38 Comments - Panther Pride - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 1:52 pm: The State is not mandating that people can no longer donate to private schools to provide scholarships when the Invest in Kids Act ends. If donors are funding these scholarships for all the right reasons, parents shouldn’t be concerned that scholarships will dry up. And I’d hope that the private schools are continuing their fundraising to secure those scholarships. The State has been pumping historic levels of money to our public schools to finally right the ship, but we’re still behind. Per IDOR, the Invest in Kids Act allows for up to $75 million in tax credits per year. That money should be going to public schools via EBF to hire more teachers, support staff, and invest in our schools so every student prospers. $75 mil ain’t chump change. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 1:54 pm: ===…attacking Democrats’ friends and allies in the teachers’ unions likely won’t help much.=== This is … everything. It’s everything. I feel the reason they are attacking Dems and “owning the Libs in hypocrisy” is the truths of this plan; No one person is stopping anyone from merely donating monies to help the kids. There’s no altruism except to the tax break allowing these monies to exist. The schools need these monies by having these students be worth more financially, with the same education delivered, and it’s not a reduced amount received or a payment plan initiated. They want “what about the children” as the donors may walk without the tax breaks and these schools lose windfall revenues for full price educations. So… attack those CTU Libs, those Dems, that hypocrisy… that’ll get that money back… back for the schools and tax breaks There’s no leverage with shame or anger here when it’s base/core fundamental is a tax break - TheInvisibleMan - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 1:59 pm: “knowing very well that they can not afford it” Catholic churches and schools have done a great job convincing their members there is a direct link between the IKA and their ability to get scholarships. Nothing, absolutely nothing, is stopping the scholarships from still existing after IKA sunsets. The church much prefers parents to look to and blame the state for the problems and concerns in their own churches. It’s just so heartbreaking that now there won’t be any motivation at all to setup ponzi schemes to fund the church, and get tax credits at the same time. Joliet Catholic Academy in the Joliet Diocese has to pay back 100k by November, in a settlement with the SEC. “Joliet Catholic High School received $151,840.86″ https://chronicleillinois.com/news/minooka-mans-ponzi-scheme-ensnares-school-charities/ - JS Mill - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:03 pm: The catholic church would have much more money in their coffers had they not had to pay for innumerable lawsuits resulting from sexual abuse. For starters. Second, anyone who takes public money is a defacto public school and should have to follow the same rules and standards. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:11 pm: If there was ANY honesty by the proponents at this point, the people they should be shaming, in a religious underpinning, are those only donating for tax credits and not donating again without it. But, since we aren’t seeing any of that, only this continued push because of the tax credit… it’s more about money than it could ever be about the kids or altruism… or religion. Can I get an Amen… :) - Ugh - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:23 pm: Amen - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:29 pm: (“Acknowledged pointing” to - Ugh -) - What's the point? - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:31 pm: Thank goodness government breadlines and soup kitchens never formed a powerful union or SNAP (read vouchers) would never be allowed at private grocery stores. - Rudy’s teeth - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:31 pm: Agree with JS Mill’s comments regarding lawsuits against the Church arising from sexual abuse. Many of the graduates of Catholic high schools could donate directly to their former school to provide funding for current students. The alumni of Leo High School is quite a “Who’s Who” of Chicago’s corporate, legal, and philanthropic communities. Surely they can open their checkbooks to keep the doors open and welcoming to future Leo students. - Excessively Rabid - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:39 pm: As far as I can see, donors can still contribute to these schools and it would be fully deductible on both their Federal and state returns if they itemize. - Suburban Mom - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:45 pm: There was a big push of - at all places - Chuy Garcia’s townhall in Brookfield. https://www.rblandmark.com/2023/09/05/school-tax-credit-complex-topic-at-rep-chuy-garcias-town-hall/ - Google Is Your Friend - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:46 pm: - TheInvisibleMan - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 1:59 pm: I also wouldn’t be shocked if in general the school communities themselves are hostile to scholarship recipients. I attended a Catholic high school and kids who openly talked about attending on scholarships or their family needing a scholarship to attend were mocked by kids from wealthier families. You can chalk to up to high school jerks, but I never saw a teacher or administrator who witnessed it put a stop to that kind of talk or promote broader notions of inclusivity. I agree with you that “the Church” is always looking for someone else to blame for their own misconduct, mismanagement, or general lack of empathy and respect. - JJJJJJJJJJ - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:47 pm: The need for a “wind down period” is also infuriating. The sunset provision has been there all along and it’s already been extended once. I’d love to know what sort of planning was done by these schools in light of that. Did they enroll kids knowing there wouldn’t be enough scholarship moeny for them to finish their education at the school? Was the plan to use these kids as political pawns all along? - Back to the Future - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:49 pm: Agree with the teacher union leaders and Father P. that the public schools are not good choices in many communities. It is a small program that is giving some kids a chance at a better education. I do agree we should have a solid program in place to insure that we have a way to compare test scores. Perhaps these parents are wrong. Why not compare educational opportunities? Let’s help these kids out by continuing a program that seems to be working for some families. