On Tuesday, September 9, the major candidates in the North Carolina governor’s race met for a debate on WRAL. Around one-fifth of this debate focused on education. Both candidates avoided specific details of their own ideas for public education, but they spent plenty of time attacking each other, primarily on vouchers. The Democratic candidate, Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue, botched the explanation of her opposition to vouchers and left herself open to criticism on the issue with a misleading advertisement. The Republican candidate, Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory, stated that striving for a higher education is "elitist", and outline certain categories of students that should be eligible for vouchers as a relief from public schools. Let’s look at the facts.
[My transcription from WRAL. Emphasis and errors are mine.]
David Crabtree: Education, always been a big issue. With the last governors I can remember, particularly Mike Easley, Jim Hunt, both held education banners saying, "We want to be the education governor." We’ve talked to both of you about this before. But, if you can quickly, give me your education priorities. Top two.
Pat McCrory: Well the first is, we’ve got to get back to basics, and teach the basics, especially first, second, third grade. And as Judge Manning has ruled, where we took $750 million or so out of the school system in budgets, and has ruled that the education system is owed that $750 million. We need to throw the calculators out of first and second grade, where we do still have them in some of our classrooms, cause kids aren’t learning basic math, because – I’m talking their multiplication tables and – and we have a thirty percent dropout rate. And the second thing is, I want to reintroduce and put a special emphasis on vocational training. I think there is an elitism right now toward directing all the kids to four-year college degrees. And I think that’s wrong. And, plus our labor force needs mechanists and technicians that can do jobs that are needed in North Carolina, and frankly pay more than my liberal arts degree paid in 1978 out of Catawba College.
Mayor McCrory refers to the recent decision from Judge Howard Manning in a decade-old case in which local school districts claimed they were short changed in payments from fines and fees collected by the state. Manning determined that the state owed $747.8 million to school districts; that it could be paid to them over time; and that it must go solely toward technology needs. While this new mandated funding is a crisis, McCrory drops it into his answer without any explanation of how to respond to it. McCrory also mentions a return to "basics" without really defining what they are, or explaining how he feels they are connected to a 30% dropout rate. And he concludes with emphasizing vocational training.
It is offensive that McCrory views shooting for the moon as "elitism". It is a word snatched from its (often inappropriate) use in the national political campaign and applied haphazardly to a statewide race. It is never elitist to ask students to reach for their highest levels of achievement. What is the old saw? "Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you will land among the stars." All students should be encouraged to strive for any goals they set for themselves. And our teachers and counselors should always encourage students to test their limits. The primary alternative is the situation that McCrory describes. Not all students are being directed to four-year colleges. But without an emphasis on shooting for the moon, some educators might limit the dreams of students who haven’t had the background, the resources, or the family history to suggest that they can achieve more that what is expected of them. To assume that some students aren’t worthy of striving for the highest levels of education, or that some students are destined for only certain lines of work – well, that is elitism.
Crabtree: He talked about the dropout rate. Is that a priority? Everybody says it’s a priority, but, boy, it is a tough one to tackle.
Bev Perdue: Sure, it’s a priority. The dropout rate has to be a priority. But you start with having good public schools all over the state, where you pay teachers and hold them accountable, where you have kids who move through the system on grade level. You don’t do it with vouchers the way the mayor of Charlotte proposes. You don’t tear down and take out nearly a billion dollars from the public school system to support private tuition credits for some other folks. I believe in the public schools. That’s how you start every kid from preschool on to the whole public school system needs that good education, David. And then you’ve got to have a pathway for education, whether it’s vocational, community college or the university. That’s what my College Promise is about. Folks feel like that is a real challenge for us, and the mayor talks about technology and vocational. You know, that hearkens back to the old low expectations and low status quo of the mid part of the twentieth century –
Crabtree: Well, my plumber that I pay fifty or sixty dollars an hour to might disagree with that.
