children more effectively and cheaply no more money can be spent on education. No one denies that we need more research in education. No one can deny that children should be educated in the most effective and efficient way possible, but until we find more efficient and effective ways to do the job we have the moral responsibility to give our schools the money necessary to educate children on the basis of what we now know. We now turn to the question of where the money is to come from and how it is to be translated into educational services and how those services are to be distributed. In talking about improving the financing of education, one must make the basic assumption that a much greater percentage of our gross national income must be devoted to this purpose. As a matter of fact, the United States ranks very low among the developed nations of the world in the percentage of national income given to education. In 1970 the United States spent slightly under 6% of aggregate income for elementary and secondary school education. England spent 8% and the percentage of income spent by other countries varied upward. It would not be at all unreasonable for the United States to spend 10% of its gross national income for the education of the young. This would increase the total amount spent for elementary and secondary school education to 10% of $795 billion, or $79.5 billion, using 1970 figures. In that year the United States actually spent $45.4 billion for elementary and secondary education, both public and private, with the Federal government contributing approximately 8% of that total: about $4 billion. In other words, in order to make even this modest additional commitment, $35 billion per year more would have to be produced from somewhere. The question is: where? In addition to raising enough money to provide intensive education for the children who need it most, a fair and equitable educational support program must require an equitable contribution from all taxpayers. Our basic ideas were contained in the National Excellence in Education Act introduced in the Senate two years ago, sponsored by many members of this committee. Our plan will be amended in the light of the Serrano decision which outlaws locally levied property taxes for education, and we will ask the sponsors to reintroduce it in the next session of Congress. The plan, as amended, would have the following basic elements: 1. The average per-pupil cost of education, utilizing proper staffing ratios, would be pegged at $1,600 a year. 2. This amount would be achieved by a combination of Federal aid and state tax effort, since the locally levied property tax is no longer a reliable source of income. 3. Each state would establish a state educational fund. We make the following suggestions for raising the state share of this fund: (a) Each state would levy a 20-mill property tax based on state property assessing procedures audited by an agency to be set up within the U.S. Treasury Department. (b) States would be permitted to levy an education surtax on the Federal income tax. The surtax would be paid to the Treasury Department by the taxpayer along with his U.S. income tax bill. The Treasury Department would then refund such revenue to the state educational fund. (c) Each state would be required to raise from sources other than the 20-mill property tax a minimum additional amount which would vary with the state's taxable wealth and income. 4. Federal aid would be distributed to the states so as to make up the difference between the amounts raised by state effort and $1,600 per child. 5. States would be required to present to the United States Office of Education a plan for distribution of educational funds to local districts in accordance with the educational need of the district. Educational need would be determined by means of a sociological index which would take into account such factors as per capita income, student mobility, student involvement in court proceedings, and other factors. 6. Local districts would be required to certify acceptable plans to their state agencies, with copies to the United States Office of Education, describing programs for intensive education for hard-to-educate children. 7. Local districts would be required to comply with Federal laws and court decisions relating to integration and civil rights. In summary, we have tried to show here (1) that the quality of education is directly related to the funds devoted to education; (2) differences in the educability of children must be taken into account in any system of education, so that those with the greatest need receive the most intensive service; (3) equalization of expenditures between states should be accomplished through a combination of required state-wide tax effort and Federal aid; and (4) funds must be distributed within states in accordance with educational need. Mr. MEGEL. At every level (local, State, and national) the question of financing of educational systems poses problems. The Serrano decision in California, erasing local property taxes for financing local educational systems, has been followed by similar decisions in other areas. It must be remembered, however, that the Serrano decision did not outlaw property taxes. The decision stated that local property taxes could not provide equalized educational opportunity. States, therefore, in addition to existing equitable tax programs, also must set up systems of statewide property taxation and distribute the funds for education on an equalized basis so that every child will have a fair and equal chance to receive quality education. At the national level, there have been administration proposals for revenue sharing and the value added tax to support education. The AFT cannot support revenue sharing unless massive new funds are provided. The following resolution on the value added tax passed by the AFT executive council on February 5, 1972, states our position clearly: The American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO, strongly opposes the Nixon administration's proposed value added tax. We resent the attempt to tie education to a regressive, unfair method of taxation. which would further advance the Nixon "soak the poor" philosophy. The value added tax is not a new way of taxing-it is merely a different method of collecting a sales tax. The burden of a value added tax falls entirely on the consumer, with all the regressive attributes of a sales tax. Moreover, the value added tax would destroy the thin margin of equity that remains in the Federal tax structure. As proposed, this tax would single out education for special treatment. Revenue for education should be raised in the same manner that funds are raised for other social programs through the existing progressive Federal tax structure. It is inappropriate to hide an unfair tax under the cloak of desperately needed educational funds. The AFT will oppose any value added tax proposed in Congress and will participate in the campaigns mounted against the value added tax by the AFL-CIO and other segments of the labor movement. