* Lots has been written and broadcast about Invest in Kids. The PR push has truly been magnificent. But it’s been super-rare to see a mainstream news media outlet actually convince legislators to honestly assess its future. Marni Pyke did just that…
The Invest in Kids initiative will expire Jan. 1 unless lawmakers approve an extension. So far, “I don’t know if there’s a path yet to get it passed,” Democratic state Rep. Marty Moylan of Des Plaines said.
Democratic state Rep. Fred Crespo of Hoffman Estates agrees. “Based on my observations … the votes are not there,” he said Friday. […]
“We’re talking about real money here,” Crespo said. “We’re talking about $75 million that the state does not realize by giving out these credits. There are issues and concerns with the separation of church and state. Some of our members feel that the state should not be funding any private or Christian schools.”
* Associated Press…
Critics of an Illinois program providing private school scholarships say there’s no proof it improves academic achievement. But state education officials, delayed by COVID-19’s school disruptions, have never reported the academic performance of participating students as required by the Invest in Kids Act, a hot issue as lawmakers reconvene Tuesday. […]
The coronavirus pandemic essentially shut down annual statewide student assessments in 2020 and 2021, the first two years of Invest in Kids. The first report measuring progress among program participants won’t come out until early next year, education officials said.
“Unfortunately for the thousands of Invest in Kids families, it appears that Gov. (J.B.) Pritzker’s administration either failed to complete, or failed to share these assessments four years in a row, which has emboldened opponents to point to the lack of data the administration refused to collect,” Senate Minority Leader John Curran, a Republican from Downers Grove, said in a statement to The Associated Press. […]
Research group WestEd, whose contract for the analysis is $640,275, couldn’t start until it had 2022 results; its inaugural report will indicate whether students improved on 2023 tests.
* Sun-Times…
U.S. Reps. Jan Schakowsky, Nikki Budzinski, Sean Casten, Danny Davis, Jonathan Jackson, Raja Krishnamoorthi and Delia Ramirez wrote “school vouchers … perpetuate and deepen the education inequities that plague Illinois.”
They also took issue with religious groups using public dollars.
“This program diverts public funds from the public school system to be used to pay for tuition at private and religious schools,” the lawmakers said in the statement. “Furthermore, many of the schools funded by the program have policies that openly discriminate against students on the basis of disability status, gender identity, sexual orientation, if they are pregnant or parenting, or immigration status.”
Senate Republicans dispute that narrative as they continue to try to save the program. Senate Republican Leader John Curran, R-Downers Grove, planned a Tuesday morning news conference in Springfield to urge Democrats and Pritzker to reconsider.
Curran has argued the program has not taken money away from public education, and he supports a compromise that would lower the total donations eligible for tax credits from $75 million to $50 million. He has also railed against the ideological fights over the program, arguing the children benefiting from it should be guaranteed the certainty of a permanent program.
* SJ-R…
An administrator at a Catholic elementary school on Springfield’s east side is concerned for a future without it.
Michael Carlson, principal at St. Patrick Catholic School, said it charges $1,750 in tuition yet it costs more than $8,000 educate a student. Only one of the school’s 62 pre-K through fifth-grade students is not on an income-based Empower Scholarship, covering the full tuition costs.
“Invest in Kids is incentivizing donors to invest in our community,” he said on Wednesday. The scholarships are eligible for students living in households earning less than 185% of the federal poverty level.
At Sacred Heart-Griffin High School, 21 of 525 students are either on complete or partial scholarships but another 40 are on the waitlist, according to Bill Moredock, the school’s president.
…Adding… Sen. GOP Leader Curran held a press conference today. Highlights from his press staff…
Presser
5:20 - “It is abhorrent that there are leaders in the legislature that are ignoring the pleas of these children and these families that are trying to save their educational opportunity – their preferred setting that they are excelling in educationally. We have to listen to these children and the parents who have been here and afford this choice to these low-income families. The same choice that I’m afforded and many of my colleagues are afforded.”
6:45 – “Governor Pritzker unfortunately today is sending a very loud and clear message that these low income children are not a priority. Where is the Governor on this topic? Where is he today? He’s in Florida… in another state talking about federal issues.”
