HB 148 and means-tested vouchers
Posted by Tom on February 6th, 2007Those who know me well know that I’m not opposed to an equitable, well-crafted voucher bill. In all of the discussions of HB 148, including its incarnations in past years, the one piece of information I’ve always wanted but never come across is an income chart showing how household income translates to voucher amounts.
The following table shows how household size correlates to voucher amount. It is based on the federal reduced lunch standard as it currently stands, which is what the bill directs under its proposed language for 53A-1a-803. (Line 78 in the House amended version.) These numbers show what the voucher amount would have been for the 2006-07 school year; being tied to the reduced lunch standard, it will change each year.
| Voucher amount |
% of base | 3-person | 5-person | 7-person |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $3000 | <= 100% | $ 30,710 | $ 43,290 | 55,870 |
| $2750 | <= 125% | $ 38,388 | $ 54,113 | $ 69,838 |
| $2500 | <= 150% | $ 46,065 | $ 64,935 | $ 83,805 |
| $2250 | <= 175% | $ 53,743 | $ 75,758 | $ 97,773 |
| $2000 | <= 200% | $ 61,420 | $ 86,580 | $ 111,740 |
| $1750 | <= 225% | $ 69,098 | $ 97,403 | $ 125,708 |
| $1000 | <= 250% | $ 76,775 | $ 108,225 | $ 139,675 |
| $500 | >250% | |||
Hmm. A single mother gets a full voucher amount at what is barely a livable salary. A family of seven gets the full voucher amount at a salary above the state median. I don’t see how this matches up with the desire for a means-tested voucher that helps those who need it most.
I’ve added this table to the Politicopia discussion.
[...] The legislature then went back and passed an amendment to the proposed voucher law, by a two-thirds majority, which means the second law cannot be submitted to a referendum. [...]
Left by Utah voucher fight: Ball of confusion « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub on May 25th, 2007