Here's a thought experiment to test how much of the choice controversy actually revolves around accountability. Let's say that we agree that choice schools should all be independently accredited and should administer the same standardized tests as MPS and publicly disclose the results. (Maybe you'd need to tweak these requirements to account for a school's religious character or alternate educational philosophy, but let's put that aside for now.)
Let's also assume that we agree with Mayor Barrett and specify that Milwaukee taxpayers should pay no more than they pay for each kid in MPS, i.e, $1900 or so. So instead of asking Milwaukee taxpayers to come up with 45% of the cost of the choice program, let's just say they need contribute only the same amount per pupil as they pay for each student in MPS.
But since we are going to require all these choice schools to be "accountable," we can't possibly leave them underfunded ! Since the Governor and the teachers unions all believe that money is the sine qua non of educational excellence, I am sure they will agree that the local share of the cost of the choice program (that we have now reduced to $1900/student) should be paid to the choice schools and not to the state. In this way the choice schools will get the same equalization aid and the same local support that MPS enjoys. For both Milwaukee and state taxpayers, there would be no fiscal gain or loss as a result of a student opting to enroll in a choice school.
The out-state legislators might not want to give up the savings, but shouldn't Doyle, the Dems and the unions go for that?
Does anyone believe for one moment that they would?
6 comments:
Only public school districts receive state equalization aid, so I'm not sure where you're going with the recommendation that individual private schools receive such aid. Is your thought experiment to make each voucher school into its own school district for state aid purposes?
I need some more clarification to see where you're going with this one.
Several things I don't follow:
But since we are going to require all these choice schools to be "accountable," we can't possibly leave them underfunded!
I thought that was the point? That voucher schools can do it cheaper?
For both Milwaukee and state taxpayers, there would be no fiscal gain or loss as a result of a student opting to enroll in a choice school.
What you're proposing is increasing the state's portion to about $5800 per voucher student (current MPS eq. aid level), up from the current $3500. I'm not sure what you mean that there is no gain or loss, as that seems like a loser for the state.
Plus, Mayor Barrett's proposal only covers students over the 15% cap, so not only would what you propose be possible under his plan, it doesn't come close to paying the kind of money you think it will.
A question for you: If, as you imply, money is not the sine qua non of educational excellence, how would you feel about an extension of the MPCP but without an attendant fund increase? That would save money for certain for both Milwaukee and state taxpayers. After all, we could add 1000+ students without dropping the payouts to schools by more than about $400 per student. Isn't $5900 still enough to educate a student well?
No, the choice schools don't get equalization aid; they get payments under the choice program which are basically driven to be more or less what MPS' equalization aid is. So, currently, they get 6300 and MPS equalization aid, before the choice adjustment, is around the same (Actually, I think a bit more; but remember we're going to "fix" the choice adjustment).
So under my proposal, MPS gets around 6300-6500 in equalization aid and the local taxpayer throws in another 1900 (and then you get whatever else you get that runs the cost per pupil up another two grand or so). The choice schools get their 6300 from the state plus another 1900 locally.
Is this a "loser" for the state - yes (as I said) it is as compared to the current system. The state no longer saves money on choice. On the other hand, it doesn't lose money on choice either. Out-state legislators wouldn't like it, but why wouldn't it be just hunky dory
for the Milwaukee Dems and the unions - unless it is choice itself, as opposed to accountability or tax fairness that is the issue.
No, the choice schools don't get equalization aid; they get payments under the choice program which are basically driven to be more or less what MPS' equalization aid is. So, currently, they get 6300 and MPS equalization aid, before the choice adjustment, is around the same (Actually, I think a bit more; but remember we're going to "fix" the choice adjustment).
So under my proposal, MPS gets around 6300-6500 in equalization aid and the local taxpayer throws in another 1900 (and then you get whatever else you get that runs the cost per pupil up another two grand or so). The choice schools get their 6300 from the state plus another 1900 locally.
Is this a "loser" for the state - yes (as I said) it is as compared to the current system. The state no longer saves money on choice. On the other hand, it doesn't lose money on choice either. Out-state legislators wouldn't like it, but why wouldn't it be just hunky dory
for the Milwaukee Dems and the unions - unless it is choice itself, as opposed to accountability or tax fairness that is the issue.
Posting it twice doesn't make it less wrong, Rick. MPS is getting about $586.5m in equalization aid this year--less than $6000 per student MPS counts for state aids.
The state is currently taking about $41m back for the $93m voucher program, meaning the state's share for each voucher currently student is $42m. Doing state aid instead would increase the state share to more than $85m. Tthe state's share of voucher students comes from GPR rather than the K-12 fund, so this ends up being a pretty big bite, and I don't see how you can say the state "doesn't lose money one choice" under that plan.
To rephrase, you are proposing spending $7600 per voucher student as opposed to the current $6300. However you slice it, the first number is bigger than the second.
Its actually about 630 mm before you subtract the payment for choice which I am proposing that you leave there while requiring MPS to pay $1900/kid to the choice schools. (Based on the membership numbers in the report that I got the 630mm (about 97k), this pushes equalization aid per kid north of 6000.)
Under my admittedly tongue-in-cheek proposal, choice does not cost MPS any equalization aid but it does cost it an additional 1900/choice kid (presumably in additional levy which we'd allow it to do).
Still it is money ahead because it gets out from under having to educate those kids which surely has a marginal cost greater than 1900/kid. (If you say it doesn't, then MPS is overfunded because it'd have to have a lot of excess capacity. That's simple economics. Since I haven't heard MTEA or MPS claim that lately, I'll just assume I'm right.)
The "thought experiment proposal" would cost the state money as opposed to the present program. I said as much and that's why it won't happen. People outside Milwaukee wouldn't support it. The maximum it would cost is the 42mm that MPS pays for choice but that probably isn't the right number because if 15k came back to MPS there'd be enormous pressure to increase the pool of equalization aid; probably in excess of the state's share of choice.
But certainly if the only concern were accoutability and fairness to city taxpayers (surely more money for the "children" is not a problem for the unions and educrats), this proposal should be a winner.
Unless you don't like choice itself. Which you don't have to. But don't kid yourself into thinking that opposition to choice is not precisely what Doyle and the teachers unions are about.
Post a Comment