7:15 – “We have issues here in this capitol that need to be resolved.”
7:22 – “In two days we’re going to be done. And we either leave here with our heads held high because we acted and saved opportunity for these low-income students or we return to our districts in really a cloud of failure because we will be failing thousands and thousands of low-income families throughout this state.”
7:58 – “Labor leaders have come out in support of this program and the opportunity it affords in the vocational setting. We need to continue to grow and pursue these opportunities for these low-income families. It is really about lifting kids out of their current situation.”
8:22 – “When the governor came out this week and eventually said leave something on my desk, pass whatever, when I get back from Florida, I’ll take a look at it. That is not leadership. What we are calling on is for leadership on this issue, both from the legislative leaders as well as the governor. It is time for the governor to lead on this issue and come back to Illinois.. and help continue this program for these low-income kids.”
8:54 - “It is time to do what’s right. We are here to call on our colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle – put this bill on the board, it’s time for this to be called for a vote. We want this voted on this week.”
Q and A
9:23 – “We are here to act to extend this program. Where’s the governor? He needs to be leading on this. It is members of his party and his side of the aisle that are not putting this bill up for a vote. The governor needs to interject himself in this.”
10:05 – “We are standing here united fighting to continue this program. These kids deserve not only the full effort of Senate Republican Caucus, they deserve the full effort of each and every legislator in the capitol. There are children on these scholarships in each legislators’ district. It is time to represent the people of you’re district not the ideology of your party. It is time to put this on the board for a vote.”
12:15 – “It is department by department by department under the governor’s control including ISBE that has not done the assessment. If it was me, I’d be here, I’d be laser focused on Illinois. I wouldn’t be ‘thinking big’ about America. I wouldn’t be in Florida. I’d be in Illinois and I’d be getting the job done and until the job stay focused on Illinois.”
…Adding… From Mac Strategies…
Good morning,
We wanted you to be aware that there will be action in front of Speaker Welch’s office at 12:30 p.m. and in front of the Governor’s office at 1:00 p.m. Approximately 250 students and families in blue shirts and with signs demanding an extension of the Invest in Kids Act Tax Credit Scholarship Program.
…Adding… As promised…
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:16 pm:
So much for the argument the scholarships are primarily benefiting middle class families.
So much easier to demonize Invest in Kids as tax give aways to the rich instead of a lifeline to lower income minorities
“Illinois Department of Revenue data shows out of 9,656 awardees, 3,060 Hispanic students, 32%, and 1,904 Black students, 20%, received scholarships for 2022-2023.
In terms of income, 6,467 scholarship recipients, or 67%, lived in families below or up to 185% of the federal poverty level. The 2023 federal poverty level for a household of four is $30,000.”
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:19 pm:
“I said I would sign whatever came to my desk, but the Freedom Caucus of Republicans sank Invest in Kids”
- Governor Pritzker, “maybe”
(I am not speaking for the governor, ANY governor, or ANY ONE. No one wants that)
- Rudy’s teeth - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:21 pm:
The best evidence that Invest in Kids is successful and meeting goals…test scores. If schools who receive funds reveal test scores and gains, there is evidence that the program provides academic rigor for students.
The most important factor for a child’s success in school relates to the educational level of parents. Structure, stability, and security in the home are factors which support student success.
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:23 pm:
“Furthermore, many of the schools funded by the program have policies that openly discriminate against students on the basis of disability status, gender identity, sexual orientation, if they are pregnant or parenting, or immigration status.”
Beyond that, some private schools are essentially using state resources to propagate beliefs that are discriminatory.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:23 pm:
===So much for the argument the scholarships are primarily benefiting middle class families.===
Talk to the Mensa Group from the Eastern Bloc why they are sinking it?
You won’t, of course, because you support nihilists in the GA and in the governor’s office.
Welp, this time that backfired.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:26 pm:
=instead of a lifeline to lower income minorities=
What a complete joke your hyperbole is. This isn’t a “lifeline”, no ones life is at risk. ALL of these kids have a public option available to them. Every last one of them.
