Page images
PDF
EPUB

In the consideration of educational issues pending in the 84th Congress, it is also important to bear in mind that the Federal Government has no established policy governing what it should or should not do in this field. Precedents for certain forms of activity, such as cooperation with the States in a program of vocational education, have been established by a series of acts which constitute a segment of public policy. A few acts have contained specific statements of policy. A notable example is Public Law 815, 81st Congress, which spells out a policy of Federal assistance for the construction of school buildings in certain types of federally affected localities.

C. REAPPRAISAL OF POLICIES IN AMERICAN EDUCATION

The problem of financing public education is markedly affected by the times. This is a period of popular reappraisal of policies in public education in the United States. The current reappraisal movement is extending into all aspects of public education, with present emphasis upon methods of financing public-school construction.

The reappraisal of education in general has been stimulated by the economic transformation which has occurred as a result of revolutionary developments in science and technology. The reappraisal of education and of our methods of financing it is an integral part of a broad reappraisal of our way of life.

In the past, periods of controversy concerning education have been periods of development of public policies in this field. Roughly between 1890 and 1920 the people agreed upon assigning the public schools new responsibilities and duties. These now embrace the preparation of all the Nation's youth for vocational and cultural pursuits and for good citizenship.

It is hoped that the current period of controversy concerning education in the United States will bring about identification and elimination of inadequacies in our educational system, and its adjustment to the needs of the times.

D. THE BASIS FOR CONGRESSIONAL CONCERN

Because it is the national legislature, a representative body, the Congress is inevitably and deeply involved in the current nationwide controversy over public policies in education. It is necessarily concerned especially with considerations of the role of the Federal Government in education, and with specific proposals for legislative action at the national level of Government.

By its action or inaction on pending issues the Congress will inescapably establish or greatly influence the establishment of some of the major public policies in education for the years ahead. Decision on specific educational issues pending in the 84th Congress will have immeasurably important effects on the future of America.

E. GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT AND EDUCATIONAL EXPENDITURES

On the basis of studies made by the Bureau of the Census and other agencies it is expected that the population of the United States will grow from about 165 million in 1955 to about 190 million in 1965-an increase of about one-sixth of the present total. During this time,

however, it is expected that the school-age population (ages 5 to 17) will increase from about 37 million to over 48 million-an increase of about one-third of the present total.

Many changes in the age composition of the population are anticipated. These will markedly affect the value of national production of goods and services and the need for educational expenditures. A 1953 study by the Econometric Institute, Inc., forecast that by 1963 a larger percentage of the population will be in the young and old-age groups, leaving a lower percentage of the people in the age groups between 18 and 64 years-roughly the working group.

These data appear to indicate that the working population will be bearing a much greater financial burden for educating the Nation's youth in 1965. However, there are other important factors affecting the prospect. It is expected that in 1965 the working day will be shorter, but the productivity of American workers will be much greater, due to advancements in technology and vocational education, improvements in health of the workers, et cetera.

The Economic Report of the President, transmitted to the Congress on January 20, 1955, contains the following statement:

An arithmetical calculation, based on a number of technical assumptions, the most important being that the annual gains in productivity that we have in recent times will occur in the future, shows that our country can within a decade increase its production from a current annual level of about $360 billion to $500 billion or more, with the figures expressed in dollars of the same buying power.2

Taking into account all major contributing factors, the National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools has estimated that by 1965 the percentage of gross national product needed for the support of improved standards of public education will have increased only slightly above what it is now. An estimated increase from about 2.4 percent in 1954 to between 2.6 and 3.6 percent in 1965 is forecast. If such be the case, the cost of supporting public education will still be only a very small percentage of the gross national product in 1965. It appears that barring major disaster the national economy will be able to support great improvements in public education in the years. ahead.3

F. CURRENT FINANCING OF PUBLIC EDUCATION

Revenue for the support of public elementary and secondary education is derived from local, State, and Federal taxes. Most of the money comes from local and State sources. For the school year 1951-52 (the latest year for which the United States Office of Education has published data) about 96.5 percent of the current expenditure came from these sources. By States, the percentage derived from local and State sources ranged from 85.6 in Wyoming to 98.9 in Michigan. In every State the Federal contribution was small in relation to the total expenditure.1

The systems of public school finance vary markedly among the States. Some of the State governments have assumed the major responsibility for financing public education, rather than leaving that responsibility to the local school districts. Delaware provides nearly 90 percent of the school funds from State sources. On the

84th Cong., 1st sess. House Document No. 31, p. 4.

National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools, Financing Public Education in the Years Ahead, New York, the Commission, 1954, pp. 1-5 and technical appendix.

4 U. S. Office of Education, Circular No. 420, December 1954, p. 3.

other hand, Nebraska provides less than 5 percent of the total from State sources of revenue. Generally within the last 30 years the State governments have assumed more and more of the burden of school support.

The local revenue is raised mainly from taxes on real estate. Some counties and municipalities use other sources. These are generally reserved, however, to the State and Federal Governments.

Revenue from the general property tax is generally used by localities to support not only schools but also all other local public services. Total State funds for schools consist principally of appropriations from general funds (about 80.3 percent), earmarked taxes (about 18.2 percent), and permanent school funds derived principally from Federal land grants (about 1.5 percent).

