SIMMONS: Norton’s school-choice concerns driven by politics, not reality

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

There’s a tug of war taking place in the nation’s capital, and school-choice advocates should push forward with all deliberate speed.

On the surface, the tug appears to be over money. That is to say, if D.C. leaders pass legislation Tuesday to help college students pay for school, then they risk losing federal tuition money.

At least that is how Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District’s nonvoting congressional delegate, interprets the pending measure.

A maker and reputable interpreter of laws, Ms. Norton, a Democrat, has been on the wrong side of school choice before, however.

In fact, I think she’s using the wrong stick to even gauge whether funding will be gained or lost if the bill she’s concerned about wins D.C. Council approval.

Titled the D.C. Promise Establishment Act of 2013, the measure calls for using income-based guideposts to help D.C. graduates pay for post-secondary technical schooling and college.

Council member David A. Catania’s bill could work in tandem with the D.C. Tuition Assistance Grant, or D.C. TAG, which Congress created in 1999 to offer students with few higher-education options in the city the difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition at public colleges and universities. A major difference is that the D.C. Promise eligibility ceiling is $283,272.

There are other key differences.

As Mr. Catania points out, “individuals from families with up to $1 million in annual income can participate in D.C. TAG, as well as students who graduated from high schools outside the District. Moreover, D.C. TAG assistance is primarily directed at public, four-year institutions, whereas the D.C. Promise can be used at all accredited institutions of higher education, as well as accredited career programs.”

That Mrs. Norton and other federal appropriators think D.C. Promise and D.C. TAG are competitors is interesting, considering the former targets poor D.C. kids who matriculated D.C. schools while the latter does not. Indeed, D.C. TAG encourages D.C. kids, including wealthy ones, to attend schools outside the District.

Ms. Norton said recently that House and Senate appropriators do not want the federal government to pay D.C. TAG if it and D.C. Promise have “similar funding levels.”

Fortunately, in a letter, Mr. Catania and Council Chairman Phil Mendelson tried to allay Ms. Norton’s concerns about the potential of competing financial aid programs in a letter last week.

See, while the supporters of D.C. TAG and D.C. Promise don’t say so, both programs are, for all practical and applicable matters, school voucher programs.

Both programs use public funds to bridge a financial gap — whether it’s to a public college or a private school — just like the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which was created by Congress to lift the boats of poverty-stricken kids.

Story Continues →

View Entire Story

© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

About the Author
Deborah Simmons

Deborah Simmons

Award-winning opinion writer Deborah Simmons is a senior correspondent who reports on City Hall and writes about education, culture, sports and family-related topics. Mrs. Simmons has worked at several newspapers, and since joining The Washington Times in 1985, has served as editorial-page editor and features editor and on the metro desk. She has taught copy editing at the University of ...

Latest Stories

Latest Blog Entries

Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
TWT Video Picks