They want to go to a private school and they can. There is no reason why their benefactors cannot donate to sponsor these kids. The catholic church, which runs the most private schools in Illinois has more than enough money to take care of students.
- Davison - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:27 pm:
The need is there but the votes aren’t.
Springfield in one sentence.
- Suburban Taxpayer - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:29 pm:
Invest in Kids doesn’t have the support. Those of us in the suburbs like our schools, that’s why we moved to the suburbs. Teachers unions+ suburban high property taxes= no vouchers for you.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:32 pm:
===The need is there but the votes aren’t.===
The want is wanted, the want is not a need.
The need, so we can be very crystal clear, is that a bunch of rich folks need tax breaks to give to schools (not students) with kids as the vessel to get monies to schools. The education, discounted, paid in full, full scholarship, is the same. The difference is the cash the school gets
No one is stopping the rich donors if there’s that need.
It’s not a need. It’s a want. Lobbying in a nutshell.
- Perrid - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:32 pm:
This scheme isn’t as bad a actual vouchers or charter schools, but it’s still taking away public funds so some kids go to “good” schools and others don’t. It might only indirectly defund public schools, but it’s still just bad policy. If some schools are underperforming they should either be reformed or closed, we should let some kids “escape” “bad” schools while keeping others in those same schools but with less public funds (again, indirectly, as it’s the state coffers as a whole that’s be suffering not necessarily that school’s funding).
- West Sider - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:34 pm:
What’s stopping the generous donors from rallying together and continuing to provide scholarships for these kids after the Republicans fail to get this done? Only interested if there’s something in it for them, I suppose. Give me a break.
- In the know - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:37 pm:
“Michael Carlson, principal at St. Patrick Catholic School, said it charges $1,750 in tuition yet it costs more than $8,000 educate a student. Only one of the school’s 62 pre-K through fifth-grade students is not on an income-based Empower Scholarship, covering the full tuition costs.’
62 kids? You can’t sustain that no matter what. Also this school was supposed to close a long time ago due to no money, this was way before this program.
- TheInvisibleMan - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:39 pm:
The Joliet city council meeting last night saw someone from the Joliet Diocese, invited by the council, giving a presentation to the city about why the Invest In Kids Act should be supported.
It was weird.
They sounded desperate for money, because in the bigger picture they are;
https://www.shawlocal.com/the-herald-news/news/2023/10/29/diocese-of-joliet-facing-parish-restructuring-due-to-falling-attendance/
- Drury's Missing Clock - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:41 pm:
Anyone else a little tired of people acting like sending a kid to public school is the end of the world?
- Kippax Blue - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:45 pm:
Just how much does the Springfield diocese grant per student avast Pat’s?
- Kippax Blue - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:46 pm:
… at St Pat’s?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:48 pm:
===avast Pat’s?===
For a moment, I thought it was Talk Like a Pirate Day
- Frida’s boss - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:49 pm:
71/36 nuff said Gov said he’ll sign either you have it or you dont
- Michelle Flaherty - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:50 pm:
You don’t need a law to donate to private school scholarships.
You need a law to get a tax break on your donation to private school scholarships.
- Unionman - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:58 pm:
If the dems don’t have the votes, then why not just pass it through and let it be a bipartisan. Let their caucus vote their conscience and districts.
If it passes, it passes, if it fails, it fails
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:05 pm:
A good education is one of the keys to a better life so it is certainly a lifeline.
Even Stacey Davis Gates believes that private high school is best for her family
The Catholic Church will be surprised to learn they can afford to educate all of the poor kids whose families would like to be educated in their schools.
In addition to the 9,500 kids currently getting scholarships there are 25 or 26,000 kids on the waiting list.
Since when are the best interests of the lower income minority kids who benefit from the Invest in Kids represented in the legislature by the Eastern Block?
- Notatechie - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:05 pm:
How much money has been spent on the pr? Take that money and donate it to a school for scholarships. Stop asking the Taxpayers to pay for a tax break for the few. Public schools only improve with funding and those tax dollars can help with school needs.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:12 pm:
===The Catholic Church will be surprised to learn…===
… that paying settlements for sexual abuses over decades makes it impossible to fund their own schools.
