Claims of a painless HOPE fix with income caps don’t hold up
One way to gauge a government program’s popularity is by how far politicians are willing to stretch the truth to argue they are that program’s strongest defenders. By that measure, the HOPE scholarship must be the most beloved program in all of Georgia.
A year after a broad reform of HOPE — one that accepted lottery revenues had plateaued while tuition levels soared — the scholarship suddenly is being hotly debated again. The apparent impetus is a state agency’s report forecasting falling HOPE award levels during the next several years.
Given that such forecasts accompanied last year’s reform, however, one can’t help but sense political opportunism. And some truth-stretching.
Democrats in the state Senate are agitating to re-revamp HOPE. (House Democrats have little leg to stand on here, because they were very public participants in crafting last year’s legislation.) Their pitch is that the “old” HOPE — covering 100 percent of tuition costs — could be restored, if only the state implemented an income cap.
A not-too-low income cap, mind you. Just a little ol’ income cap that would only affect the highest-earning Georgia households.
The Democrats’ chief claim is that, by imposing a household income cap of $140,000 on HOPE recipients, about 92 percent of eligible students this fall could have their tuition at state universities fully covered. (They sometimes say 94 percent, but the audit report they cite actually puts it at 92 percent.) Under the 2011 reform, most of those HOPE scholars will have less than 70 percent of their tuition covered unless they qualify for the new Zell Miller Scholarship, which covers it completely.
The Democrats’ claim is correct — if, that is, we include HOPE students at the state’s technical schools and private colleges. But at the 35 schools in the University System of Georgia, from Georgia Tech to Georgia Perimeter, a cap of $140,000 would have meant cutting out one in six HOPE scholars in 2010, according to the most recent state audit (which you can download here). That includes one in three HOPE recipients at Georgia Tech and the University of Georgia.
Worse, even those figures wouldn’t hold up very long. Within three years — assuming current trends about lottery revenues and the growth of eligible students and tuition, as well as assuming all of HOPE’s available financial reserves were used — the cap would fall to $120,000.
A year later, it would fall still further, to $100,000.
Before the end of the decade, it could sit as low as $80,000.
A cap of $140,000 might include the vast majority of HOPE recipients, but here’s an idea of who in metro Atlanta would be excluded by a cap of $100,000, according to the most recent wage statistics compiled by the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics:
- a household with one registered nurse ($58,540) and one police officer ($43,096);
- a household with two public school teachers ($52,165 apiece).
If the cap were at $80,000, it would be too low for:
- a household with one firefighter ($48,777) and one secretary ($38,724);
- a household with two social workers ($40,241 apiece).
Neither these average wages nor the income caps are adjusted for inflation. So the effect of an income cap would only grow in the future.
In fact, with a $100,000 cap, about one-third of all HOPE students in public colleges in 2010 — including half at Tech and UGA — would have lost the scholarship.
At $80,000, we’d have been talking about two in five at all state colleges and universities. Lest anyone think the impact is only great at the state’s most selective colleges: About 20 percent of students at Georgia’s two-year schools, would have lost HOPE with such a cap.
No matter how you rearrange the program, the math is brutally unyielding.
Again, it’s true that current law also means reductions, in the proportion of tuition a HOPE scholarship will cover. And again, that reality was known when the reform passed last year.
Democrats are free to argue HOPE should cover everything for fewer and fewer people, rather than covering less and less for everyone. But they at least ought to acknowledge that’s what their proposal would do.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
66 comments Add your comment
Hillbilly D
February 23rd, 2012
11:26 am
Most university students don’t have cars
Granted I don’t know them all but of the college and university students that I know personally, I don’t know a one that doesn’t have a car. Those cars span the entire scope from those that are barely driveable to the latest hot toy.
