NJ Business Matters: The Blog of the CIANJ

Students Support School Choice

Yesterday, 50 students in Camden marched to deliver 7,000 signatures to State Senator Dana Redd (D-Camden), urging her to support the Urban Enterprise Zone Jobs Scholarship Act. Regular blog readers know that the program would allow companies to receive a 100% tax credit for contributions made to scholarship organizations. The scholarships would then be distributed to poor children in these failing districts so that they could attend either participating public schools outside the district or private schools.

Cue the Pavlovian response from the NJEA,

"Funding for this bill would most likely come right out of state aid to the eight pilot districts," said NJEA President Joyce Powell has said. "If you take $360 million out of those districts, what happens to the 95 percent of their students who remain? If you take one or two students out of a class of 25, you still have to pay the teacher, the heating bill, the custodian, and every other educational expense -- just with less money."

That's fiction. Here's a copy of the bill. Read it from cover to cover and you will learn that nowhere in it is language saying $360 million would be taken from the districts. The NJEA President is speculating as to what a future legislature might do. She probably has tomorrow's winning lotto numbers too.

The fact is that in these districts, New Jersey's taxpayers are spending nearly $20,000 per student. That's more than virtually anyplace else on the planet, and the results have been unsatisfactory - even with stat inflation through tools such as the Special Review Assessment.

At some point, the status quo must change for the betterment of the students, the state's businesses and New Jersey's taxpayers. How can a so-called education association oppose letting poor children attend the best school possible?

You Won't Believe This

Down in Florida, the former President of the teachers union is now the head of the school choice movement. Go figure.

The new head of the leading voucher group in Florida is a former teachers union leader who once said vouchers were "based on false assumptions and faulty logic."

His hiring may be another sign that the bitter political lines over vouchers are not as hard and fast as they were just a few years ago....

People say, " 'Gee, Doug, you suddenly flipped your position on school choice.' That's not true," Tuthill said.

Tuthill said he heard many of the same arguments now raised against vouchers when he helped set up the International Baccalaureate program at St. Petersburg High School in the early 1980s. "Our argument was all we're trying to do is create more learning options (for kids)," he said.

Bingo. Different children will excel in different environments. This includes traditional public high schools, vocational schools and yes, private schools. Yet somehow, the teachers union here in New Jersey continues to argue that the best interest of education does not include offering poor children all possible options.

Also joining the movement is a St. Petersburg Times columnist who now acknowledges that vouchers do not undermine public education.

Good for them.

Company Considers Jersey Because of Talented Workforce - Who'da Thunk It?

Earlier this summer on a radio discussion about the UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act, the hosts assailed supporters of the bill calling it a giveaway to big business. Their logic was that the 100% tax credit was only supported by business because it could help the bottom line, and the hosts found it impossible to believe that businesses gave much thought to local schools.

First, there continues to be a fallacy in the public discussion that the tax credit somehow "saves" companies money. It does not. If a firm has a CBT tax obligation at the end of the year of $25,000, this legislation simply allows them to take a portion of that (say, $5,000) and donate it to scholarship organizations for poor kids. Either way, $25k is still coming out of the company's bottom line.

Second, businesses do care about local education. The reasons should be intuitive - a high quality school system helps attract parents to an area, and trains the future workforce. As evidence, check out this week's feature in NJBiz on how New Jersey is seeking to lure companies,

The EDA incentive has not yet convinced Soft Tissue Regeneration of Charlottesville, Va., to move to New Jersey as the company weighs incentives offered by Virginia and Connecticut, says Joseph Reilly, its president and CEO. Reilly currently works from his Chatham home.

Soft Tissue is considering relocating to New Jersey mainly because the state offers access to the talent Soft Tissue needs, says Reilly.

“We would have a better opportunity of finding them [highly skilled employees] in northern New Jersey than we would in Charlottesville or in the Hartford, Conn., area.”

There you have it - access to talent. A high-quality K-12 school system helps attract and keep parents in an area while simultaneously training qualified new workers. It is one of the advantages New Jersey has over other states - even Virginia with its Forbes #1 business-friendly ranking.

Try to remember that the next time you hear a radio host screaming about "big business" in their board rooms.

International Competition Isn't Just for Gymnasts

It's back to school time and American parents are looking for products to help their kids maximize achievement in the classroom. Unfortunately, as the Heritage Foundation's Dan Lips points out in the Philadelphia Inquirer, many never have a say in the most important variable in the education equation - the school their child will attend.

Adjusted for inflation, the US spends more per-pupil than ever, and here in New Jersey we spend more than anywhere else on planet Earth. Despite that, the U.S. ranks in the twenties among industrialized nations in math and science and one-fourth of all students never earn a high school diploma. The problem is even more pronounced in our urban centers, where poverty puts the greatest restrictions on where a parent can send their child to school.

