
said the new version of the bill has the same problems as the original."It still
drains money from public schools," Tenenbaum said. "It still could decimate
state funding for law enforcement and health care and road improvement. It still
won't help the vast majority of low-income families."Rep. Shirley Hinson,
R-Goose Creek, one of the bill's co-sponsors, said she's concerned about such
"attacks" and that the bill wouldn't take money from public education."This bill
looks out for parents and children first," she said. "But it also looks out for
the state."Rep. Mike Anthony, an educator and former football coach, said the
bill's sponsors lowered the tax credits to try to build support for an ailing
bill."They want to get their foot in the door, and once they do this program
will be for Mark Sanford's children in two years," said Anthony, a Union
Democrat. "If he's so pro-education, why has he for two years tried to close USC
Union? I'm offended by this."Sanford spokesman Will Folks said the new version
shows that the bill's supporters are willing to work with the opposition to give
parents more choices. The opponents, he said, are not willing to do the
same."The continued opposition just shows they are not willing to work with us
and that they probably have their own best interests and not the best interests
of parents or kids at heart," Folks said."Sadly, that's often what you expect of
the status quo."Robert W. Dalton can be reached at 562-7274 or
bob.dalton@shj.com.