Tuition Tax Credits

[proud2BlibKansan]

House Bill 1783 (was named HB 1479)
http://www.house.mo.gov/bills061/bills/HB1783.htm

Senate Bill 962
http://www.senate.mo.gov/06info/bts_web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=53665

Please contact your MO state congress critters ASAP and ask them to vote NO on these bills. They would allow for tuition tax credits and vouchers in 3 MO school districts - KC, St. Louis and Wellston. Tuition tax credits are reductions in tax liability for parents who enroll their children in private schools. They represent a drop in revenue for the state and can lead to a reduction in funding for public schools or other public services. Tuition tax credits are worth more than tuition tax deductions, and they typically benefit wealthier families who already have their children enrolled in private schools. IOW, wealthy republicans will pay less in taxes if their kids attend private schools. (Which is IMO, the REAL reason for this legislation).

One of the state reps sponsoring this legislation is traveling around the state claiming that 95% of the students who graduate from high school in KCMO are functionally illiterate. State MAP test scores, SAT and ACT scores, as well as NAEP test scores absolutely do NOT support her claim. She is blowing smoke. If she had a decent piece of legislation, it would seem that she wouldn't need to lie to get it passed, eh?

Now for some truth - Evidence does not support the argument that vouchers or tuition tax credits will improve public education. However, there is strong evidence that reducing class size and adopting scientifically based reading programs improves student achievement. There is also evidence that early childhood education increases a child's success rate in school.

These tuition tax credit vouchers would take $40 million away from public schools in Missouri. This amount would be more than enough to fund early childhood programs in the three affected districts. So if the state wants to improve education in these districts, then a better strategy would be to establish early childhood programs or reduce class sizes in each district.

SB 962 refers to these vouchers as "Angell Opportunity Scholarships". That's just a fancy new name for VOUCHERS. The Angell part is from the name of the guy (Mr. Angell) who will be hired to supervize the program. Yes, the bill mandates that this particular guy - who doesn't even live in MO - be hired to run the opportunity scholarship program.

Say NO to vouchers, tuition tax credits and Angell Opportunity Scholarships.

[evlbstrd]

1. Here's a link to find your Senator and Representative.

http://www.senate.mo.gov/llookup/leg_lookup.aspx

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. Thank you!

This one looks close so we really need as many people as possible contacting their reps before the vote - which could be as early as next week.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. Talking points when you call your reps:

These came from the public info office of the KCMO School District.

Questions to ask your legislators:

1. How will the state of Missouri replace the $40 million reduction
in general revenue caused by the tuition tax credits?

Note: Allowing taxpayers to claim a tax credit or tax deduction
decreases the state's tax revenues. Funds that would otherwise be
available for public schools and other vital services would instead be
redirected to private schools. It would not be sound fiscal policy for
the Missouri Legislature, charged with maintaining a system of free
schools for Missouri's children, to redirect funds away from the
educational system it is constitutionally bound to support.


2. What financial accountability measures are there for private
schools accepting the subsidized scholarships?

Note: House Bills 1783 & 1479 provide publicly subsidized
scholarships for students to attend private schools with no
accountability to the public or government. While public schools are
required to conduct a biannual audit and are subject to audits conducted
by the Missouri State Auditor, private schools are not required to ever
submit to an audit. Private schools are allowed to protect their
financial practices and budgets from public and governmental scrutiny.
Private schools that choose to accept students receiving assistance
through HB 1783 & 1479 will not be held to the same accountability
standards of public schools, despite the receipt of public funds.

Missouri's Sunshine Law was created as a means of guaranteeing
the expenditure of public funds is done in the open to assure fair and
legitimate use of taxpayer dollars. Private schools, though, escape
public inspection promised by the Sunshine Law. Public schools are
required to conduct most business in open session under the watchful eye
of taxpayers. Private schools receiving public money under HB 1783 &
1479, however, are not required to provide access to the schools'
records, policies and procedures.