===Since when are the best interests of the lower income minority kids who benefit from the Invest in Kids represented in the legislature by the Eastern Block?===
Friend, you need 71 in the House. Losing 7 nihilist when the GOP caucuses want the bill to pass, you really don’t understand how nose counting works… or you can’t be honest that the Mensa Group from the Eastern Bloc will be instrumental in sinking Invest in Kids.
- LP -… think on this brilliance;
===You don’t need a law to donate to private school scholarships.
You need a law to get a tax break on your donation to private school scholarships.===
It’s about the tax free money given to those Catholic schools.
No need for a law unless it’s about it being tax free.
Not one kid gets that money, each school gets that cash.
- Dirt Lawyer - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:12 pm:
We willingly pay the tuition for our two grandchildren to attend Catholic school. If the scholarships go, it’s likely the school will eventually fold. And that’s OK with us. If the school cannot sustain itself with tuition and donations, then it should die.
The business model for Catholic schools collapsed when nuns and brothers left in droves after Vatican II, and what’s left is a sad vestige. Let it go and spend that money — especially taxpayer money — elsewhere.
- Politix - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:14 pm:
Invest In Kids wasn’t meant to bail out churches that poorly manage their private school businesses. And parochial school is a business.
That said, a phaseout would be prudent to minimize the impact on kids.
- CentralILCentrist - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:14 pm:
Michelle Flaherty for the win…
- Lurker - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:17 pm:
I hope this does not affect St Pats too much. They are doing good work over there.
- Former Downstater - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:21 pm:
Am I missing something? Is there any law preventing individuals with the means to do so from donating to fund private education?
I’m a progressive. I hate private schools, especially ones that promote narrow religious ideologies. So do pretty much all of the people I associate with.
Yet, none of us have any problem with people choosing to donate their personal money to them. We just don’t believe they should receive a tax break to do so.
I struggle to understand why this law is needed.
- Lurker - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:30 pm:
There seems to be a lot of mentioning the lost revenue but I am not seeing discussion about the loss expense. That is, if a student does not go to a public school, that schools expenses drop by ~$10k
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:31 pm:
===that schools expenses drop by ~$10k ===
lol
No.
C’mon. They lose a student and furlough a teacher for three months?
- Ruth Dakin - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:41 pm:
=== it is abhorrent that there are leaders in the legislature that are ignoring the pleas of these children and these families that are trying to save their educational opportunity ===
No, Durkin, what is abhorrent is lying to these families that the State is canceling the scholarships, when in fact donors can still donate, and even get a federal tax break. What is abhorrent is using these black and brown children as pawns in their long game of trying to dismantle teachers unions.
- VK - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:41 pm:
==that schools expenses drop by ~$10k==
Would absolutely *love* to see a source citation for this absolutely wild claim.
- Teachers unions - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:44 pm:
illinois isn’t ready for innovation in education. We’re lashed to the mast of teachers unions, plain and simple. Kids may suffer but lobbyists win.
- School Guy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:44 pm:
If you “hate private schools” like Former Downstate, the conversation is over. Understood. But if the issue is money going to private schools instead of public schools, that is a more nuanced conversation.
Let’s say a conservative 2/3rds of the 9600 students on scholarship can’t go to private schools any more and then go to public schools. At a rough $15K per student, those 6200 students will cost the state far more than $75M to educate.
- NIU Grad - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:46 pm:
The publicity for this being led by a lobbying/marketing firm is probably not helping win over Dem legislators when they hear the “we need money” argument.
- Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:53 pm:
The good news for these kids is that the State of Illinois already has made arrangements for them to receive scholarships at near by public schools.
===Pritzker’s administration either failed to complete, or failed to share===
This kind of statement is something that has been a pretty consistent issue when it comes to how the administration has actually governed.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:58 pm:
===At a rough $15K per student, those 6200 students will cost the state===
Again, it doesn’t work that way in the real world. At all. And especially not after the formula was completely revamped.