Bobby
February 23rd, 2012
11:27 am
The reason SAT scores were added was because schools were inflating their grades in order to make more kids Hope eligible.
yuzeyurbrane
February 23rd, 2012
11:30 am
Kyle, talking about verbal stretches and spin, it is quite a stretch to call last year’s HOPE legislation a “reform”. The Democratic leadership made a mistake in supporting another step in gutting quality public education in Georgia. Many steps need to be taken to save public education in Georgia, only some of which involve HOPE. Number 1 is restoring the multi-billion dollar state budget cuts in education so that tuitions need not be raised, thereby triggering a greater drain on HOPE. Another is defeating the proposed amendment to the state constitution which would gut both local control of schools and public education in general by leading to a voucher system for the wealthy. Didn’t I hear all the Republican Presidential candidates say last night that they wanted schools to be controlled at the local level? It did not get through to Ga. Republicans who are for local control except when they are not.
atlmom
February 23rd, 2012
11:49 am
I was under the impression that the income cap was taken away – so that kids who were doing well in GA, no matter what their parent’s income – would STAY in GA. The point was to keep the kids HERE, especially the ‘best and brightest’ – so that they wouldn’t leave GA. Because supposedly the data indicated that once they left they were gone for good.
I think that the HOPE has been a tremendous success…Keeping kids in GA. AND raising admissions standards to the schools (whether that is ‘true’ or grade inflation is another story, though).
UGA 1999
February 23rd, 2012
11:58 am
Democrats are a joke. What does a household income of $140k have anything to do with my child EARNING Hope? Another class warfare tactic.
Linda
February 23rd, 2012
12:02 pm
We have an entitlement society. It is not limited to low-income & no-income people. It is not limited to thieves. It also includes some kids of the high-income & rich people.
A statement above was “…program providing scholarships for students who…are wealthy anyway.”
Hopefully, all high-income & rich people DO NOT have wealthy students. Parents who love their children, regardless of their income or wealth, do not over indulge their kids. When it comes to college, parents should demand students earn the privilege & pay for it themselves, at least partially, through scholarships they earn & through hard work (jobs).
HOPE should be based on merit.
Sarah Coulter
February 23rd, 2012
12:47 pm
Bobby, you are delusional. When I went to UGA 8 years ago, several students I encountered bragged about the money their parents saved for their college education went towards their new car because they got HOPE.
One of them drove a nice, brand-new Lexis.
And before the usual suspects start in on class envy, I don’t a drop. These kids worked hard in high school sacrificing their social lives to keep their GPAs up.
Bobby
February 23rd, 2012
12:54 pm
Sarah, sure several students have nice cars. Especially at a school as big as UGA. But many more have nothing or old junkers.
I went to GT, and over half my firends didn’t have cars. I did, but it was an 18 year of Maverick. Spent 4 1/2 years chauferring several people around, who’s parents didn’t buy them cars.
But yeah, many parents probably bought their kids cars using money they saved because the kid worked hard to get good grades. What is wrong with that? Should people not be rewarded for doing good?
So again, how am I delusional by saying most kids don’t have cars, so saying a bunch have nice cars means nothing. Does 1 person you know that got a Lexus mean that many others with a junker or nothing means nothing?
RaceToTheBottom
February 23rd, 2012
12:59 pm
Restrict Hope scholarships to the kids of parents who play the lottery. Folks stupid enough to play the lottery need to educate their kids so they will be smart enough not to throw their money away like their parents.
td
February 23rd, 2012
1:21 pm
yuzeyurbrane
February 23rd, 2012
11:30 am
” Many steps need to be taken to save public education in Georgia, only some of which involve HOPE. Number 1 is restoring the multi-billion dollar state budget cuts in education”
And can you please explain to us all where this money should come from? How do we increase the revenue?
jms
February 23rd, 2012
1:21 pm
McNamara,
“If the scholarship largely goes to those financially well off, then we haven’t increased our overall number of Georgia graduates. They would have graduated college anyway.”
True, but they would have been more likely to graduate from a non-Georgia university and less likely to seek employment here.
“Adding the SAT as criteria also makes it difficult to increase the overall number of students because the best schools, primarily heavily wealthy, have the best scores. That is an inhibitor to low income students.