3. How will taxpayers know if students attending private schools on
subsidized scholarships are receiving a quality education in a safe
environment? Private schools accepting scholarships are not required to
administer the MAP exam to students. How will you be able to evaluate
student performance in private schools if they are using different
assessment tools?

Note: Private schools are free of student achievement standards
set by the state and federal governments. Private schools under HB 1783
& 1479 are not required to conduct MAP assessments. They can choose to
conduct any nationally recognized norm-referenced assessment. These
alternative assessments are not available to public schools in Missouri,
however. Regardless of the quality of alternative assessments, failing
to require private schools to conduct the MAP assessments restricts the
ability to compare the achievement levels of students in public schools
versus private schools. Further, private schools are not required to
employ "highly qualified" teachers or even certificated teachers.

Student safety in Missouri is ensured by the Safe Schools Act.
Public schools are required to enact certain policies and procedures to
ensure the safety of all students. Private schools qualifying under HB
1783 & 1479 are not required to follow the Safe Schools Act, including
the Act's requirements for criminal background checks on all employees
that will have contact with students. The legislation instead requires
all private schools to "comply with all health and safety laws or codes
that apply to nonpublic schools." The bill does not, however, define any
such "safety laws or codes" that actually apply to nonpublic schools.

All of these accountability measures are intended to ensure
students receive a quality education in a safe environment. Providing
public funds to private schools that are free of each of these important
measures defeats their purpose and questions the viability of the
private schools involved with HB 1783 & 1479. If these accountability
measures are truly important for public school students to achieve, then
they should be important enough to apply to all students, whether they
attend a public or private school.


4. Is this legislation constitutional?

Note: There are several provisions in the Missouri Constitution
that restrict the flow of public funds to support religion or religious
organizations. Article I, Section 6 of the constitution states "no
person can be compelled to * maintain or support any priest, minister,
preacher or teacher of any sect, church, creed or denomination of
religion." Credited taxes should be public money, but are instead spent
supporting private schools. Article I, Section 7 places further
restrictions on the support of religious organizations stating, "* no
money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or
indirectly, in aid of any church, sect or denomination of religion, or
in aid of any priest, preacher, minister or teacher thereof." This
provision goes beyond the federal constitution's basic separation of
church and state. Courts have found the federal constitution to merely
prohibit taking money directly from the state coffers to support
religion. Missouri, however, restricts direct and "indirect" use of
state funds to aid religious organizations. Even though tuition tax
credits and deductions never reach the state treasury, these funds are
"indirectly" taken from the state and used to aid private religious
schools. Article IX, Sections 5 and 8 also restrict the use of public
funds to support private and/or religious education.

These constitutional provisions shape a clear policy in Missouri
against public support of private and religious organizations. Tax
subsidy programs divert public funds from the state coffers to private
institutions in direct violation of this important public policy. While
the money does not come directly from the state's treasury, funds
intended for public use (for example, taxes levied by the state) are
redirected to institutions not anticipated by the Missouri Constitution.


5. Will this legislation violate the desegregation agreements
approved by the federal courts between the state of Missouri and the
Kansas City and St. Louis School Districts?

Note: If the St. Louis public schools in particular suffer a
loss of funding due to students leaving to attend private schools, it is
possible that the federal court could rule that the State has violated
the terms of the 1999 federal court desegregation settlement. This could
place additional financial responsibilities on the State to provide an
increasing amount of state support to the schools of the City of St.
Louis. If that would happen, funding of the other school districts in
Missouri could be seriously impacted.


6. Please cite any unbiased research that provides evidence that
tuition tax subsidies improve student achievement?

Note: Hailed as a means of improving public education, there is
no empirical evidence that states with tuition scholarship tax subsidy
programs have seen an improvement in the public education system due to
the tax subsidies.


7. Who in your district is encouraging you to vote for this
legislation? How will this legislation benefit your constituents?

Note: Polling shows that Missourians prefer supporting their
local public schools rather than spending public dollars on private
schools.