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, without massive Federal input, American education in the great majority of our school districts faces chaos and bankruptcy. We firmly believe that the Congress must immediately face up to the dire needs of the Nation's schools. The proliferation of Federal educational funding programs can be merged into H.R. 981, if fully funded. We urge serious consideration for this provision. We extend our thanks to the chairman and the committee for the opportunity to present our points of view. Mr. Chairman, I have some additional material on the New York City's schools and the Chicago and Cleveland schools that I would like be made a part of the record. Mr. PUCINSKI. Without objection, so ordered. (The material referred to follows:) WHAT NEW YORK CITY'S SCHOOLS NEED (By C. H. Tompkins, Research Director, United Federation of Teachers) All schools should have services that are adequate for the educational needs of the children assigned to them. Programs and standards which have been established for the More Effective Schools-cited the U.S. Office of Education series, "It Works"-should be available to every child in the elementary schools. This goal can only be accomplished by cutting existing pupil-teacher ratios in half. On the junior high school level, the "Restructured Junior High School Program" developed by the United Federation of Teachers should be implemented in every borough. This program provides for middle schools of not more than 800 pupils. Small classes, a wide selection of courses and opportunities for individual study or research would be made available to each pupil. The result would be an effective learning environment. The experimental program at the John Dewey High School offers an opportunity for an excellent high school experience to every student, and the program should be expanded. Students accept the intellectual challenge of the rich variety of available courses and opportunities for independent study, and teacher and pupil esprit d'corps at the school is high. Comprehensive occupational training programs should be provided to give every student a saleable skill. Eighty percent of the jobs for the foreseeable future do not require a college degree, yet fewer than twenty percent of New York City's high school students now receive the occupational training that would qualify them for jobs upon graduation. A paraprofessional should be assigned to every class on every grade level from pre-kindergarten through the 12th grade. This program has made a unique contribution to the education of the children, and, at the same time, has provided an opportunity for thousands of individuals to secure a college education. Fifty-two hundred paraprofessionals are enrolled in higher education in New York City for the 1972 spring term. An educationally sound staffing ratio should be established for counselors and attendance teachers to guarantee essential guidance services for all the children. There should be a substantial increase in the number of school secretaries to relieve the severely overburdened personnel who are performing vital services for school pupils and staff members. The Bilingual Teacher in School and Community Relations program should be implemented on all levels of the school system. The number of non-English speaking pupils attending City schools requires at least one teacher in every school with a substantial enrollment of non-English speaking children to serve as a liaison between parents and school. The Bureau of Child Guidance, despite great need on the part of socially and emotionally handicapped children, lacks an adequate staff of workers to do the job that needs to be done. The present staff totals less than one-fifth of the number of positions necessary to do effective work for children requiring psychological and social work services according to recognized professional standards. Many handicapped children are on waiting lists unable to enroll in the public schools because of a lack of sufficient programs to meet their needs. Additional funds should be provided for physically and mentally handicapped children. An internship, or on-the-job training program required of all new teachers for a period of approximately three years is essential to guarantee a high degree of professional competency. The internship program would serve as the teacher's probationary period. Teacher competence would be judged by scrutiny of the actual teaching performance during the internship period. In addition, retraining facilities under teacher control should be made available to all teachers in the school system. The following tabulation shows that a major step toward achievement of the standards outlined above would require an increase of $850 million in school operating revenue. To accommodate the increased staff and to retire obsolete facilities now used by 150,000 pupils in New York City would require the construction of 19,000 additional classrooms costing approximately $3.8 billion. Paraprofessionals (1 for every class, prekindergarten through grade 12). 56,800 396, 000, 000 20,000,000 Additional allowance for instructional materials and equipment, $20 per pupil. 20,000,000 40,000,000 Total. 850, 000, 000 Note: Capital outlay.-To accommodate the increased staff and retire obsolete facilities would require 19,000 additional classrooms costing approximately $3.8 billion. Mr. CARL J. MEGEL, CHICAGO TEACHERS UNION, February 17, 1972. Legislative Director, American Federation of Teachers, MY DEAR MR. MEGEL: In 1972 Chicago public schools received approximately $39.4 million under the seven titles of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Approximately $36.4 million was allocated under Title I. This allocation allowed the Chicago schools to provide special assistance through Title I funds to 95 of the 249 schools which qualified for assistance. Of the 208,036 children in Chicago who were identified through the Aid to Dependent Children and census records as eligible to receive Title I services, only 43,824 could be served because of the limitation on funds available under Title I. Further the means used to identify eligible schools and children-namely the Aid to Dependent Children and census records-fail to identify children whose needs are as great and whose poverty level may be as severe. They do not show up in the ADC rolls and census records for several reason: they are recent immigrants to the city and are often unaware of public assistance available to them or are unsophisticated in dealing with the procedures needed to obtain it. Many have a cultural tradition against public assistance. The largest of these groups of children whose needs go unrecognized by Title I eligibility guidelines are children whose first language is not English, American Indians, and Appalachians. There needs to be some special provision in the eligibility guidelines under Title I for these children whose critical education needs must not be ignored. It was hoped that the introduction of Title VII to ESEA would provide for the needs of children who do not speak English well enough to succeed in school It has not. Chicago schools enroll 31,988 children who speak primarily Spanish. Another 5,574 elementary children have a foreign language background other than Spanish. In 1972 Chicago was allocated only $220,000 under Title VII to serve these children's needs. Fraternally, JOHN E. DESMOND, President. EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF CLEVELAND, OHIO (By James E. O'Meara, President, Cleveland Teachers Union) The Cleveland schools are in dire financial straits. The January 1971 tax duplicate has been reduced by 100 million dollars. The loss of industry to Cleveland has also had its effect on our financial situation. With the large number of students on the poverty level in Cleveland's inner city, the cost of education has increased considerably. In twenty-five Cleveland elementary schools, out of a total of 132, more than 50% of the students are from welfare families. The federal government owes the Cleveland Board of Education $750,000 for the food services that were rendered in the poverty program. As a result, Cleveland had to borrow even more money to meet its expenses this year. |