Abandoning Public Education is Not the Answer

Most of us would agree that every child in Alabama deserves a quality education. That is why we have a public education system. Most families cannot afford a private school, so without public schools their children would not have a chance to get an education.
It is also true that some of our public schools are struggling to keep up with academic standards. And how we help the students in these schools has been at the center of the biggest debate in Montgomery.
Last year, the Republican legislators in Montgomery forced through the controversial Accountability Act, which provides tax credits for families that transfer their children out of “failing schools” and into private schools.
The Accountability Act also provides tax credits to individuals and corporations that make donations to “scholarship granting organizations” that are meant to give scholarships to kids in failing schools who cannot afford the costs of a private school even with the tax credits, though these organizations can award up to 20 percent of their scholarships to children who are already enrolled in private schools.
To pay for these tax credits, Republican leaders cut $40 million out of the state’s education budget. And more than half of that is going to those who donated to a scholarship granting organization rather than a family trying to transfer their child to a private school.
So more than $20 million of our tax dollars is going to people and businesses that made donations to these organizations rather than to our children’s education where the money was meant to go.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not at all opposed to private schools. But I think private schools should be privately funded. Our tax dollars should go to our children’s education, and not to those people who are trying to make a profit off of private education on the taxpayers’ dime.
And after all that, only 52 kids in the entire state transferred to a private school last year, while about 720 transferred to another public school. That is less than half as many who transferred the year before the Accountability Act was passed.
But it’s not just that the Accountability Act has failed in practice. It is also a failed concept.
The Accountability Act, and the Republican legislators who wrote it and voted it into law, is rooted in the belief that the only way to fix a failing school is to give up and abandon it.
Despite what some politicians might say, kids leaving schools is not going to help those schools perform better academically. And unless every kid in a “failing school” is able to transfer to a private school or a non-failing public school, then there will be thousands of kids still “trapped” in these “failing schools.” So are state leaders not interested in helping these kids get a quality education?
The reality is that you cannot fix something by abandoning it. That would be like a business firing half its employees and expecting the company to become more productive.
If our goal really is to help kids in struggling schools, then we cannot hope to do that by abandoning them and their teachers. We have to look at what the problems are and come up with real solutions.
We need to lower classroom sizes so that teachers can spend more one-on-one time with their students and so teachers can have an easier time controlling the classroom. We need to expand programs that we know work, like the pre-k program, the Alabama Reading Initiative and the Alabama Math, Science and Technology Initiative.
And we need to treat our educators like professionals instead of treating them like the enemy. The Accountability Act was passed without input from a single educator or school administrator. Even the governor’s own superintendent of education was left in the dark.
You can’t cure an illness without seeing a doctor, and you can’t improve our schools without talking to a teacher or principal.
But above all, we cannot hope to help kids in struggling schools by abandoning them.
Rep. Craig Ford is a Democrat from Gadsden and the Minority Leader in the Alabama House of Representatives.

In a letter written in 1789, Benjamin Franklin observed, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”  While the former is certain 100 percent of the time, the latter is not necessarily so.
This is borne out in a recent study published by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). CBO is a nonpartisan federal agency established to provide independent analyses of budgetary and economic issues.
The December 2013 report, based on 2010 data from the IRS and the Census Bureau, is revealing.  It found that the top 40 percent of American households paid 106.2 percent of the nation’s net federal income taxes but accounted for only 72.3 percent of total income. The bottom 40 percent had 14.7 percent of income but paid negative net income taxes, accounting for -9.1 percent of taxes.
This needs further explanation. CBO calculated before-tax income to include “market income” households earned as well as what they received from government, called “government transfers.”  Market income consists of wages and salaries, business income, capital gains, dividends, retirement income for past service, and other sources.
Government transfers are cash payments and in-kind benefits. They include unemployment insurance, Social Security and Medicare, and means-tested programs such as Medicaid and food stamps.
Using this methodology, CBO concluded the top 40 percent had an average income of $95,500 and greater. The bottom 40 percent had $44,200 and less.
Transfers cause the income in all groups to increase. But the increase, both in dollars and percentage of income, is greatest for those with lower income.
To determine net income taxes paid, CBO analysts subtracted “refundable tax credits” from taxes paid. And when refundable tax credits – such as the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit – exceeded tax liabilities, households had negative income taxes. That is, they received more from the government than they paid in taxes.
Granted, the United States has a progressive system of taxation. But should the top 40 percent be expected to pay all the income taxes?  The answer depends primarily on one’s philosophy on the use of taxation to effect redistribution of income.
The CBO report, “The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2010,” can be accessed at www.cbo.gov.

