1. Investing in quality public schools in our state will produce a workforce that can adapt to sophisticated technologies and compete in international markets. Up until 1980 technological change boosted the demand for educated workers and our educational system was able to respond. Since 1980, technological change and the demand for educated workers have continued to accelerate but educational attainment has not kept up. (1)

2. Investing in quality public schools provides a lucrative financial return for the taxpayers of our state. A widely cited study finds that for taxpayers, the annual return on their investment in education is 13.3%. This is due solely to the higher wages that a better educated workforce would earn and the resulting tax revenue. It means the average taxpayer will recoup his tax payment for education in 5 years and then experience improved public services and lower taxes after 5 years. (2)
3. Investing in quality public schools will reduce the cost of crime, government health insurance costs, and welfare, saving our taxpayers significant money. Changing just one high school dropout into one high school graduate results in a lifetime public savings of $70,000. Including taxpayer savings from reduced crime and public assistance will substantially increase the 13.3% fiscal rate of return. (3)
4. Investing in quality public schools will greatly improve the state’s chances of developing, attracting, and retaining businesses, particularly those businesses that require highly skilled employees. Surveys of businesses find that the top factor in choosing a site location is the quality of education and skills possessed by the local workforce. (4)
5. Investing in quality public schools will create jobs and increase incomes in the local communities of our state. The employment and wages of education employees have both an important direct and indirect effect on local economies. Education employees purchase a large amount of their goods and services locally and this direct spending “multiplies” as local businesses hire more employees who then go out and spend their paychecks locally. For example, in a rural district, if 100 jobs were added to the local K-12 system, 56 additional non-education jobs would be created in that district. (5)
6. Investing in quality public schools will reduce the income disparities that exist in our state. States that spend more on public education experience larger decreases in income inequality. (6)

Sources

1. Goldin, Claudia & Katz, Lawrence. The Race Between Education and Technology, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2008.

2. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Education at a Glance 2006. OECD Publishing, September 2006.\

3. Belfield, Clive & Levin, Henry (eds). The Price We Pay: Economic and Social Consequences of Inadequate Education, Brookings Institution Press, 2007.

4. Cohen, Natalie. “Business Location Decision-Making and the Cites: Bringing Companies Back”, Working Paper for The Brookings Institution, April 2000.

5. Woods, Mike & Doeksen, Gerald & St. Clair, Cheryl. “Measuring Local Economic Impacts of the Education Sector”, in The Role of Education: Promoting the Economic and Social Vitality of Rural America, Beaulieu, Lionel & Gibbs, Robert (eds). Southern Rural Development Center, Mississippi State University, January 2005.

6. Behr, Todd & Christofides, Constantinos & Neelakantan, Pattabiraman. East Stroudsburg State University; “The Effects of State Public K-12 Education Expenditures on Income Distribution”, National Education Association, April, 2004.