Imagine how much stronger the American education system would be if families had greater control over the 100,000-plus tax dollars that are spent on their children's educations. Families could choose schools - just as they now shop for school supplies and backpacks - shopping for the right classroom that meets their children's unique needs.

For some, greater parental control might mean choosing to enroll their child in a different school, instead of the neighborhood public school. For others, it might mean supplementing their child's schooling with tutoring or extracurricular activities.

Across the nation, policymakers are slowly but surely giving parents more control over their children's education. Many states now offer families some choice in what kind of public school they send their children to. Additionally, 14 states and Washington, D.C., have programs to give more families the option of choosing between public and private schools for their children.

If all families had the power to choose the best school for their children, schools would work to attract them - showing why they offer a superior learning environment that meets children's specific needs. Struggling schools would face more pressure to turn themselves around, and the best schools would become models that are replicated across the country.

Here in New Jersey, a pilot program is sitting on the desks of legislators, awaiting an up-or-down vote. The UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act would, by its fifth year, allow up to 20,000 poor children in eight cities the opportunity to go to a school of their choosing - public or private. They would be tested in the same way as their peers in existing public school, and the legislature could then decide whether the program merits being extended. Even better news is that kids in the program would be educated at 40%-60% less than their peers in local public schools.

It's time for a fundamental change. If the US ranked in the twenties in the medal count in Beijing, there would be a national outcry. More money thrown into the same system has not produced better results. Just as it does in the private sector, genuine competition would. Just ask the residents of Milwaukee, Washington, Florida and elsewhere who have already voiced their support of existing school choice programs. Don't Jersey's kids and taxpayers deserve the same?   

"Just ask Washington"

During the Senate Economic Growth Committee's debate on S-1607, the UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act, school choice opponents (i.e. the teachers' union) urged legislators to:

“Just ask the people of Milwaukee, Cleveland, Washington, D.C., or Florida, who have seen billions of dollars in public tax revenue diverted to private and religious schools. Sadly, it has now been documented that years of vouchers, tax credits, and other privatization schemes haven’t produced a shred of evidence that they improve student achievement.”

Yes they have. We have already shown satisfaction with school choice programs in Milwaukee and Florida. And an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal delves into basic school reform, including Washington, D.C.'s voucher program.

Qualifying families in the District of Columbia receive up to $7,500 a year to attend private K-12 schools. To qualify, a child must live in a family with a household income below 185% of the poverty level. Some 1,900 children participate; 99% are black or Hispanic. Average annual income is just over $22,000 for a family of four.

A recent Department of Education report found nearly 90% of participants in the D.C. program have higher reading scores than peers who didn't receive a scholarship. There are five applicants for every opening.

90% is not a statistical anomaly, and the demand for Washington's program would likely be mirrored in New Jersey's urban centers. Unfortunately, some in the education establishment would refuse NJ kids the same chance.

Courier Post Supports UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act

The Courier-Post on Sunday joined the majority of New Jerseyans and announced its support for S-1607, the Urban Enterprise Zone Jobs Scholarship Act.

The bill, which in its first year will allow up to 4,000 poor children in New Jersey's urban districts to leave failing schools, would also save taxpayer dollars. The Post writes,

For years, our state has poured billions of dollars into poor, urban school districts hoping upon hope that, eventually, the money would turn things around and lead to markedly improved schools and a better education for our state's poorest students.

Well, as anyone who has looked at the student-performance data from Camden, Newark and other such school districts over time knows, doing the same thing has not led to a better education for the majority of kids in these cities. Kids are still coming out of those districts woefully lacking in basic skills such as the ability to read and write well enough to attend college.

So it's encouraging that, after years of futile efforts to rescue the schools, a small effort is being pursued to actually rescue the kids, at least 4,000 of them. Quite a novel idea....

If NJEA leaders want to continue confining students in poor districts to the life sentence that is an inadequate education, then shame on them. But state lawmakers should have the courage to ignore this powerful lobbying group and do the right thing.

A novel idea, indeed. However, it is one that has already been successfully tried in states such as Arizona and Florida. In fact, Florida's program has been so successful that the legislature recently voted to expand it.

It is time to give NJ's children the same opportunity. 

Three Clicks for School Choice

By now, regular blog readers can recite the benefits of S-1607, the UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act, by heart. Today presents you the opportunity to help this landmark legislation become reality.

CIANJ is reaching out to its members, and to those who support school choice as a means of improving student achievement while saving taxpayer dollars, and asking them to help.

