“Cash for Clunker Schools” or Tuition Voucher Confusion
Senate Bill 2494 passed last week in a vote of 33-20 and is now waiting discussion and a vote in the Illinois House. This bill, the “School Choice Program” would offer tuition vouchers to students now enrolled at 49 of Chicago’s poorest performing schools. The bill is 99 pages long. The first nine pages deal with the voucher system and the remaining 90 all deal with very confusing tax code changes to allow for families to receive the money to pay for the private schools and not pay Illinois taxes on it. The voucher amount would be exempted from “base income” in the Illinois Income Tax Act.
Below I give a lot of background information on the bill that one should read before reaching the section about why I think there are problems with the plan. I hope I explained the plan correctly. If this bores you; just skip down to the highlighted area.
The School Choice Program as a pilot program for students enrolled (or who would otherwise be enrolled) in one of the poorest performing Chicago Public Schools; the lowest 10% as determined by testing levels. Parents would receive vouchers from the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) which they could use to pay for tuition at a non-public school. The private school would then submit the voucher to the ISBE for payment. The voucher could not exceed the amount of expense that CPS shows is related to that particular student’s enrollment. By December 31, 2014, the ISBE would assess whether the program has been working and make recommendations whether to expand the program with CPS and/or with other schools in the state.
The monetary amount of the vouchers would be determined by a formula that calculates state and local resources for the funding of each child’s education. While CPS spends about $11,536 per pupil; about $4,222 of that funding comes from the state. The average cost of tuition at a private school is about $3,234 per year. So if the typical voucher is issued for $3,234 and we subtract that from the state cost of $4,222 that would leave a net savings of $988 to the state for every pupil who elected to attend a private school rather than a CPS school.
Timeline of vouchers:
Base year = 2010-2011 school year;
In January 2011 (and each January thereafter), principals of low performing schools must notify custodians (guardians) of the availability of vouchers;
Between March 1 to May 1, 2011, custodians may apply and submit any ISBE-required documentation;
By August 1, custodians would be notified of the amount of their voucher award;
By September 15 the voucher instrument would be issued to the parent;
By October 1, the custodian must present the voucher to the nonpublic school;
By October 31, the nonpublic school would submit the voucher to ISBE;
By December 31, ISBE must honor and pay the voucher; and
By December 31, 2014, ISBE must submit its report on the status of the voucher program (including number of participating pupils, names of the schools to and from which students transferred, the financial ramifications of the program, and the results of pupil assessments). ISBE would also assess whether the program has been financially and academically beneficial and recommend whether it should be expanded.
Meeks has long called for equality of funding between all schools. He has not thrown in the white flag on that quest, but felt he needed to try for an option that would pass.
Now that we have all the facts; we can deal with the confusion.
First, if a child were enrolled in a low performing school and a parent could send them for free (tuition paid by the state) to a private school, they would absolutely do it. There would be no reason not to. So if all the current students leave the worst CPS school to attend private schools; then the CPS school would have no students and would have to close. If the school closed, it would obviously “drop off” the list of low-performing schools (because it would not exist) and the next lowest school would go on the list. If that occurs, eventually all CPS schools would close. It would be a downward spiral that would lead to the demise of CPS.
Second, why is a school low performing? That decision is based on standardized testing scores. Are low scores the teachers’ fault? If that is the case, then replace the teachers. If it is the students’ fault, how will they improve by going to a private school? Is it because the teachers are better at a private school? If it is an issue of teachers, then getting better teachers is the solution, not getting rid of the students.
Third, Catholic School education per pupil costs less than CPS per child because many of the schools receive funding from the local parish and some from the Archdiocese. So if all those CPS students get to attend at the same rate as a parish student does, it means the church is supporting the state in education costs. If I were a member of that parish, I would resent that. The Catholic schools should raise their tuition to have it reflect the true cost; not the subsidized amount.
Fourth, while the State of Illinois can amend its own tax code to not tax the value of the vouchers, what about Federal IRS code? If parents receive vouchers worth $4,000, it would have to be reflected in their tax returns and federal income tax would be due. If that is not true, then it is unfair to parents who do not get a tax deduction for the tuition they currently pay for private school.
Fifth, what if I were a parent who already removed my child from a low performing school and was making sacrifices to pay for the tuition at a private school. According to the timeline, my child would have had to be a student at the low performing school in January 2011 for me to receive the voucher. I would be better off financially to have my child enroll in the low performing school, receive my voucher and then move them back to the private school.
My “confusion questions” could go on for pages. Please send this blog to your individual state Representative and ask for some answers before they vote to approve the voucher system.
President Harry Truman said, "If you can't convince 'em, confuse 'em." Meeks could not convince the legislature to appropriate more money to fix the broken educational system in Chicago, so he has concocted this voucher system. The legislators don’t even realize they should be confused because they just haven’t asked the right questions.
Or as Michael Stipe, the lead singer in R.E.M. said, “Sometimes I’m confused by what I think is really obvious. But what I think is really obvious obviously isn’t.”
The voucher system as proposed is obviously wrong.


