Perdue: Sure, you want that, David, but you don’t want a community colleges that focuses – neither of my parents had a high school diploma. I’ve heard the mayor say he doesn’t think the community college should focus on GEDs and getting kids who have dropped out those kind of high school start ups. GEDs are important. The mayor says that this higher education, this community college track, where you look to get a degree and go on isn’t important. There are nursing assistants and teacher assistants all over the state who work full time and go to the community college at night to make this happen. So there’s three pieces of this community college system that are all worthy and noble – the GED, the helping folks who drop out and don’t do well; the vocational technical, which is wonderful, and I’d rather have a plumber when my toilet breaks than a good lawyer, I’d do that in a heartbeat; and then the college prep. You gotta do it all. That’s why the system’s one of the best in the country.
I will return later to Lt. Gov. Perdue’s claim about taking a billion dollars out of the school system. While Perdue does strike back about McCrory’s statements on vocational education, she does not say enough about teacher pay or accountability. If enough schools are failing our students to the point that a major party is suggesting vouchers for private schooling, then the issues of accountability are not being addressed and need more public attention. Perdue never states that vocational and technical skills are not important, nor does she deny that they can be lucrative professions. Instead, she suggests a tiered educational system that can help students from any background go as far as their abilities and desires will allow.
And for the record, according to the most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (May 2007), the mean hourly wage for plumbers, pipefitters and steamfitters in North Carolina was $17.21 ($19.73 for the Raleigh-Cary metropolitan area). Only 10% of those workers in North Carolina made more than $23.57 an hour ($27.70 for Raleigh-Cary).
Pam Saulsby: I have to get you to speak to vouchers, because you’ve been hammered, you’ve been hammered a little bit on that.
McCrory: Well, I have been hammered on it by misleading and negative ads by Ms. Perdue on – in fact the end of the ad says, "Pat McCrory – a real danger to the middle class." Not just a danger, I’m a real danger –
Saulsby: For supporting vouchers.
McCrory: For supporting vouchers. I do support selective use of scholarships for kids in which the public school system is not meeting their needs. We have disabled kids, we have disadvantaged kids which ought to be given a choice. In fact, I’m the only one among the – I’m sorry – Beverly Perdue is the only one among the four of us who has voted for vouchers. And yet the ads are against me. She supported vouchers in every budget she’s voted on, vouchers for college students who get $1800 a year - $1800 dollar a year check – which I think is a good idea, because they don’t go to public universities, they go to private schools. So she supports giving them choice, not even in a selective way. I think there are selective use of vouchers. I don’t agree and I’ve never stated that we ought to offer vouchers to everyone because the state can’t afford it.
Saulsby: Well, can you make a distinction between the vouchers that –
Perdue: Pam, the distinction is clear –
Saulsby: – the mayor’s getting hammered on, and the private school vouchers that you support?
Perdue: The voucher that the mayor is talking about isn’t a voucher.
Saulsby: What about the ones that you support?
McCrory: What is it? What do you call it?
In this exchange, the lieutenant governor is correct. The $1800 in financial assistance that the mayor refers to is not a voucher, it is a grant, and it is currently $1950. Since 1975, the North Carolina Legislative Tuition Grant Program [.pdf] has provided financial assistance to students attending private college and universities. The grant is not based on need, but on state residency. While this grant program does constitute state aid to private educational institutions, the level of education involved is not mandated by the state constitution. Citizens have the choice of whether to pursue higher education, and if so, whether to attend a public or private institution. The voucher is solely intended to defray the costs of higher education, just like other scholarships and grants. It is not intended to rectify a failure of the state to provide adequate public college or university education.
Perdue: If you talk about college scholarships for kids, if you talk about day care or Smart Start enrollment, those are two different things. The constitution of this state, our most sacred state document, has one requirement for the governor of North Carolina, and it’s been there since day one. This governor is constitutionally mandated to provide free and public educations to every child in North Carolina – free and public. The vouchers that I oppose so much is just – it’s just hard for families from hard-working, low-wage families in New Bern or in Wake County or whatever county you pick out. You find me a school where you can take a voucher and do it all. Many kids can, many kids are from families that can afford it. But most kids from hard-working, low-wage families don’t have the capacity to pay the differential between the voucher and what the cost of the tuition in the private school is. And most kids from those families have mama and daddy who work, or grandmama, and they – those schools frequently don’t have transportation. The governor of this state is constitutionally ordered –
Saulsby: Okay, you’ve said that –
Perdue: – to do free public schools.
