Archives
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
Categories
Tuition Tax Credits
Rep. Gregg Buxton hosted an informal gathering at his home to discuss tuition tax credits (“TTC”). TTC advocates (Utah Education Excellence and the Utah Taxpayers Association) and opponents (superintendents and representatives from school districts and the Utah Education Association) had a lively and good discussion, focusing mainly on a Utah State/Southern Utah University finding that TTC would save between hundreds-of-millions to over a billion dollars.
The discussion is maturing a bit, moving from raw, fatalistic rhetoric toward a more substantive analysis. Two key points on this debate are (1) we need to focus broadly on improving education, not on protecting or promoting any particular educational agenda, and (2) regarding financing issues, we need to understand that a balance sheet has 2 sides. Though this latter point seems obvious, I have seen many very intelligent people grab the cost side and completely write off the financial benefits side of the ledger.
Actually, a third point — everyone needs to come to the table. I applaud those who constructively engage in the dialogue. It is very complex, but opportunities do exist to simultaneously advance education and meet the public’s desire for choice, if we stay at the table and figure it out.
One interesting tidbit from the discussion was the Utah Taxpayer Association’s analysis that districts with declining enrollment are managing the situation well and, rather than financially struggling, they actually are providing more money per student than are the growing districts ($400 more per student). I couldn’t link directly to their report, but it can be found here and, then, go to the July 2004 issue.
Our discussion