January 30, 1997

The Clinton Education Budget: More of the Same

On Tuesday, January 28, President Clinton held a news conference in which he detailed the major education initiatives to be contained in his FY 98 budget to be submitted next week.

False Hope for School Choice

• Clinton's 1-Percent Solution: There are over 110,000 elementary and secondary schools across the nation. Bill Clinton's bold proposal to give parents "more choice" by doubling the number of charter schools amounts to increasing the total number of such schools to fewer than 1,000 schools nationwide. Clinton's school choice proposal offers "choice" to less than 1 percent of our nation's schools, parents, and children.
• Republican Student Opportunity and Safety Act: This Senate bill provides greater educational choice by giving all children the right to learn in safe schools. The proposal allows states to use existing funds to establish private and public school choice initiatives for low-income parents and provides funds for schools to improve and strengthen school safety for students and teachers. Unlike Clinton's proposal, S. 1 offers real choice to those children who currently have no choice but to attend an unsafe school.

Reading, Writing, and Presidential Rhetoric

• More of the Same is No 21st-Century Solution: There are currently 425,000 federally supported teachers serving the needs of our nation's special education and disadvantaged students. In addition to these, there are 825,000 regular kindergarten-through-third-grade teachers. What does Bill Clinton think 250,000 minimally trained work-study volunteers will accomplish that these professionals can not? Why doesn't the President focus on improving instruction skills of teachers already on the front line?
• Republican Return to the Basics: Republicans promise $510 million per year in a concerted effort to combat illiteracy among children and adults. The legislation is dedicated to ensuring that deserving persons are provided proven reading instruction. S. 1 will reward successful teachers and administrators who significantly improve the academic performance of their students.

Clinton's Education Tax Proposal: It's About Time

• Clinton Flip-Flops on Affordable Education: During the last Congress, President Clinton vetoed two Republican education initiatives: penalty-free IRA withdrawals for tuition expenses and a $2,500 tax deduction for interest paid on student loans. With any luck at all, he won't veto his own education tax breaks.
• Tuition Inflation: The President's plan to offer a $10,000 tax deduction may actually increase tuition costs. With an immediate surge in federal education dollars, colleges will have little incentive to keep tuition costs down in order to attract students. Clinton's proposal has already met with criticism in his own ranks. Secretary of Education Richard Riley and former CBO Director Robert Reischauer have both raised these concerns regarding the effects of short-term boosts in federal education funding.
• Grade Inflation: Will the President's plan linking his $1,500 tax credit with an arbitrary "B" average pressure teachers to award students higher test scores, and thus compound the effects of grade inflation?
• Republican Tax Incentives for Higher Education: S. 1 will provide for penalty-free IRA withdrawals for tuition expenses (Bob Dole Education Investment Accounts) and a $2,500 tax deduction on student loan interest -- both of which Clinton vetoed in the 104th Congress. In addition to encouraging long-term savings for education, the bill will also make permanent the tax-free treatment (up to $5,250 a year) of employer-provided education benefits and will make work-study earnings nontaxable to students.

School Construction Loan Subsidy: More Federal Mandates

• The federal government provides only six cents of every education dollar spent in this country; state and local governments provide the rest. Yet, 50 percent of the paperwork generated on the state level is in response to the bureaucratic demands Washington attaches to its tiny share of education funding. How many school districts will opt for this loan subsidy, only to end up paying more because of the government red tape that is a part of the package?
• Merely by adhering to the federal labor requirements, local school districts in many parts of the country will see the cost of school construction double. Ultimately, both students and taxpayers will lose under this latest federal power grab.

• Republicans Support Local Decision-Making: Rather than imposing new federal requirements, S. 1 will allow local school districts to make use of existing federal funds to improve the safety and academic performance of schools without the endless paperwork requirements from Washington.