- Former Downstater - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:58 pm:
@SchoolGuy, to me, the issue is why is this program needed? What is stopping people who currently donate through the program from continuing to do so? If they really care about providing students with what they see as better educational opportunities, why is a tax break necessary?
From reading the other comments, others seem to have the same issue.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:59 pm:
@LP
People that are giving money now are free to continue giving that money. If they are only doing it for the tax break then I would say they really aren’t all that concerned about education. They’re in it for themselves, not the kids.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:00 pm:
==That is, if a student does not go to a public school, that schools expenses drop by ~$10k==
Are you really that dense?
- H-W - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:11 pm:
From the Daily-Herald story:
=== 67%, lived in families below or up to 185% of the federal poverty level. ===
From this, we can conclude that 33% of the recipients were above the 185% threshold (i.e., family incomes above $55,500).
Also from this presentation, we cannot conclude how many of the recipients are from poor or low income families as the story suggests (i.e., the data do not indicate how many of the 67% are from households below $30,000).
Finally, these scholarships are not uniformly available to the majority of Illinoisan children living outside urban and suburban areas, where private schools are rare.
Let the program pass. Let the schools decide whether or not to retain current students in the absence of general revenue funding (the source of those scholarships is the avoidance of tax liabilities).
- City Zen - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:11 pm:
==This program diverts public funds from the public school system==
False, but they already know that.
==Only interested if there’s something in it for them, I suppose.==
Stellanis has entered the chat.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:12 pm:
==False==
Not necessarily false. Those are taxes the state would otherwise be receiving that could be put towards education.
- Chicagonk - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:18 pm:
Invest in Kids incentivizes giving that otherwise wouldn’t happen. I’m actively involved in Big Shoulders and one of the strongest advocates for Invest in Kids is Rep Curtis Tarver who serves on the board as well. There is no doubt that there will be fewer scholarships handed out without the Invest in Kids Act. And the demand for the scholarships currently exceeds what is currently available to give out.
- Amalia - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:20 pm:
“We’re talking about $75 million that the state does not realize by giving out these credits.” Wow. This tax benefit subsidizes the (Roman) Catholic Church. End it.
- Pundent - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:21 pm:
=False, but they already know that.=
Well here’s something that’s irrefutable, the program helps fund financially struggling Catholic schools who’ve had their coffers depleted by sexual abuse settlements.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:22 pm:
=A good education is one of the keys to a better life so it is certainly a lifeline.=
No it isn’t. There is no evidence that the private schools save or improve lives. If you are a square pg in a private school, the impact can be detrimental. I was a square peg in a private school. That is why my life’s mission has been to work in a place where every kid is welcome and can expect to be treated with dignity while receiving a quality education.
=That is, if a student does not go to a public school, that schools expenses drop by ~$10k=
====At a rough $15K per student, those 6200 students will cost the state====
Sigh…no, and no. Here is why:
In the first scenario- the loss of one or two students per classroom would result in exactly zero personnel changes. Even if it was in every classroom in the building.
No facilities need reductions.
No energy need reductions.
No transportation changes
Maybe, if you have consumables your budget goes down a fraction of a percent. But supplies like books and computers are at best 10% of a district budget.
In the second scenario even if all of the kids getting s government subsidy (and the corresponding private schools) were to go back to public they would basically have to go to 4 or 5 schools for anyone to notice the change in needs. Given that these students are dispersed across the state, and Illinois has roughly 500,000 students, you are talking about 2% max. The state is putting over $350 million in annual increases to ed spending. This is a blip statewide. And if every district, including the smallest, received the same number of kids (roughly 11 per district) only a couple of the very tiniest districts would feel the impact. If all 9,600 went back to CPS, they might not notice.
Physical plant needs don’t change
Minimal to no personnel need changes (noof these kids are getting special ed services in all likelihood)
Minor supply changes
No energy changes
No transportation changes
You are welcome.