Article IX of the North Carolina constitution:
Sec. 2. Uniform system of schools.
(1) General and uniform system: term. The General Assembly shall provide by taxation and otherwise for a general and uniform system of free public schools, which shall be maintained at least nine months in every year, and wherein equal opportunities shall be provided for all students.
Perdue starts off down a good path in this response by mentioning the requirements of the state constitution. But then she loses her place in a ramble about the difference between the voucher and the true cost of private education. She needs to stick with the words of the constitution. General education in North Carolina must be uniform, free, and public. Equal opportunities must be provided to all students.
McCrory suggests that only certain categories of students would be eligible for vouchers under the program he supports. He begins by mentioning "disabled" and "disadvantaged" students, and he has also suggested that students in low performing schools (according to an undefined criteria) should be eligible for vouchers as a safety mechanism to escape a failing school. While his support of vouchers is clear, the details are missing; there is no mention of vouchers on his elementary campaign website. This voucher proposal runs afoul of the state constitution on at least two fronts.
First, general education in North Carolina must be provided equally to all students. If some students are receiving the option to leave the public school system at the state expense while other students are not, this is an inequitable system. And if some students are being poorly educated in failing schools, the state cannot abdicate its constitutional responsibility to its citizens by subcontracting the duties of education to private schools. Instead, the state has the responsibility to make all schools meet the same minimum standards. (These standards were clarified in the case Leandro v. State of North Carolina [346 NC 336].)
Further, the General Assembly is mandated to create a system of taxation and other income sources to provide funds for the "system of free public schools." Funds collected for education in the current manner could not be applied to private school tuition. Students are not being educated in a public manner if funds collected by the state are being used for private education vouchers. And if families are given the false choice between a failing school and a private one, where the voucher does not cover the cost of tuition, the education is not free.
Finally, there is an economy of scale involved with education funding that has not been addressed. If a student takes a state voucher to fund her private education, she is actually taking more funds than just those provided for her instructional needs. While per-pupil spending does account for the teacher salaries, supplies, and other items that are directly involved in the instruction of that student, they also contain educational overhead – things like utilities, capital spending, college and career prep programs, and other items generally shared by all students in a school. When students leave on vouchers, they reduce the quality of these shared resources. And when students leave troubled schools, the lost funding hurts even more.
McCrory: Can I respond to this please?
Saulsby: Right, and then we have to move on.
Crabtree: I would like some clarification, though, and we’re going to talk about the ads a little later, but it does say the mayor’s plan would cost this state $900 million.
Perdue: That’s right.
Crabtree: Where – where does that – do the math for me of how that happens.
Perdue: The math for you is what the average cost per student in the public school system is, if you write a voucher for that amount to the kids who would go to private school, that’s where the math comes from - $900 million.
Crabtree: How do we know how many kids would be involved to come up with that?
Perdue: The numbers are there on private school enrollments and private school projections, and how other states or other facilit – other communities have done vouchers. The numbers are clear, David, that’s what the estimate is. We can get all of you all the fact sheets after the debate.
Crabtree: But doesn’t that presume that every child would then take advantage of that?
Perdue: I think the figure is $900 million if every child did, it has to presume that, because that leaves the public schools stranded not knowing what the budget’s going to be when school starts. The school enrollment is based on kids who have, who are seated in the classroom. And you’ve seen what happens in Wake County. They’ve had to plan all summer trying to figure out how they’re going to pay for and hire the teachers for the enrollment overgrowth they have. You gotta have some way to start a school year, and that’s the bal – that’s the estimate that the experts have given us on what the mayor’s voucher program would cost.
McCrory: This is –
Perdue: You add lottery to that – he wants to do away with lottery - it’s $1.2 billion.
