One of the criticisms about Daniels’ Lottery Privatization/Higher Education proposal I probably won’t sign on to is the one raised in this Indy Star article. Daniels says he wants to use the Lottery Privatization proceeds to fund scholarships that would have to be repaid if the recipient leaves Indiana within the first three years out of college.
Some higher education experts said the plan would do little to improve access to higher education because it isn’t geared to lower-income families.
Robert Shireman, president of The Institute for College Access & Success, said many top students have already won scholarships, and their families can afford school. Such a program would mostly benefit white, upper-class students, he said.
“Generally students who have very high test scores are more likely to come from high-income families in the first place,” he said. “So focusing on students with high test scores and high GPAs (grade-point averages) without a needs test does essentially throw money in a direction where it’s not needed.”
It seems to me that this misses the point of the proposal, which Higher Education commissioner Stan Jones points out.
“It’s not so much about a scholarship program,” he said. “It’s really a brain drain program. It’s about keeping those kids in Indiana.”
These are distinct policy goals. I’m not going to say one deserve preference over the other. But, saying we want more Hoosiers to go to college is different from saying that we want the best and the brightest Hoosier kids to stay in Indiana.
I think fighting brain drain is a good policy goal. I think privatizing the lottery is probably a stupid approach toward that goal. And, I think providing access to higher education to more Hoosiers is also a good policy goal.
I think money is only part of the problem on the brain drain front. I suspect the best and the brightest Hoosier kids can make a decent living in Indiana if they want to stick around. And, a few thousand dollars in scholarship money probably isn’t going to make up the potential earnings gap anyway. What we really need to do is to make Indiana a “cool” and potentially profitable place to live and raise a family. We have to work on our culture. I actually think the Governor’s trails program is a better start than the proposed scholarship program. Geographically, we’re always going to be at a disadvantage to places with spectacular scenery for recreation, but we can at least cut the gap.
We also should think about scrapping that abominable anti-gay provision the legislature is proposing to write into our Constitution. and other wedge issues favored by social conservatives. Intolerance isn’t going to help our culture. Think about where our young brains are draining to – cities like San Francisco, Austin, Boston, and New York City. I imagine you’d be hard pressed to find bastions of social conservatism attracting smart young people in droves. Even in red states like Texas and Georgia, I suspect it’s the liberal parts like Austin, Atlanta, and Athens attracting the best and the brightest.
In any event, what we want is to make Indiana the kind of place cool enough that young adults in their 20s want live there and also the kind of place with income potential, schools, and other facilities that make it the kind of place where young families will want to stay.
You are exactly correct — read Richard Florida’s book– :the Rise of the Creative Class” and you’ll see that it’s cities like Indy, Lafayette-West Lafayette and Bloomington– the most accepting and diverse places in the state which are flowering with creative higher level jobs. And it’s proven across the country.
As my best friend Richard used to say– Gays and Lesbians are the canaries in the coal-mine– if it’s not safe for them in a locale– it’s probably not safe for other diverse groups. And what progressive cutting edge company can lure people to live in a conservative atmosphere? Regardless of tax rates, good schools and scenery — people want a certain standard of living– the creative class can demand that, because they have skills that are wanted.
The book is a recommended read for the holidays!
I’m not sure the scholarship program is the best way of solving the brain drain. I’m thinking more along the lines of you – if you build it, they will come. There has to actually BE jobs for these people. Focusing that money on business/industry development is probably a more productive way of addressing the problem – although I’m not against other infrastructure improvements such as you suggest…
Amen to Doug’s & Idunno’s comments on cultural changes that attract creative and productive minds!
I do think that tax rates are a component, though. There’s a reason corporations file in places like South Dakota, and a reason wealthy individual who have multiple residences make states like Tennessee and Nevada their official place of residence.
As a matter of policy, I believe that Indiana has to do everything it can to be attractive- be accepting of all sorts of differences, including sexual orientation, race, creed, and class.