- Former Downstater - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:25 pm:
==There is no doubt that there will be fewer scholarships handed out without the Invest in Kids Act.==
What specific evidence leads you to conclude there is “no doubt” a drop will occur?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:25 pm:
I defer the rest of my “financial explanation, school to school, student to student” time to - JS Mill -
:)
- City Zen - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:26 pm:
==Those are taxes the state would otherwise be receiving that could be put towards education.==
The money for IIK comes from the General Revenue Fund. School funding levels are determined separately through EBF. That property tax relief grant that is part of EBF actually takes money from education funding. If less money for education is a concern, then we should end the grant program.
You could argue IIK takes away money from something else, but so does every other tax credit and exemption on the books.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:27 pm:
===There is no doubt that there will be fewer scholarships handed out without the Invest in Kids Act.===
So you’re saying they are utterly lazy unless they can get free money?
Huh.
You’d think losing revenue would make the schools feel more compelled to reach these donors direct, no?
Very telling.
- CentralILCentrist - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:30 pm:
when I read the headline, I sang “You don’t have the votes, you don’t have the votes…” from “Cabinet Battle” in Hamilton.
- jimbo26 - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:33 pm:
Wonder why the rich guys getting the tax break aren’t down at the Capitol in their fancy suits instead of sending these kids to promote their tax break.
- City Zen - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:38 pm:
==the loss of one or two students per classroom would result in exactly zero personnel changes==
The loss of two students in a classroom increases the attention received for each remaining student. Student/teacher ratio improves at no cost to the school district. Ask parents would they rather have 18 kids in their child’s classroom or 20?
And those economies of scale you mentioned migrate to the private school.
- Banish Misfortune - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:39 pm:
Though I and my sibs had 12 to 16 years of Catholic education and I sent some of my kids to Catholic schools, I never thought that someone else should get a tax break for it. Nor did I ever hear my parents complain about paying their taxes. I think Catholic schools can be the right choice sometimes. But I don’t think my neighbors taxes should go up to support those schools. It is just wrong to reduce someone’s taxes because he or she gives money to a private school. I’m not much of a fan of the charitable deduction to start with, it has become a way for the wealthy to support their hobbyhorses at the expense of the public.
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:40 pm:
===Stellanis has entered the chat.===
The military has an expression that accurately describes such situations. “Different spanks for different ranks.”
- School Guy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:41 pm:
@Former Downstater I understand that you and many people feel this program is unneeded. Some polls show there is support for it. I believe private schools do a lot of good work for students and families throughout Illinois. Just as the state supports charitable and educational endeavors in many other ways (Catholic Charities, Jewish United Fund, NAACP, YMCA), there isn’t a big reason why it can’t support this educational endeavor for families who are seeking to have their children in a non-public school.
Private schools already raise a significant amount of dollars to supplement tuition in most schools. The tax credit helps incentivize additional giving to those schools. Again, if you don’t like what private schools do, that is a different argument. I think one can look around and see the differences made in private schools all around Illinois.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:42 pm:
===The loss of two students in a classroom increases the attention received for each remaining student. Student/teacher ratio improves at no cost to the school district.===
Taking back :30 seconds of my time from - JS Mill -
Private school costs to, say, utilities, isn’t measured by student. It costs X to heat, electric, teacher, and more kids (vessels to cash, in this instance) cover costs.
Same education, 12 or 20 students, but the dollars are real to those schools.
===Wonder why the rich guys getting the tax break aren’t down at the Capitol in their fancy suits instead of sending these kids to promote their tax break.===
I admit it, I chuckled.
They’re eating prawns, watching pawns…
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:44 pm:
===Private schools already raise a significant amount of dollars to supplement tuition in most schools. The tax credit helps===
Don’t look now, but you’re making it about the schools and not about “the kids”
Hmm.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:45 pm:
Does anyone think those kids would be allowed to protest at the Capitol in favor of abortion rights, LGBTQ rights, etc on a school day?
- Pundent - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:46 pm:
=The loss of two students in a classroom increases the attention received for each remaining student..=
I think JS Mill is a far more credible source on these issues. Part of the problem with the “failing schools” crowd is that they’ve never actually taught in or run the schools they so freely opine on.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:49 pm:
==Does anyone think those kids would be allowed to protest at the Capitol in favor of abortion rights, LGBTQ rights, etc on a school day?==
I ask because one way they would definitely lose their scholarships at some of the program schools is by taking political action the school disagrees with and being expelled as a result.