Click here to visit CIANJ's Action Center. Once there, you will be prompted to e-mail Senate President Codey and Senator Buono, Chair of the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee, and urge them to post the bill for a hearing as soon as possible. The entire process takes less than two-minutes and offers the opportunity for hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer savings while improving the lives of tens of thousands of students in our inner-cities.

On May 8^th, S-1607 passed the Senate Economic Growth Committee with bi-partisan support (CIANJ's testimony from that day is available here). As with many pieces of legislation, S-1607 must be considered and approved by several committees before a full Senate vote can be taken, and we need your help to ensure it is even considered by the budget committee.

S-1607 would allow corporations to receive a 100% tax-credit for contributions made to scholarship organizations serving eight pilot districts (Newark, Camden, Elizabeth, Trenton, Orange, Jersey City, Paterson, and Lakewood). Children in those districts, whose families earn less than 250% of the federal poverty level, could then use the tax-credit scholarships to attend participating public or non-public schools.

The legislation would help boost student achievement in our urban cores by allowing parents and children to choose the best possible school and educational environment for them – whether that is in a public or a private school.

It simultaneously saves taxpayer dollars. As private schools within New Jersey’s urban cores close, their children are sent into overcrowded public schools in which New Jersey spends more per-pupil than any other state. This increases operating and school construction costs in the public school system and further pressures New Jersey’s overburdened taxpayers.

Join CIANJ and voice your support for school choice, by visiting our action center.

74% In Favor of Tax-Credit Scholarships for Low Income Children

For the third year in a row, New Jersey residents have shown support for the UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act. A just-released Monmouth University Poll shows that 74% of those surveyed support tax-credit scholarships for low income children. This is virtually the same number that answered favorably in 2007and 2006.

From the Monmouth University Poll question,

Some people in New Jersey have proposed setting up an urban scholarship fund as a five-year pilot program. Low-income parents in select urban areas would be able to get scholarships from this fund to send their children to any private or public school participating in the program. The money for this program would come from voluntary contributions by New Jersey businesses. Any business that contributes to this fund would be able to take a credit on their state income taxes equal to the amount of their contribution. Would you support or oppose setting up this type of pilot program in New Jersey?

74% Support
21% Oppose
4% (VOL) Don’t know / Refused

The complete survey, which shows overwhelming support across all demographic groups, is available here.

Taxpayers Group Speaks Out for UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act

In their campaign against school choice, the NJEA has attempted to take the position of taxpayer advocate, arguing the state cannot afford this investment in education that would provide $24 million in tax credit scholarships during the first year. This is striking given the state budget includes $11 billion for education and the UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act would represent 0.0012% of overall education spending. It is also striking given the NJEA's positions on other issues directly or tangentially related to education.

Nevertheless, the president New Jersey Taxpayers Association responded to the NJEA's charge in yesterday's Trenton Times. As NJTA President Jerry Cantrell puts it,

And to argue that the proposed initiative raids the state treasury is simply an outright lie. For the record, as I understand the proposal, the amount of state fiscal support ($360 million) via corporate scholarship donation tax credits would engender $6,000 per pupil scholarship costs against the $18,000-$25,000 per student that it costs to educate them in public- school settings. Let's face it: Even if the academic results were the same, the savings to New Jersey taxpayers is $720 million to $1.080 billion over the life of the pilot project vs. forcing those same students into the public school system.

So, if it's successful, why in the world wouldn't we as taxpayers support it? Guess what? It could be that's what the NJEA is afraid of.

Just to be clear, while the NJEA claims this is a poor use of tax dollars, the President of the Taxpayers Association has joined the business community in support of the UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act. As we have stated repeatedly here at NJ Business Matters, S-1607 offers the opportunity to save taxpayer dollars while improving student achievement.

How can anyone be opposed to that?

"The Point of the Tip of the Iceberg"

One of our arguments in favor of the UEZ Jobs Scholarship Act is that the legislation would allow taxpayers to save long-term by avoiding some school construction costs. New Jersey's urban cores simultaneously have closings in private schools while public schools claim to be in need of serious capital investments. Allowing children from public schools to use tax-credit scholarships to attend private schools helps address that capital investment at a reduced cost to New Jersey's overburdened taxpayers.

We'd like to thank the NJ School Development Authority for further making the point. The chief of that organization told the Star-Ledger that the $2.5 billion that may be delivered to his agency this year,

"won't even address the tip of the iceberg. $2.5 billion will allow us to address the point of the tip of the iceberg."

He claims the $2.5 billion would be enough to cover costs for about 47 of the 398 schools in need of construction.

The State does not have the kind of money needed to address the entire iceberg. Unless of course it wants to play the role of the Titanic. Passing common-sense legislation that would improve student achievement while saving taxpayer dollars seems like a better approach, does it not?