At its core, the SAT is not a judge of raw intellect. It is a judge of the combination of raw intellect and knowledge. Those in the best schools have the most knowledge and are therefore at a huge advantage.
For instance, you can’t do well on verbal if you have never seen many of the words. You can’t figure out a math concept that you’ve never come across. That knowledge gap is why SAT was never used before, and why its unfair today.”
Wealth and education are highly correlated. Wealthy parents usually value education and make sure their kids make the most of their educational opportunities. Don’t hold that against them.
It sounds to me like you should channel your energies into ways to get the underpriviledged to value education from birth rather than advocating college scholarships for those that are unprepared for college.
BOB FROM ACCOUNT TEMPS
February 23rd, 2012
2:24 pm
there should be a minimum income level to get hope. low income families can get pell and other grants. higher incom families can not qualify. that should be your means test.
the red herring
February 23rd, 2012
2:26 pm
if there is a cap reinstated it should apply only to those people whose annual incomes exceed 500k or 1 million. families making 100 to 200k per year with homes, kids, cars, etc are not rich—those children should qualify. with democrats it’s all about class warfare and not about the truth.
coach obama has his team well trained in this tactic. i would prefer to see no income cap at all because in my view any child that works hard and qualifies should be treated the same as other children that did the same. this reminds me of the commercial where the guy gives an ice cream to one child and refuses to give it the other child because he’s not a “new” friend… it’s time this country stopped socialism and gave all people/children the same opportunities. note that is “opportunity” not handouts. in order to survive we must become a nation of achievers instead of a nation of people trying to figure out how to keep getting the free stuff (e.g. unemployed filling for disability when their unemployment checks run out).
Sarah Coulter
February 23rd, 2012
3:36 pm
That was one example, Bobby. It was a going trend and that was 8 years ago. When were you in school?
Yes, there were some that didn’t have the wealthy parents that could buy them those cars. But that was the rarity.
And you said that many didn’t have cars. Again, when did you go to school? Plus, I didn’t realize that UGA’s bus system took these kids home on the weekends, for holidays, or to away football games.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
February 23rd, 2012
4:21 pm
“If you’re serious about higher education in Georgia for all, pay for it through taxes.”
——–
If you’re serious about higher education, pay for it yourself.
What a shocking concept that must be for the moocher class and Democrats (oops, redundant).
catlady
February 25th, 2012
7:34 pm
Whatever “fix” is done, it should NOT include more bureaucracy! In fact, too much is spent now in administrating it!
Did you know, Kyle, that for years there was a LOWER INCOME LIMIT? That is, kids getting Pell did not get HOPE, EVEN WITH A 4.0! In fact, as I recall, the lower income limit lasted a year or two longer than the upper limit! This was true in 93-96, at least.
I’d say, in order to simplify and save the money for students rather than paying administrators, cut the pie into whatever size shares the lottery can afford. That is, if it can pay $3,000 this year because the lottery is down, so be it. Of course, the Lottery Corp must be made to give the ENTIRE agreed upon percentage to the fund. No more of this 5-10% less than it agreed to give! And absolutely no more bonuses for the Lottery Corp. In addition, cut the pay of the Corp leaders–there is no reason they should make $200,000 and more. If the Lottey Corp cannot do this, award the exclusive rights to the lottery to another group.
I don’t think there should be a “Zell Miller scholarship”. Just attach a 1000 SAT to the 3.0 GPA for everyone. A kid with less than 1000 has little chance of completing college, and COMPLETING should be what we are all about.
The HOPE has encouraged too many unprepared and non-serious students to go to college. No loss, you say, it’s lottery money? Yes, but each and every one of these students are subsidized by the taxpayers to the tune of about $10,000 per year (tuition pays only about a third of the cost of putting on the classes). And of course this does not include room and board–those are additional costs borne by the student, but of course as long as you are alive you have room and board costs.
No doubt that HOPE has exacerbated the rising of college costs, but the system-wide decreases in state appropriations, and the rising expectations from students and their parents for the frills have also paid a role.