Wayne Curtis, Ph.D., is a former superintendent of Alabama banks and Troy University business school dean. He is retired from the board of directors of First United Security Bank.  Email him at wccurtis3@gmail.com.

By Steve Flowers

The 2014 legislative session began this week. Speculation is that it will be short and may not last the full four months allotted.

The super majority Republican legislature will put their final touch on their four-year march to the right. They have made an indelible conservative mark on state government in both fiscal and social measures.

The GOP House will emphasize financial incentives for job expansion. They are calling their agenda “Common Sense Conservative.” It will include a bill to raise the threshold where small businesses have to pay a monthly estimated income tax from $1,000 to $2,500. They will also make filing state business taxes easier by creating an online tax filing system for all taxes.

Other bills in their conservative agenda will include a tax credit to encourage adoptions. They will address the issue of legislators exiting their terms early to lobby. They will tighten the current law that prohibits legislators from lobbying for two years after they leave office.

Speaking of those legislators who left early, their replacements are ready to go after winning special elections last year. Margie Wilcox won the seat of Jim Barton in Mobile. Dimitri Polizos will replace Jay Love in Montgomery. The Elmore County seat held by Barry Mask will be filled in a special election Republican runoff on January 28th.

Several lawmakers have announced they will not seek reelection this year. These open seats will create lively contests. Veteran lawmaker Richard Laird of Roanoke has served in the House since 1978. Laird was always an archconservative although he ran as a Democrat.

Arthur Payne of Trussville will end his 36-year tenure in the House. Arthur was a very conservative legislator like Laird.

Another powerful and respected House member, Mary Sue McClurkin, will not run for reelection. Mary Sue served successfully for 16 years. Another conservative will replace her. In fact, another conservative female will likely take McClurkin’s North Shelby seat.

DuWayne Bridges will step down from his Chambers County seat. Like Laird, Payne and McClurkin, DuWayne had a very conservative voting record.

Two freshman Republicans have chosen to serve only one term. State Senator Bryan Taylor of Prattville and Wes Long of Guntersville will not run for a second term.

Steve Clouse of Ozark will assume chairmanship of the House General Fund Budget Committee. Rep. Lesley Vance of Phenix City becomes chair of the House Financial Services Committee for the second time.

The AEA fired their first salvo of the campaign year. They gave $150,000 to Gareth Moore to challenge Senator Jimmy Holley. It will be wasted PAC money. They will not defeat the popular and effective veteran South Alabama State Senator.

Gov. Bentley has said that funding for prekindergarten programs and pay raises for teachers will be among his highest priorities during the legislative session.

Speaking of Gov. Bentley, he seems determined to get to the bottom of the Alabama State University issue. He spearheaded and called for a complete audit of the university over a year ago. His report has come back and he is on the warpath. He recently released a report on a forensic audit of finances on Alabama State University, which alleges that family and friends of at least three current or former university board members benefitted financially from their ties to the university.

This 36-page audit was done by Forensic Strategic Solutions of Birmingham. This audit revealed significant discrepancies. Indeed, the audit in its conclusion calls for a further investigation to allow a jury or trier of fact to investigate multiple acts of fraud, waste and abuse that may have occurred and may be occurring currently at ASU. The audit lists numerous conflicts of interest, financial waste, inappropriate relationships, payments to family and friends of university board members, intentional obscuring of inappropriate payments circumventing policies and procedures and ASU’s practice of charging administration fees to fund a reserve account for the Center for Leadership and Public Policy. However, Gov. Bentley’s ire seems focused on allegations of fiscal mismanagement of a Medicaid contract that ended up costing the university approximately $1 million. This saga is just beginning. You have not heard the end of this story.

See you next week.

Steve Flowers is Alabama’s leading political columnist. His column appears weekly in more than 70 Alabama newspapers. Steve served 16 years in the state legislature. He may be reached at www.steveflowers.us.

(Opinion by Jackie Robinson)

The Birmingham Water Works has been the focus of quite a bit of media attention
lately. It seems like there is a story in the news at least once or twice a week. But with all
that press, the public still hasn’t been told “the rest of the story.”
For example, did you know:

•     The Birmingham Water Works’ water quality is one of the top 5 in the nation and not
only meets federal drinking water standards, but exceeds them.
•     As water rates have increased nationwide because of increased federal regulation and
the need to replace and upgrade aging infrastructure, over the past couple of years the
Birmingham Water Works rate has only increased by 4.5% compared to the nation’s
average increase of 6%.
•     In 2011, Moody Investor Service upgraded the Birmingham Water Works’ bond rating
to Aa2, and Standard and Poor’s upgraded it to AA. Very few water utilities receive this
kind of investor confidence. And the bond rating increases occurred at the same time
our nation’s bond rating went down and Jefferson County declared bankruptcy. More
importantly, these higher bond ratings help save money, which translates into lower
rates for customers.
•    The Birmingham Water Works repeatedly receives national acclaim for the way it
operates and is held up as an example of how a water utility should be run. Moody’s
praised the Birmingham Water Works for its “prudent fiscal management and healthy
financial position,” and Standard and Poor’s said it had a “strong financial profile” and
“competitive water rates.”
•    In July 2012, the Birmingham Water Works opened a Health and Wellness Center to
provide free health care services and free generic drugs for its employees and their
families. The Health Center improves employee health and at the same time is projected
to decrease the Birmingham Water Works’ health care costs by 12% over 5 years.
•    The Birmingham Water Works sponsors a Young Water Ambassadors program. This
six-week program allows 100 area high school juniors and seniors to spend their
summer working and learning about the Birmingham Water Works and its operations,
impressing upon the students the importance of conserving and protecting water.

So the next time you turn on your faucet, do so knowing that the rest of the story is that
the Birmingham Water Works is not trying to get from mediocre to good, we’re trying to
get from good to great.

Jackie Robinson is Chairman, Birmingham Water Works Board

to Representative Paul DeMarco

I have done the research you challenged me to do on this subject and though I find you are correct on the aspect of the City not owning anything but the right to appoint the BWWB members, historically, I find this has always been the arrangement – before, during, and after, the City of Birmingham held the assets.  As well, I have found additional information I do believe you should be considering when contemplating refiling a legislative action to reconstitute the Birmingham Water Works Board, attached below.
I have reviewed the information provided to me by the BWWB on their operations, budget, capital, and conduct/transparency in business and have found them to be held to and delivering at the highest of standards. (state of waterworks pdf below)
It strikes me that, as there has been no outcry of poor quality, excessively high rates, or failure to maintain our water system to the highest of integrity, why one would entertain to fix what apparently is working just fine. As well, at this time in history, the City of Birmingham has appointed the most dynamic and responsive of boards that we have seen in a long time.
I understand the issues of representation that you intend to resolve, especially in an election year. However, with 95 percent of customers and revenue being generated within the borders of Jefferson County, I can see no reason to add or readjust the board to include a 5 percent interest constituency. It would seem apparent, once engaging the BWWB in conversation and doing a bit of research, that the outlying counties who receive services are City of Birmingham residents in Shelby County, outlying areas that voluntarily made the decision to align with BWWB, or – as in the case of Walker and Blount counties – had no other choice but to request to be added into the system.  I am not hearing from anyone in those sectors asking to have representation on the board. Neither do I find any fact based reasons to accuse the BWWB of failing to do their job – and according to the data given in their power point (state of the waterworks pdf) they are doing it well. I only wish our city, county, and state were run as fiscally sound.
I am attaching the data you challenged me to find as far as the legal relationship between the City and the BWWB (1st 3 pdf). I am also attaching the response of the BWWB to your past legislative proposal (bwwbresponseon pdf) to review. I find the facts to be clear and the need to continue allowing the BWWB to do what they are doing, in the manner in which they are doing it, to the best of their ability is imperative to the growth of our region, the stability of our system, and the integrity of our water assets.
I do support language that would secure, at the state level, the appointment of one representative from over the mountain as well as the term limits to two terms period. That would clarify what the City has failed to solidify with those “gentlemen’s agreements” made through the years. However, any other action towards the BWWB at this time would, without further data and justification, prove to be self-serving, irresponsible, and short sighted.
Now, I must also state, the comments made by some of your Democrat delegation were quite offensive. Many in attendance, including City Council and BWWB members, agreed those comments were made only to incite divisive action on both sides of the political coin. It is quite a shame that al.com chose to only report on the ugly and not the facts of the evening.  However, it is imperative that you, the Republican delegation, temper your forward movement in a way that will not divide us further. Please carefully consider the greater good that can be done here, scale back your actions, and engage the BWWB in a discussion for the future.
I do believe that the greater good we should be considering here is that the service and water given to us by the BWWB are top notch – ultimately that the rates are equitable, the business is conducted transparently, and the administration of this asset is responsible, proactive, and fiscally sound – which is most evidenced here by the facts. I hope this information finds your mind open, your heart forgiving to your colleagues, and your focus on ensuring that the BWWB continues on in the same manner in which it is working today – providing us with the highest quality of water and securing that delivery of that water is made in a safe, timely fashion for years and years to come.

Kim Rafferty, City Council, District 2
Birmingham, AL