- Lefty Lefty - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:56 pm:
Maybe there could be compromise - keep the scholarship but the Church has to pay some taxes.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:59 pm:
Tip of the cap to OW and Pundent.
=The loss of two students in a classroom increases the attention received for each remaining student. Student/teacher ratio improves at no cost to the school district. Ask parents would they rather have 18 kids in their child’s classroom or 20?=
But lets suspend reality and pretend our hypothesis is correct (can only be true if every kid gets the same amount of individual attention. That is NOT how it works).
If a class is 50 minutes long (period lengths vary by schools and age groups but that is probably close to the average) then a student in a 20 student classroom gets 2.5 minutes versus 2.7 minutes in an 18 students classroom.
Yep, I wouldn’t hold my breath for any additional christmas cards from appreciative parents.
And again, that is not how instruction works with real human children.
=And those economies of scale you mentioned migrate to the private school.=
Sorry, but that simply makes no sense. Private school operational costs are not a factor in state budgets.
Buildings don’t magically shrink. bus routes don’t change much, heating and cooling costs don’t change etc. etc.
- School Guy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 4:15 pm:
=== Don’t look now, but you’re making it about the schools and not about “the kids”===
I think we can all agree that the schools have to be open for the kids to benefit, right?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 4:19 pm:
===I think we can all agree that the schools have to be open for the kids to benefit, right?===
No. We don’t have to agree with that if the goal to keep them open is a tax break pretending to help kids, but you now readily admit its about the schools?
lol
No. No I do not agree. Ask the donors to bail out the schools.
Chicago closed 50 schools. Schools are not required to exist forever.
Make *your* case to the donors.
“We can all agree”… love of Peter, Paul, and your favorite saint.
- Pundent - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 4:23 pm:
=I think we can all agree that the schools have to be open for the kids to benefit, right?=
If the schools are in such dire straights that the wouldn’t be open absent this tax credit, I’d question their viability in the first place. It also doesn’t sound like a place you would turn to for a better education.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 4:46 pm:
=I ask because one way they would definitely lose their scholarships at some of the program schools is by taking political action the school disagrees with and being expelled as a result.=
Or even if it is their parents that are protesting or living a “lifestyle” that the school does not agree with. I wonder how Ma and Pa Baileys school would feel about same sex parents?
- Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 4:52 pm:
===Does anyone think those kids would be allowed to protest at the Capitol in favor of abortion rights, LGBTQ rights, etc on a school day? ===
I have some family that attended Catholic schools for K-12 and several times in the school year they were required to go line the streets to oppose basic human rights. Now that they’ve reached the age of reason and have developed their own views on the human rights they were required to protest against as a part of their k-12 education I haven’t asked them about how they feel about having been forced to protest in favor of their school’s political views.
The state shouldn’t be involved in financing schools where bigotry is literally part of the syllabus. Diverting public funds to fund private education does noting to improve public education and the notion that it is appropriate to fund limited scholarships to some children to attend private education as some kind of public good rather than making efforts to improve K-12 education is completely fictional.
These private schools refuses students they don’t want to deal with. We should not utilize public funds to support schools that don’t even respect the idea that every child has a right to education.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 5:21 pm:
@Candy Dogood- So well stated. Brava.
- School Guy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 6:35 pm:
One thing we can all agree on is that OW always has to have the last word. All I said was a school has to be open to help kids. You don’t have to believe the schools are helping kids but they certainly aren’t helping kids if they are closed. The case is made to donors, parents, business folks. No reason the case can’t be made to the state legislature too. And even to you. Thanks for reading.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 6:45 pm:
===One thing we can all agree on is that … always has to have the last word.===
When you are losing the argument…
===All I said was a school has to be open to help kids.===
*No* school is *required* to last forever.
The alleged argument is “for the kids”, this “Invest in Kids” tax break.
===You don’t have to believe the schools are helping kids but they certainly aren’t helping kids if they are closed.===
Opinion not a measured fact, as even the PR campaign is about the heartstrings not the measured achieving.
