Provo Daily Herald

Money Matters

October 3, 2007

http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/239219/

From now until Nov. 6, the Daily Herald will focus regularly on Referendum 1, the voucher initiative that would help parents pay for private school. Voucher proponents say the plan will improve education for everyone; opponents say it leaves too many questions unanswered. In this space, we will explore the issues and give our views.

Utahns for Public Schools says one reason it opposes vouchers is this:

"96 percent of Utah's school-age children attend public schools. Yet, Utah has failed to make the investments necessary to provide every child with a quality education. Today, Utah class sizes are the largest in the nation. Utah also ranks dead last in the nation in spending per student."

It's an interesting point -- and one that actually supports the voucher program.

Utahns tend to have large families, which is a key reason, along with rapid growth, that schools are crowded. If Utah's average household size (which is 50 percent above the national average) were suddenly reduced to the national norm, and if school taxes remained constant, our per-pupil spending would be much higher.

But let's be realistic. Family sizes are not going to shrink, and throwing money at class sizes isn't going to work. There simply isn't enough money to throw. Utahns have balked at the massive tax increases that would be required to fix per-pupil spending without making other changes in the system.

Moreover, money-throwing often misses the mark. Even if additional dollars were found for schools, those dollars would need to be carefully targeted to achieve specific goals, not spread evenly like frosting.

For example, if we want to reward the best teachers, then a system would need to be designed that would measure teacher performance and reward those in the top rank. All raises, whether in business or government, should be based on performance, not merely punching a clock. Unfortunately, such reforms run counter to the labor union paradigm.

Vouchers were designed to take some of the pressure off the public schools in two ways: first by reducing class sizes; second by splitting the funding baby. Only half the actual cost of educating a student would be provided in the form of a voucher, on average. The other half would remain in the public school system.

Because no voucher will cover the cost of private school, any parent who chooses a voucher would pay the difference out of pocket for the promise of a better education. A parent who is concerned enough to take a child out of public school will do this gladly.

The bottom line, of course, is a net gain for the public school system. With each voucher issued, the cost of educating a student is taken away from the public school; the other half of the money remains in the system to make improvements.

It's baffling why educators don't jump at the opportunity.

Referendum 1 will be voted on Tuesday, Nov. 6. We urge all voters to make their voices heard on this vital issue.