In about one-third of the States, school facilities are provided separately for children of the Negro race. For these States, average statistics are very nearly meaningless, since in most cases there is considerable difference between the white and Negro school systems, and the averages fall somewhere between. Statistics for. the separate school systems are not available in all cases, but data indicating the situation with respect to teachers' salaries and the value of school property for a number of States with separate school systems are shown in exhibit 10.

EXHIBIT 10

Average salary of teachers, principals, and supervisors in 14 States, and value of sites, buildings, and equipment per pupil in 10 States, by race, 1935–36

! Biennial Survey of Education: 1934-36, vol. II, ch. II, p. 103.

? The average salary in each case was weighted by the corresponding number of positions.

3 Enrollment taken from Biennial Survey of Education 1935-36, ch. II, p. 103; value of school property for all pupils from ibid., p. 81; and for Negro pupils from David T. Blose and Ambrose Caliver. Statistics of the Education of Negroes, 1933-34 and 1935-36, U. S. Office of Education, Bulletin 1938, No. 13 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1939), table 28.

THE ABILITY OF THE STATES TO SUPPORT SCHOOLS

The relative ability of the States to support schools varies directly in proportion to the amount of funds they are able to raise through taxation per child of school age. The actual amounts they do raise cannot be used as a measure of relative ability, since some States levy heavier taxes than others. It is therefore necessary to estimate the amounts that could be obtained in each State through the application of a suitable uniform tax plan.

The greater part of the intensive work in this field has been done under the direction of Dr. Paul R. Mort of Columbia University, who has served as a consultant of the Advisory Committee on Education. Dr. Mort's earlier studies of the problem were based upon the relatively normal conditions of the year 1930. Exhibit 11 shows in concise form the results of his research as to conditions in that year.

From this exhibit, it is apparent that the State of New York could have supported a minimum defensible program of public education with only 16 percent of the estimated yield of the uniform tax plan. California and New Jersey could have done the same with about 22 percent. On the other hand, in 20 States more than 50 percent of the yield would have been required, and in 9 States more than 100 percent. About two-thirds of the States could not have supported the minimum program from the estimated yield of the tax plan without seriously trenching upon the amount needed for other governmental services.

The uniform tax plan used to measure State and local ability included: (1) A progressive income tax beginning at 1 percent on the first $1,000 of taxable income and rising 1 percent per $1,000 to a maximum rate of 10 percent, with personal exemptions of $1,200 for a family head, $600 for a single individual, and $200 for each dependent; (2) a real-estate tax of 1 percent on the full value of all real estate without exemptions; (3) a business income tax of 4 percent on the net income of corporations and of 2 percent on the net income of unincorporated businesses; (4) a stock transfer tax of $0.04 per $100 par value or of $0.04 per share for stock of no par value; (5) a severance tax of 2 percent of the gross receipts from petroleum

317387-41- -9

and natural gas; and (6) a corporation organization tax of 0.5 percent on the par value (or issue price of no-par stock) of authorized capital stock of corporations, paid at the time of organization or when additional stock is authorized.

EXHIBIT 11

Percentage of the yield of a uniform tax plan required to finance a defensible founda tion program of public education, by States, 1930 1

'Derived from Paul R. Mort and Eugene S. Lawler, Principles and Methods of Distributing Federal Aid for Education, Staff Study No. 5, The Advisory Committee on Education (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1939), table 2, p. 14.

Consideration was given to the Federal tax system existing in 1934 both in specifying the tax bases and in determining the tax rates. The original study should be consulted for a discussion of the reasons for selecting the particular

taxes and rates.5

New estimates of tax paying ability for the year 1935 were prepared under the direction of Dr. Mort for the Advisory Committee on Education. The total tax-paying ability of the States as measured by the uniform tax plan was considerably lower in that year, as might be expected, but the relative distribution of ability among the States remained about the same. Exhibit 12 shows for each State the number of children of school age, their percentage distribution among the States, and the estimated revenue available per child for education in each State if it made average effort to raise funds for the purpose.

An easy calculation from this table will show that about 20 percent of the children live in States where more than $75 per child could be provided for education without heavier-than-average taxes. On the other hand, another 20 percent live in States where not more than $25 per child could be provided without heavier-than-average taxes. An expenditure of $50 per child of school age would be low by city standards almost anywhere, yet more than 60 percent of the children of the United States live in Štates that on a State-wide basis could not provide $50 per child for public schools without more-than-average effort.

5 See the Advisory Committee on Education, Staff Study No. 5; Principles and Methods of Distributing Federal Aid for Education, p. 49; and Paul R. Mort, Federal Support for Public Education, ch. VI.

The regional distribution of financial ability per child is shown by the map of the States, exhibit 13. This map may be compared to some advantage with that of exhibit 8, which shows expenditures by States. Almost without exception, the States of low expenditures are also the States of low financial ability.

EXHIBIT 12

Number of children, percentage distribution of children among States, and revenue available for education per child if each State made average effort, 19351

1 See The Advisory Committee on Education, Report of the Committee, p. 226, for technical footnotes.

Exhibit 14 permits a direct comparison of actual expenditures and financial ability for each State. As indicated by this chart, only 3 of the 33 States of less than average financial ability are spending less than the amounts the estimates indicate as feasible; the other 30 were in most cases spending considerably more than might be expected. On the other hand, of the 15 most wealthy States, which also average large in size although they include some small States, the States of California, Wyoming, Montana, Ohio, and Illinois were the only ones found to be spending more than could be expected with average effort. The other 10 wealthy States were all spending considerably less than the amounts they could have raised with average effort.

The estimates used by the committee were made with care and with the benefit of several years of intensive research by various groups and individuals. Exception may be taken to the details of the estimates for any single State, but the entire showing is impressive. It bears out fully the contention that the less able States as a group are putting more effort into the cause of education than anyone could reasonably expect of them. It is also beyond question that they are taxing themselves much more heavily for education than the wealthier States.

In spite of all their efforts, the States which are financially least able contain most of the children who are not in school at all and they contain the largest number of totally inadequate schools for the children who are in school.

EXHIBIT 13

Revenue available for the education of each child 5 to 17 years of age if each State made average effort to educate its children at average cost, 1935

made to the States for various educational purposes. Exhibit 15 shows for each

fiscal year, 1938 to 1945, the appropriations for educational grants which are now authorized by law. Large amounts of emergency funds have also been provided in recent years, particularly for school building construction, for adult education, and for vocational training for defense industries.

Source: The Advisory Committee on Education, Report of the Committee, p. 29.

FEDERAL AID FOR PUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS

The Federal Government has expressed its interest in education in many ways and for a long time. Land grants for public schools were among the earliest ways in which that interest was expressed. For 50 years money grants have been

EXHIBIT 14

Current expenditure per child of school age, 1935-36, and estimated revenue available for the education of each child if each State made average effort, 1935

Source: The Advisory Committee on Education, Report of the Committee, p. 30.

WPA 2740

If enacted into law, the bill, now under consideration, will for the first time provide substantial money grants for the general current operation of public elementary and secondary schools.

The purposes of the amount to be authorized follow the recommendation of the advisory committee and reflect the conclusion of the committee that enlarged