El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1920-05-11
TEXAS SCHOOL ENDOWMENT IS
NOT AN UNMIXED ENEFITI

POSSESSION Of enormous permanent school fund
vested IN lands and securities great benefit to
Texas in earlier days when population sparse and
undeveloped In later years it has operated
demeu for the that the receipt Of considerable
annually from the state treasury has made most rural
communities neglect to tax themselves for school purposes
with the result that the rural schools have had only
fourth OF third much to spend on schools as they
should have to maintain the night standards
The state contribution to city schools and the stronger
and richer counties has not had this effect since cities and
progressive counties themselves to the limit anyhow for
schools and then hardly have enough to manage with
with the state contribution added They pay huge SUNS
into the state treasury and receive part Of It back that
IS about the way It works But rural communities IN more
backward counties have simply fallen INTO the habit Of
limiting their school expenditures the received from
the state regarding this clear saving, and ike the
remittance man they have fallen into thrftess habits.
It is interesting to note that among the ten states pro
vng the largest proportion Of their total school funds
through state taxation Tor from permanent fund.- to
be found some Of the most backward states educauona
he only states providing less proporionay than Texas
through local county taxation for schools Alabama
Georgia, Mississippi, and Montana
It would seem ofhand the states fortunate enough
10 possess large permanent school funds progressive
enough to impose heavy state taxes for schools ought be
the leaders educaonsy It is not The effect has too
often been bring dry to the rural schools from the
failure of rural communities to supplement the state
tribution through a local tax.
There is remedy for Texas It is to change the method
Of distribution Of the state school funds that the amount
paid 70 any county Independent school district would be
proportional to the amount raised locaIysay to
eeo oneourth II independent school DISTRICTS OF onehaf
in rural Districts Of the total school budget Some way
must be found force the rural districts to do their share
through taxing themselves
Yet everyone wiz agree that it is vital to the state that
every child have elementary education Rigid applics
ton Of the above suggested remedy might in back
ward counties simply result In having schools at all So
the state must assert its power for general welfare
devise system Of compulsory education that VIII really
compel every community to maintain adequate school
facilities The main object Is not withhold funds
from rural schools but rather to force rural communities TO
supplement the state fund through local taxes.
Texas makes liberal provision for rural schools
he state treasury comparison with other states and
furnishes free text books but the results have
altogether happy. We have compulsory education but
do not provide buildings and teachers take Of
children This condition is not limited Texas but we
cannot alter the facts in other states while
control over Texas facts.
In school expenditure IN proportion to population the
United States governments figures show that Texas is far
down the list, ranking s2d in this respect and when the
amount spent the education Of each child considered
Texas ranks szth For each child Montana spends four
tunes as much as Texas; California, Nevada and Arizona
three TINES as muehi while Washington, Wyoming, New
jersey Oregon, Idsh0 North Dakota Iowa Utah Indiana
Ohio Rhode Island, Minnesota Colorado Massachusetts,