You saying the quiet part out loud… it’s about the donors getting a tax break…and the kids are the vessels to keep the schools open. With no tax break, donors may not step up.
You want the schools open, go to the donors direct.
I do appreciate, truthfully, that you are part of a small few telling the truth to the money aspect of this.
- TB Furman - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 7:56 pm:
Great coverage, as usual. I live in Skokie, and am represented by Rep. Olickal and Sen. Villivalam, two Democrats supporting the vouchers in the name of “constituent services.” It is the most conservative position either of them publicly hold. In this area, the vouchers are going to families who send their kids to schools for religious education, for the most part. We really can’t judge the academic performance of these schools because they do not take the state tests. There’s a lot of commentary in this space about the well-known parish schools, but there are other, smaller schools, affiliated with religious organizations, that people are not generally aware of.
It’s been said earlier in these comments, but people in the suburbs generally understand that they are going to tax themselves rather heavily in return for more robust public schools. The vouchers undermine all of that. Mr. Olickal and Mr. Villivalam both understand this, but they’re gambling that people are just not paying attention to this issue. But they’re wrong. We are.
Nothing against private religious education. Just stop making everyone subsidize it. The plan for education in Illinois is public education.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 7:56 pm:
= One thing we can all agree on is that OW always has to have the last word.=
Unless you are asked or elected to speak for others speak for yourself. Do not try and speak for me.
And no, I don’t agree.
There is no reason anyone has to lose a scholarship, those who wish to donate can still do that. They can donate directly to the school of their choice and it is likely a tax deductible donation if the school has a 501c3 set up. Even public schools have those.
But the government subsidies should stop.
By the way, for those who think private schools are better…where do you think they go to for special Ed services, specialty electives, or drivers Ed? Spoiler alert- they send their students to the local public school. Happens everyday all across the state. So much for their superiority.
- School Guy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 7:56 pm:
Anyone who says money isn’t a factor isn’t being honest. But in order to advance your mission, you have to have money. Raising money is hard. But the state supports the mission of other non profits, including religious based organizations. Asking for the state to support private schools isn’t unreasonable. If you don’t believe in the mission, that’s another conversation but probably won’t fit here.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 8:03 pm:
===But the state supports the mission of other non profits, including religious based organizations. Asking for the state to support private schools isn’t unreasonable.===
It certainly is very unreasonable to think in a caviler way that excluding students to their mission is being inclusive, and teaching religion as part of the educational mission is arguably putting division of church and state in a mix, given these churches aren’t even paying taxes… so it’s quite different.
It’s not apples to apples in education.
Again, you are at least being honest that it’s about the schools, “I think we can all agree” that this PR slam has been about “the kids” not the schools… because subsidizing religious education directly won’t find 71/36.
- School Guy - Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 9:48 pm:
In the words of your favorite president, OW, “There you go again.” Spinning things into superlatives. Teaching religion is not putting church and state in a mix. That has been upheld time and again. This is not a court conflict, this is a legislative challenge.
Students at private schools meet state graduation requirements. There are some here who want private schools to be inclusive of special education. Most I know would be happy to do so, but can’t do so on low budgets. I know, I know, just keep asking wealthy donors to pony up if the mission is important. Not as easy as you and folks think around here. I know, I know, get 71/36. I think that’s where you and I agree.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 8, 23 @ 10:15 am:
=== There are some here who want private schools to be inclusive of special education. Most===
No.
The schools have the right to discriminate, as public schools do not.
There you go again trying to equate what isn’t equal.
=== can’t do so on low budgets. I know, I know, just keep asking wealthy donors to pony up if the mission is important. Not as easy as you and folks think around here.===
That’s not up to Illinois to bail out the school.
They can close just as easy, if they cabdriver make it. There’s no law requiring these private schools must exist.
You want a want. No one is required to help.
Lastly,
=== Teaching religion is not putting church and state in a mix. That has been upheld time and again. This is not a court conflict, this is a legislative challenge.===
The legislature is making a choice not to do it. That’s how winners make policy. The idea of the mix, it’s not viable apparently to 71/36