It's not just the money.
The fix for HOPE should move it from a phony-standards entitlement for
run-of-the-mill academic performance to one that rewards actual achievement and
encourages socially desirable behaviors. Here's how:
1. An SAT requirement --- 1000 would be desirable --- should be a part of
Gov. Sonny Perdue's legislation to fix HOPE's financial problems. When Georgia
develops end-of-course testing, expected to be fully implemented in six years,
HOPE should be tied to it. Requiring a 3.0 grade-point average, which 32 percent
of current B-average students don't have, is useful, too.
Establishing meaningful standards encourages study. And it converts a
low-threshold government entitlement into an actual scholarship.
One of HOPE's design flaws is that politicians had a pot of money to spend.
Too much money. So they created programs to spend it, not to reward scholastic
achievement.
Now the money's running out, and even with all the fixes recommended by the
currently empaneled HOPE study commission, it will likely run out of money again
before today's newborns hit college.
2. Discontinuing payment for books and fees, as recommended by the
commission, is good. Parents, rich and poor, have been changed by HOPE's
existence. A surprising number have apparently come to believe government should
provide their children a free college education. This has happened in just the
decade of HOPE's existence. We've changed behaviors of students and parents
undesirably.
Making parents financially responsible for some college expenses does two
things. It encourages them to save. And the act of saving psychologically
commits parents and children to higher education. Frankly, I'd rather have the
state contribute to a tax-exempt individual education savings account for
newborns, controlled by parents, matching, say, the first $500 they contribute.
Poor people saved to educate this generation of baby boomers. The combination
of savings, Pell grants, student loans and part-time jobs makes college
accessible to all.
3. No income cap should be imposed. HOPE is intended to reward merit. If an
additional needs-based college financing mechanism is needed, the state might
consider something that allows students to earn grants by tutoring part time or
performing other community service, similar to AmeriCorps. I'm no fan of paid
volunteerism, but the state could find it useful to give students who don't
qualify for HOPE another avenue to college.
4. HOPE should be a fixed sum. Parents and students would be encouraged to
shop for price.
Higher education would have incentive to hold costs in check. And the sum
given to students could be adjusted based on lottery funds available.
One somewhat related point about HOPE: Without question, it is a voucher
program for pre-k and higher education.
I believe in vouchers. They give parents options and encourage them to become
informed and to take responsibility for their child's education. But HOPE is
incompatible with the denial of vouchers to parents of students in grades k-12.
HOPE exists for pre-k, public or private. And for college, public or private.
But not in between. The state should remedy that.
In the meantime, legislative changes should:
> Encourage students to study and to take the SAT seriously.
> Encourage parents to save for their child's college education.
> Discourage school officials from inflating grades just to make students
eligible.
> Make HOPE a scholarship and not an entitlement program, giving students
a reasonable time to adjust.
Fix HOPE's spending. Don't transfer it from one account (the lottery) to
another (the general fund).
Jim Wooten is associate editorial page editor. His column appears Sundays,
Tuesdays and Fridays.