More Commentary

• Commentary: Bill aims to help American Indians in urban areas
• Commentary: Albuquerque Public Schools just can't admit they let down the children of Navajo Elementary
• Commentary: Volunteer vets provide animal care to New Mexico's pueblos and reservations

MOST RECENT TRIB STORIES

• ABQTrib.com to remain available
  08:48 a.m., February 25, 2008
• Congressman is indicted
  08:37 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Series of attacks target Green Zone
  08:36 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Iran is defying U.N., agency says
  08:35 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Waterboarding approval probed
  08:34 a.m., February 23, 2008

TRIB IN THE BLOGOSPHERE*

• Albuquerque Old Town
• Ty Murray Invitational thrills fans in Albuquerque
• Is Rome Burning?
• Ominous Skies
• The Road to Invalidation

*Note: The Tribune does not create and is not responsible for the blogosphere's headlines and stories. These links to blogs talking about ABQTrib.com are automatically generated. Use them at your own risk.

STORY TOOLS

• E-mail story
• Comments
• iPod friendly
• Printer friendly

SHARE THIS STORY [?]

Thanks largely to the efforts of Sen. Mark Boitano, Sen. James Taylor and Allen Sanchez, executive director of the New Mexico Conference of Catholic Bishops, legislation that would have expanded school choice to New Mexico's low-income children came close to becoming a reality during the regular legislative session that just ended.

The proposed legislation would have given a state income-tax credit of up to $500 to individuals contributing to a "school tuition organization." These are defined as organizations that "provide financial assistance for the education of children in the form of educational scholarships or tuition grants allowing them to attend any qualified school of their parents' choice." Educate New Mexico is an example of a school tuition organization.

School tuition organizations would have been required to expend 75 percent of the money raised by the tax credit on children who qualify for the federal free or reduced-fee school meal program. Wealthy families would not be able to utilize the credit for their own children. Rather, those with a New Mexico state tax liability - wealthier individuals - could reduce that liability by donating to an organization that grants school-choice scholarships to low-income children.

Contrary to what opponents to the bill were saying, this was not a voucher bill. Voucher legislation takes money that has already been collected by the state from all taxpayers - that is, money under the control of the state - and designates a portion of that money (say, $5,000) to eligible students for use at the school of their choice. The voucher is tied to the student every year until that student graduates, and taxpayers are never asked if they want their money spent in that manner.

The tax credit introduced by Boitano and Taylor would have given individuals who have a state tax liability in New Mexico an option: If the taxpayers think that giving low-income children access to the same educational options as wealthy children is a good idea, they are given an incentive to contribute up to $500 pre-tax - read: no state control - to organizations that do so. If they think school choice for low-income children is a bad idea, they simply send their tax liability to the state, and no money is raised by school tuition organizations. The burden of raising money lies with the school tuition organizations, and it is a burden they must bear each year. Further, individuals who contribute one year could opt out the next. No one would be forced to participate.

The good news is that this tax credit made it out of the Senate, the House and a conference committee comprised of members from both chambers. Never before has a school-choice measure gone so far.

The bad news is that the legislation, from what we could learn, was pulled by a high-ranking member of the House leadership in the 11th hour, killing any chance to get the measure to Gov. Bill Richardson's desk before the session ended.

Recently, the Wall Street Journal reported two separate instances of legislators' single-handedly standing in the way of attempts to provide school choice to the low-income children of their states.

Apparently, New Mexico is not alone. According to the Wall Street Journal, New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver was solely responsible for "blocking a bipartisan attempt by Democratic Gov. Eliot Spitzer and the GOP-controlled state Senate to lift New York's current cap of 100 charter schools, which was reached last year."

In Ohio, newly elected Gov. Ted Strickland's first budget proposes to "abolish a two-year old voucher program for children who attend schools certified by the state to be in `academic emergency.'" In addition, Strickland is proposing a moratorium on the creation of new charter schools.

How is it that individuals can stand in the way of legislation that has passed through proper channels with the support of a majority of legislators? My guess is that you don't have to look much farther than your local teachers' union - a group whose leadership views any attempt to give low-income kids the same educational options allowed to rich kids as an attack on public schools, and a group whose leadership and lobbyists have controlled the politics of education - and thus education policy - in this country for nearly three decades.

Perhaps it's time for us to start tying the dismal results of our education policy more closely to those responsible for setting that policy. More importantly, perhaps it's time for us to let our elected officials know how we feel about how our children are educated.