Saulsby: And we’re gonna –
McCrory: She just – she’s just throwing things out there that aren’t true. I, first of all, haven’t proposed a plan for vouchers for every in the high schools, or elementaries or K-12. You have seen that nowhere. Your commercial is misleading and wrong and you ought to pull it.
Perdue: Pat, my commercial, my commercial –
McCrory: Because – let me have a turn – let me have a chance to talk now.
Perdue: – clearly says that you were for vouchers.
Here is one of Perdue’s ads that is in question:
Unfortunately, I have to take Perdue to task for this ad and its claims. The North Carolina Democratic Party created a blog to attack McCrory on issues, and they provide an explanation of Perdue’s numbers.
There are more than 169,222 students in private schooling in NC. It would cost $892 million to provide a voucher of $5,273.88 (North Carolina's current per pupil spending) for all children currently attending private school. Even a partial voucher would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
The $892 million lost on vouchers, combined with a $350 million cut from repealing the lottery could leave the North Carolina education budget with a $1.2 billion hole.
First, McCrory has stated that he would like to see the lottery ended. The lottery transferred $313 million to education in the 2007 fiscal year, including $32 million in college scholarships. While it is still too early to tell, there is no evidence yet that the General Assembly has reduced their appropriations by the same amount and spent that money elsewhere. Instead, it is revenue that did not even exist before 2005. If the $313 million is so vital to public education that we cannot live without it, then the General Assembly is still not funding public education at an appropriate level, even with the lottery funds.
Second, the $892 million figure is based on giving a voucher to all students currently enrolled in private school. This dollar figure has no basis in reality, and cannot have been provided by "experts." Current private school students would not seem to be eligible under McCrory’s proposal, which targets disadvantaged students and students in failing schools. I would believe that most families in private education can afford the choice they have made, or they would not have made it. Would the families of Salem Academy students really be getting these vouchers?
There are facts that should be used to attack the voucher proposal that are better than these fake numbers, including some of the ones stated above. A voucher program would cost money, but there is no credible estimate of how much it would cost, or how many students would use it, or what impact it would have on remaining public school students. Perdue says "the numbers are there." But her numbers don’t add up, and it is a shame to waste valuable ad dollars on an ineffective attack ad.
McCrory: I am for the concept of vouchers. I have never said I’m going to offer a voucher to every student in North Carolina – it goes K through one 12 schools – and you cannot find that. She made an assumption. And she is for vouchers. This is the elitism that’s taken over our government in North Carolina. This elitism where she earlier said, well, I want students to think higher than getting a technical education or a vocational education, when I agree. I don’t look down at plumbers. I don’t look down at mechanics or electricians or people put down my wood floors. These people, frankly, make more money than I do and they deserve it because they have a greater talent than I do. Because someone doesn’t go to a four-year college, we ought to respect them for learning a skill and a trade. And that ad that she’s talking about vouchers, where she’s scaring people with a number that’s assuming every child goes to a private school, is misleading, it’s deceptive, and it’s the type of culture that I’m trying to change in state government.
Again, McCrory trots out the "elitism" line and tries to use it as an attack on Perdue. It seems that ever since Karl Rove charged Barack Obama with being elite, this word has replaced "liberal" as the new ad hominem attack on Democrats. But it is not elitist to "think higher than getting a technical education or a vocational education". Perdue never said that she looked down to blue-collar workers either. Both candidates agree that vocational and technical trades are valuable work, and important to our economy and society. But if a student wishes to strive for more, he or she should be encouraged to do so.
And again, for the record, McCrory's annual salary is $ 39,900. According to the most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, McCrory earns more than the median annual salary for mechanics ($33,760), carpenters ($30,510), or electricians ($35,060) in the Charlotte metropolitan area.
McCrory's voucher arguments have some glaring weaknesses. If Perdue wants to regain the lead in this race, she needs to challenge McCrory with real numbers and true facts. As long as it appears she is trying to scare the voters with fabricated numbers, McCrory has an excuse to avoid direct discussion of the issue. Instead of a policy debate, her public advertising could be attacked as both negative and misleading.
[Posted at BlueNC.]