In contrast to locally collected taxes on real property, many of the State taxes, such as those on incomes, gasoline and alcoholic beverages, rather quickly reflect changes in economic conditions.5

Under the Smith-Hughes and George-Barden Acts the Federal Government cooperates with the States in financing vocational education of less than college grade. The Federal Government provides aid for both the construction and operation of schools in certain federally affected localities, under Public Laws 815 and 874 of the 81st Congress, as amended. Under the National School Lunch Act the Department of Agriculture provides assistance in the provision of school lunches in both public and private schools. Under the surplus property utilization program Federal surplus property is donated to educational and health institutions. The States in which national forests and grazing and mineral lands are located receive a part of the revenue derived from them, for use for roads and schools. The United States Office of Education has reported that Federal funds allotted to the States and Territories for education at all levels, elementary, secondary, and higher, for the fiscal year 1952-53, amounted to about $1.4 billion. This total is based upon a broad interpretation of education, including funds for vocational rehabilitation and public health service training, the value of surplus property transferred to educational institutions, support of land-grant colleges, vocational education below college grade, construction, maintenance and operation of schools in federally affected areas, agricultural experiment stations and extension service, cash and commodity distribution for school lunches, education and vocational rehabilitation training of veterans, et cetera. Comment concerning some of these programs in relation to the concept of "Federal aid to education" appears later in this chapter.

The Special Subcommittee To Investigate Federal Activities in Education, appointed pursuant to House Resolution 115, 83d Congress, has reported that in the fiscal year 1955 the total expenditure for the Federal Government's own educational programs, and its programs of aid to the States for education, under a broad definition of the term "education," amounted to about $2.1 billion. Only about 11 percent of this expenditure was channeled through the United States Office of Education."

National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools, How We Pay for Our Schools, New York, The Commission, 1954 (Working Guide No. 10), pp. 30-31.

Hutchins, Clayton D., et al., Federal Funds for Education, 1952-53 and 1953-54. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bulletin 1954, No. 14, pp. 21-25.

7 Federal Activity in the Field of Education, hearings before a special subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, 83d Cong., pursuant to H. Res. 115, Government Printing Office, 1955, p. 449.

G. THE CONTROVERSY OVER "FEDERAL AID"

The term "Federal aid for education" is widely used throughout the United States with a generally accepted meaning. However, the free usage of the term in this report requires recognition of the fact that it is of highly controversial significance.

Some persons have raised serious objection to the "aid" concept on the grounds that such "aid" is not a gratuity from the Federal Government since the funds are drawn from the people in the States. Other persons have objected to the concept on entirely different grounds. These persons contend that the Federal Government inherently bears an obligation to participate in the financing of education, which, they contend, is essential to the discharge of the Federal responsibility for the national defense and for the promotion of the general welfare.

It is a matter of opinion as to whether some of the Federal programs referred to in this chapter, such as the school-lunch program, and the program for the utilization of Federal surplus property, should be regarded as "Federal aid for education." A careful study of the development of these programs clearly indicates that some of them do not represent "Federal aid for education" with respect to either basic purpose or underlying philosophy. However, all of these programs do contribute to the advancement of education.

Many of the educational activities of the Federal Government, such as the numerous and varied forms of training and instruction given in the Armed Forces, have, of course, no place in the concept of "Federal aid for education." These programs are generally administered by the Federal Government, with little or no connection with the educational systems of the States.

The controversy over the significance of the "Federal aid" concept leads to a larger controversy. There is a much greater and more important disagreement among the people over the answers to such questions as: What kind of taxes should or must be used to provide the additional financial support needed for public education-property taxes, or income, or sales taxes? Which level of government should provide the sorely needed funds-local, State, or Federal? Should the whole tax structure of the Nation be revised? If so, what should the new structure be, and can it be built fast enough to meet the emergency needs of the Nation's fast growing school-age population? Should the Federal Government make a larger contribution to the support of education. If so, in what form should it be provided? Particularly, should it be limited to aid to construction of schoolhouses?

These and many other questions in the field of education are of concern to the 84th Congress. The present report provides part of an informational basis for the consideration of some of them.

The National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools has very recently published the following concise statement of the main schools of thought concerning the role of the Federal Government in public school finance:

There are two main schools of thought regarding the Federal Government providing financial assistance in meeting the needs of the public schools. Some feel that education is completely a State and local responsibility; and that the quality d characteristics of the schools are subject to the wishes of the people themselves

where the children attend school. They believe that the function of the State government should be to insure the provision of a minimum standard of education for all and to help equalize opportunities between the wealthier and poorer areas through State-aid programs. As for financing, they insist all education costs should be met by taxes levied within the State and that every State can collect enough taxes to provide the funds needed.

Others feel the Federal Government has better access to increases in national income, and therefore should raise the additional funds needed. Some disagreement exists within this group, however, on how funds should be distributed to the States for education. Some feel that a form of equalization is necessary and should be based on need and ability to meet need. Others feel that any measures used to determine need and ability would result in Federal dominance or control of education. This group favors distribution of Federal money to the States on a per child basis irrespective of need.8

H. SPECIFIC ISSUES PENDING IN THE 84TH CONGRESS

A number of educational issues have been introduced in the 84th Congress in the form of legislative proposals. Chapters II to VI, inclusive, of this report analyze five major educational questions selected for treatment in some detail. Other pending educational issues may be of equal or greater importance from one or another viewpoint, or combination of viewpoints.

The final chapter of this report briefly reviews some of the specific educational matters of congressional concern not discussed elsewhere in the study.

8 National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools. Op.cit. p. 33.

59922-55

« PreviousContinue »