The so-called “Education Voucher Bill,” aka H.B. 148, has become quite the heated battled in Utah, particularly now that the election is a mere 11 days out. And of course we are hearing plenty on the airwaves. Last night I listened to Ethan Millard (Nightside) rant about his point of view. I believe we are all missing the point.

First, and the most obvious, is that whenever the government creates a tax deduction, incentive, or otherwise gives a handout, the money comes from either a) existing government funds, essentially another government program or agency, or b) additional funds from the taxpayer. So which is it? Actually the first, and this is how. Opponents argue that the funds will be taken from the public schools allotment. Based on the election pamphlet, each public school district “receives state funds under a formula that is based on the number of students enrolled.” Interpreted this means that for each fewer student attending = less money to the district. However, the voucher bill provides a credit for each student who transfers from the public school system to private, and thereby proponents will then argue that the district is actually raising the per-student allotment given to the individual districts, which is a true statement. Essentially what this means is that districts will get LESS money overall (which agrees with the opponents’ point of view) but they will get more money per-student, since the $1-to-student ratio will increase (which agrees with the proponents’ point of view).

Second, who can afford private school anyway? Proponents will argue the voucher is a plan for the under-privileged, based on the fact that households under $30,000 will be eligible for the maximum voucher benefit of $3000. However I took a quick glance at two of Salt Lake area’s private schools, Rowland Hall and Waterford. I have no idea how their tuition rates compare to other private schools in the Salt Lake City area, but by reviewing  Rowland Hall’s website you see these tuition rates:

– K through 5th grade = $12,450
– 6th through 11th grades = $14,710
– 12th grade = $15,040

And Waterford lists these rates:

– 1st through 3rd grades = $11,650
– 4th through 7th grades = $13,400
– 8th through 12th grades = $16,200

Now considering a voucher’s maximum value is $3,000 (for households of under $30,000 income), how could one reasonably believe that any household of that income level could possibly afford such a plan, even with the voucher assistance? And in the few cases where it becomes possible, if at all, it will be extremely rare (more like impossible). It is clearly a program desgined for the middle class and the wealthy, the only ones who can truly afford private school. I also heard Ethan (again, Nightside) argue that the tax benefits would be felt by the poor, not the weathy, since the tax benefits are a mere $500 for the wealthy households. I am sorry, and clearly disagree, because the weathly (and their accountants) are adept at identifying every possible tax deduction.

Third, and probably most important (and ultimately the reason I am against the voucher bill) is the fact that those of us who attend school should be flipping the bill for it, whether it be public or private. What do I mean? I mean if you do not have children attending school you should not be required to fund others’ attendance. And for those of us who have children should be paying our complete and fair share. With this statement, yes, I mean we should be paying the full amount whether it be $5,000 or $10,000 a year for public, or similar amounts for private. This way the education burden is not carried over to the tax-paying public, but rather the individuals who attend the schools themselves. This is the same premise as paying an airport tax for the use of an airport’s facilities, or paying fuel taxes to support road construction. Once a step is taken toward this measure, I will gladly step up and support a state-funded voucher bill.