Have any studies been made concerning the salaries paid to our public officials in this state compared to the states at the top of the list for higher education appropriations?

Is it a concern to anyone that in 1974, 37.5 percent ($325 million) and after 1985, 100 percent of all monies received from the state lottery were earmarked for education by the governor? Does anyone care how it is spent? Where are the comparative studies to show how much money is given to each student applying for financial aid versus those who work their way through college (a dying breed, I think) in our 49th ranking state? Is it cost-effective to give ALL college students financial aid on the condition they repay it when they graduate or pay back all money loaned them if they don’t graduate? (IRS/SS could control this option.) What effort is made to collect on defaulted loans for use by those needing aid? What are the average per capita incomes of the people of the highest ranking states, their taxes, population, etc.? Perhaps the public would be willing to pay for better education, through taxes, if they knew the money was used for better facilities, good teachers, etc., and not for the repair of elevators broken by students, broken windows, fires on college campuses and added police and fire protection. All too often the offenders are slapped on the hand and told not to do it again. Eliminating destructive students on campus and using the money more effectively for those desiring a higher education could be a step in the right direction. Further cost studies on where the tax monies actually are spent for education could perhaps be a better indication to taxpayers that their money is building a better future for their state. I think the statement in The Northern Star using the ranking of this state in an attempt to acquire futher funding from the state/taxpayers doesn’t really address the problem and is misleading.

Pat Thomas

taxpayer