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:52 pm: ===that seems to be working=== What is that measure? Are the student bodies comparable to public school options? Why are these proponents not leading with data? - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 2:53 pm: ===government breadlines and soup kitchens never formed a powerful union=== You really need to work harder on your analogies. And, by the way, the farmers were some of the earliest proponents of food stamps. - vern - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:00 pm: These advocacy orgs are funded by private schools using the money they make from Invest in Kids. The program basically created a cottage industry of nonprofits whose only purpose is to use government money to advocate for more government money. This public relations blitz is itself part of the problem and a reason the program should end. - Back to the Future - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:04 pm: The measure is that the parents and children made a decision on what they know about their local school choices. Maybe it is the miserable test scores that are showing up or violence in some schools. I am thinking the families know what is the better choice for their kids and that includes the union families. This program allows some children who may come from families that have economic challenges to have a shot at a better future. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:09 pm: ===decision=== Then that decision is on them. There are alumni associations for the schools, the school should have the alumni help the students. ===Maybe it is the miserable test scores that are showing up or violence in some schools.=== Maybe the miserable test scores are because there’s no weeding out of folks who can lower overall scores. The violence angle, these private schools can also invest in the students with alums donating directly for safety, no need for tax breaks for safety. ===I am thinking the families know what is the better choice for their kids and that includes the union families.=== Who said they can’t go where? There doesn’t need to be any program for a choice of a family. ===This program allows some children who may come from families that have economic challenges to have a shot at a better future.=== You’ve yet to show any factual data to any of this, or any headier outside “choice” or “opportunity” which doesn’t need any tax break to set up a fund to help students if these donors care about students. - DTownResident - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:11 pm: Indiana used to track the test scores for kids who received state money. After they had enough data to show those kids were falling behind their peers including similar students in the schools they left , the required data collection stopped if course and other programs implemented elsewhere never require it. I think that there are some mathematicians at the U of I who analyzed students and came up with that kids do similar whether in private or public on test scores based on the income levels of the parents and when that improved kids scores would usually also go up. - notsosure - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:27 pm: vern is spot on, as far as the folks doing the advocating pocketing $ from the program. Wasn’t Mike McClain one of the founding organizers of Empower Illinois, the biggest of that bunch? Probably he did it out of the goodness of his heart. - Back to the Future - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:29 pm: It is a tax incentive program to raise money for educational options for lower income families. We have all kinds of tax incentive programs. This one seems to work for poorer families. Father Michael points out that we have a 26,000 kid waiting line. I suppose some parents would keep their kid in a miserable performing private school to allow someone else to have a tax break, but I doubt it. The proof is in the parents keeping their kids in schools that are in the program. The parents can always move back to a public school if they thought that was a better place for their children. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:34 pm: ===This one seems to work for poorer families.=== That is an opinion, not a fact, there’s no necessity for a tax incentive, given each of those schools have fundraising mechanisms. The tax incentive is for the donor abd the school… having zero to do with any student. ===I suppose some parents would keep their kid in a miserable performing private school to allow someone else to have a tax break, but I doubt it.=== You’ve never met a family with multi-generational alums that feel a seat in that school is an entitlement. It’s rarely a “one off”, especially with Catholic families. ===The proof is in the parents keeping their kids in schools that are in the program.=== The proof would actually be the students being awarded scholarships by the fundraising of altruistic alums not needing tax breaks. ===The parents can always move back to a public school if they thought that was a better place for their children.=== Again, no one is denying any choice one makes or doesn’t make. That’s not a point of contention or value to the argument - Southsider - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:41 pm: “If there was any honesty…” like Stacy Davis Gates saying there aren’t enough good schools for her child on the south side so she chose a Catholic School instead, the same private schools she calls “segregation academies” and belittles the supporters of private schools as “racists and fascists.” Why? Because she can afford it, yet won’t allow poor black and brown families the same opportunities. Poor folks get stuck in the same failing schools Ms. Davis Gates rejected. Honesty? More like Hypocrisy. - Gravitas - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:44 pm: For decades, taxpayers in Germany have had the right to direct their tax money to the school system of their choice. It is really complicated: the taxpayer checks a box on his or her tax return indicating which school system should receive the education system should receive the tax money. BTW at Leo High School, the alumni have opened their checkbooks to help a new generation of students attend their alma mater. Leo is now predominantly African American while the alums are old white guys. I mailed a donation today. - H-W - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:50 pm: === lower income children === === poorer children === Read the eligibility income thresholds. Invest in Kids is open to families living well into the middle