You have reached your limit of free articles this month.

Enjoy unlimited access to myAJC.com

Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks.

GREAT REASONS TO SUBSCRIBE TODAY!

  • IN-DEPTH REPORTING
  • INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING
  • NEW TOPICS & COVERAGE
  • ePAPER
X

You have read of premium articles.

Get unlimited access to all of our breaking news, in-depth coverage and bonus content- exclusively for subscribers. Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks

X

Welcome to myAJC.com

This subscriber-only site gives you exclusive access to breaking news, in-depth coverage, exclusive interactives and bonus content.

You can read free articles of your choice a month that are only available on myAJC.com.

Let’s blow the lid off Georgia’s scholarship program


Create a state program. Watch it achieve not only strong popularity, but cost savings as well. And then put a suffocating lid on it.

For years, that’s been the bittersweet story of Georgia’s tax-credit scholarships, which allow donors to approved scholarship organizations (known as SSOs) to claim a dollar-for-dollar credit against their state income taxes. More than 13,500 students receive scholarships funded by these private gifts, almost certainly saving the state millions of dollars per year, yet the amount of tax credits the state makes available hasn’t budged. But the wait may finally be over.

A pair of House bills would each raise the annual cap from the current $58 million to $150 million, and even higher in the future. The sponsors are a pair of Cobb County Republicans, John Carson and Sam Teasley, whose constituents wouldn’t necessarily benefit but who understand the need is great outside their districts.

“We recognize the students in our communities frankly are offered very good choices,” says Teasley. “At the same time, I don’t believe in one-size-fits-all, either. One size may fit most, but not all. I want parents to have additional options if they feel the school doesn’t fit their needs, for whatever reason, and not be limited by their income. These scholarships make it possible for them to exercise that choice.”

The reasons parents might want a different option, Carson notes, range from their children’s special needs, to exposure to illegal drugs, and more.

“I literally have emails from parents whose kids are bullied because their father serves in law enforcement,” says Carson. “I have emails from parents who say this program has caught their son or daughter up, because they were doing poorly in math – in two years, it’s caught them up four grade levels in math.

“This is what parents want, this is what students want, this is in the best interest of the state, and frankly the average scholarship awarded is less than the state contributes per pupil.”

A variety of factors have conspired to stunt the program’s growth. Some SSOs have conflicting opinions about how the program should expand. The education establishment claims the program takes money away from public schools. (In fact, the scholarships cost about $1,000 to $1,400 less than the state’s average per-pupil expenditure, so funding per student would actually fall if the tax credits — and those 13,500 students — were shifted to public schools.).

There has also been talk about reducing the credit below that dollar-for-dollar match, but Carson and Teasley offer several reasons why their bills keep the match at 100 percent. No state with a 100 percent match has ever lowered it. Pennsylvania’s program, which has lower match levels, failed to attract more donors (and thus generate more scholarship money) even after the cap was raised by two-thirds. And a similar program here in Georgia designed to raise money for rural hospitals has been very slow to gain traction, in largest part because it offers only a 70 percent match.

“In order to impact kids’ lives, and provide these scholarship opportunities, we really need to maintain dollar-for-dollar on the credit,” Carson says. “The parents want it, the kids want it, and it costs less money. Why would we not do it?”



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Opinion: Senate listened to student survivors of sexual assault; House mocked them.
Opinion: Senate listened to student survivors of sexual assault; House mocked them.

Sexual assault survivor and law student Grace Starling helped lead the fight against state Rep. Earl Ehrhart’s campus rape bill, which passed the House but failed to advance in a wary Senate. Starling says she learned a lot about politics and power in the process and shares those lessons in a guest column today. Ehrhart said the bill...
Readers Write: March 27

Redistricting should be fair to voters On March 21, in an article in the AJC by Greg Bluestein about opposition to HB 515, House Speaker David Ralston was quoted as saying: “I look for something a little more persuasive than what I’ve been hearings so far today,” he said of Democratic criticism. “The proposals – I&rsquo...
We’re against emotionalism, except when we’re not

Conservatives have rightly taken pride in Neil Gorsuch’s calm and cerebral performance at his Senate confirmation hearings. Many commentators, along with Republican senators, have mocked Democrats for presuming to evaluate Gorsuch based on the outcomes of his cases. Did he “side with the little guy” or with big corporations? The right...
An oasis of liberty in the Arizona sun

PHOENIX — As a boy, Barry Goldwater Jr., son of the former senator and 1964 Republican presidential nominee, would step out of his father’s house and shoot at tin cans 50 yards away. Now 78, he says he could fire in any direction and not endanger “anything but a cactus.” His father, born in 1909 in Arizona territory, three years...
Trump’s chickens finally come home to roost

On Monday, accountability finally arrived for Donald Trump. After 70 years spent largely skating free of consequences for his puerile misbehaviors and diarrheal mouth, he likely found it something of a shock. Seven decades is a long time, after all, and if the so-called president has learned nothing else in those years, he has learned this: Accountability...
More Stories