class. It is not restricted to poor kids. Suggesting so is a false. This is not a program for poor kids. - Rudy’s teeth - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:51 pm: If a student needs services or has an IEP, Catholic schools do not have the staff to meet the needs of the student. The Catholic schools are not all-inclusive. If they accept money from the state, they must be open to all students and meet their needs accordingly. - Hannibal Lecter - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 3:58 pm: === Maybe the miserable test scores are because there’s no weeding out of folks who can lower overall scores === That is exactly the whole point Willy. I am a firm believer that the success of a student is related to the other students that they go to school with. Many people who send their kid to a private school do so because the environment (including the other students) is more conducive to success than the public option. When your child is surrounded by other students that are learning at a higher level, it is more likely that your child will learn more. It’s the whole reason why many working class families send their kids to private school. That doesn’t mean the program should continue or not continue — it simply means that many parents want to put their kids in schools that are more conducive to success. It’s the whole reason why many families send their kids to private school. I think understanding that gives a better understanding why this program is attractive to some families. Whether its a good or bad use of public funds - I am not opining on that, and if I did it wouldn’t change anyone’s mind. - Amalia - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 4:04 pm: this is a welfare program for religious institutions and their status quo. look around. their churches are closing, merging. they can’t recruit priests and they don’t allow women to do those jobs. their schools are closing. why? because actually public schools are getting better. so they need money to prop these schools up. which props up their churches. and makes people believe they have to go through that venue to get more. I don’t want my tax dollars supporting their religion including because it discriminates against women. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 4:05 pm: ===This is not a program for poor kids.=== Ball game. This is a tax break for wealthy folks to prop up private schools. The kids are the conduit to do so. - Pete Mitchell - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 4:25 pm: “Wealthy Folks” Wealthy folks can send their kids to whatever school they want. Tax break or no tax break. Like a lot if other things in society its the middle class being hurt. They can send kids to inadequate public schools but can’t quite afford private schools. Let them keep the money and choose. - Pete Mitchell - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 4:26 pm: Wealthy folks can send their kids to whatever school they want. Tax break or no tax break. Like a lot if other things in society its the middle class being hurt. They can send kids to inadequate public schools but can’t quite afford private schools. Let them keep the money and choose. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 4:33 pm: ===That is exactly the whole point=== It’s actually not close to the point of the actual discussion. The point is the tax break to help schools by seemingly helping students, but to donate without the tax incentive to actual students isn’t the want… as the propaganda for proponents try to make it about kids that are poor, but being poor isn’t part of the criteria at all. Here’s missing the whole point; ===I think understanding that gives a better understanding why this program is attractive to some families.=== The program is about attracting wealthy folks cash for schools, not families looking for opportunities. This is window dressing to mask the reality. ===It’s the whole reason why many working class families send their kids to private school.=== Again, not the discussion being had here. With respect, and friend, I do understand and sympathize with the why, that not the argument. Your argument is understood, but not the argument to the why or what this program is. Be well. - Hannibal Lecter - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 4:38 pm: === their schools are closing. why? because actually public schools are getting better. === I would say its because private schools have become much more expensive. $3,600 a year back when I was a freshman in HS. Tuition at the same school is now between $12k and $13k. Not a lot of working class people can afford that kind of tuition, especially if they have multiple kids. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 4:42 pm: ===I would say its because private schools have become much more expensive. $3,600 a year back when I was a freshman in HS. Tuition at the same school is now between $12k and $13k. Not a lot of working class people can afford that kind of tuition, especially if they have multiple kids.=== (Enter “Invest in Kids”) If one were to discuss this as the reason (help private schools exist) for the program and not the kids, do you think there would be even less legislative support? You’re on it with that truth above - JS Mill - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 6:15 pm: @Hannibal Lecter- your statement in the primary influence on student success is not sustained by any research. Parental support and poverty are the top reasons. Back to the future misses a key point. Parents of all income ranges can move to find a better school. The lowers SES families tend to be the most mobile. Public dollars should not flow to religious institutions period. It is anti- American as communism. - Amalia - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 7:18 pm: the idea behind funding public schools is for the public good. not because your kid goes to a public school. people who do not have children or who no longer have school children pay into the fund. for the public good. do you use your local library? no? should you get credit to buy books at a store? or your local parks. if you don’t use them should you get credit and use the money at a private health club? those who take money out of the fund with this kind of program are not contributing. but they benefit from a better society. they should pay in. end this program. - Rudy’s teeth - Thursday, Sep 14, 23 @ 7:31 pm: To add a comment to JS Mill’s remarks—-the educational level of parents has much to do with perseverance and support during school years. The best way for anyone to avoid poverty is through literacy. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.