Means Testing for DC TAG
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Site Admin Offline
|
I am starting a new thread on this because of an important change to DC TAG that was approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee. For the first time, means testing will be introduced for DC TAG for incomes below $1 million. Only those from families with taxable annual income of less than $450,000 would be eligible for DCTAG. Here is the complete press release:
Norton Announces that Senate D.C. Appropriations Bill is Free of Riders, Exempts D.C. from Shutdowns, Preserves Funding, But Means Tests DCTAG WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) applauded the Republican-led Senate Appropriations Committee, which today approved a fiscal year 2016 District of Columbia Appropriations bill that does not contain any anti-home-rule riders, exempts D.C. from a shutdown in fiscal year 2017, and provides critical funding she requested for the District. She regrets, however, that the Senate bill, unlike the House bill, imposes new means testing on the D.C. Tuition Assistance Grant Program (DCTAG), which she will seek to eliminate in the final fiscal year 2016 bill. “I am deeply grateful to my Republican and Democratic friends in the Senate for recognizing the D.C. priorities we discussed both as to funds and language as demonstrated by the Senate Republican bill,” Norton said. “We should not be surprised that it contains no D.C. riders inserted by the Republican-led committee. The absence of riders is consistent with the Republican philosophy that local spending and local laws should be set by locally elected officials. In addition, we deeply appreciate that the bill goes further by preserving the most critical funding for the District, most especially, DCTAG. I am very disappointed, however, that the bill imposes new means testing on DCTAG, which undermines the intent of the program, and the proven results so far to keep taxpayers residing in the city. D.C. is a city with many two-earner households, for whom the city is in a regional competition in order to retain our taxpayers here. We must therefore fight to keep this provision out of the final fiscal year 2016 bill.” The Senate bill is extraordinary, however, in that the District may spend its local funds as its sees fit. In contrast, the House Appropriations Committee-approved fiscal year 2016 D.C. Appropriations bill blocks D.C. from spending its local funds on abortion services for low-income women, legalizing marijuana sales and enforcing a D.C. law that prohibits employers from making employment decisions based on reproductive health decisions. The Senate and House bills both prevent the District government from shutting down if the federal government shuts down in fiscal year 2017. Norton got the same provision enacted into law for fiscal years 2015 and 2016, which, for the first time ever, removed the threat of a D.C. government shutdown for an entire fiscal year. The consistency of this provision encourages Norton to believe that she should keep trying to achieve her permanent shutdown exemption bill. The bill has more good news in not overturning the budget autonomy referendum, approved by D.C. voters in 2013. Norton has succeeded in preventing Congress from blocking or overturning the budget autonomy referendum. The bill also provides funding for DCTAG and other D.C. priorities, despite significant cuts in the bill’s total funding. The bill provides $30 million for DCTAG, equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted level, just enough to keep the District from sliding into dangerous territory as the number of students qualified for DCTAG increases. The Senate bill provides $10 million above the amount in the House Appropriations Committee-passed bill, but is $10 million below the amount in the president’s fiscal year 2016 request, which undoubtedly will be necessary in the near future. However, the bill, for the first time ever, would means test DCTAG below $1 million for students, which was unfortunately requested by the Obama administration. For students who begin college in or after school year 2016-2017, only those from families with taxable annual income of less than $450,000 would be eligible for DCTAG. Norton said that amount would do predictable damage to the residents who pay a disproportionate share of the D.C. taxes vital in the city without a state to fall back, and who could move to the take advantage of excellent state university systems in the immediate region. The House bill does not include new means testing and has never included the provision requested by the Obama administration has requested it in the past. Norton said that Senate’s means testing provision undermines the purpose of DCTAG, which was to replicate an in-state university system because the District has only one public university and was losing taxpayers as a result. No state university system requires means tests for in-state tuition. DCTAG provides equal access to higher education for D.C. residents, and has helped to stabilize, and now grow, the District’s population and taxpaying residents. Before the program was created, families were moving to neighboring states, which have dozens of public universities. DCTAG was a major cause in stemming the outflow of residents and attracting newcomers. The Senate bill also funds other Norton D.C. priorities. The bill provides an extra $5 million to combat HIV/AIDS in D.C., a special Norton priority, equal to the amount in the House Appropriations Committee-approved bill and the same amount as the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and the president’s fiscal year 2016 budget request. Norton said that she was particularly relieved by the $14 million for the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority (DC Water) for ongoing work to control flooding in the city and clean up the Anacostia and Potomac rivers and Rock Creek, equal to the fiscal year 2015 enacted level but $10 million below the president’s fiscal year 2016 request. The Senate amount is gratifying considering that the House Appropriations Committee-approved bill did not provide any funding for DC Water. Norton said that federal funding for DC Water is particularly warranted because the federal government built the system and is a ratepayer for water and sewer services provided to federal facilities, including the Capitol Complex, in the nation’s capital. |
Anonymous
Yeah! Keep fighting for those earning greater than $450K... 
OK, DCUM - you're full of 450K HHI earners and above... does this mean anything to you?? At 210K, it would mean a little to me, but not a deal breaker. I can't imagine taking home almost 2x and caring. |
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Site Admin Offline
If I found myself being impacted by a 450K means test, I would be jumping for joy. But, I can imagine there are high-earning families with multiple college-bound children for whom this might make a difference. |
Anonymous
My HHI is closer to yours, but unlike you I am not so stupid to think that this will stop at 450k. Yesterday there was no income threshold. Today it is a threshold of 450k. Tomorrow the threshold could whittle its way to 205k. |
Anonymous
|
OK, but what is it? $10K per kid currently?
So by a rough ratio, losing $5K per kid would not dissuade me from living in DC at my current income. |
Anonymous
|
95% of Americans have annual household incomes lower than $118,000.
I am relieved they kept the program at all. In this political environment the appropriations battles are only going to get harder. |
Anonymous
| They will lower the threshold and then we are screwed. |
Anonymous
| $10,000 per kid per year. Though I fall well below the threshold, it would still be $120,000 for a 3 child household like mine. I don't have an extra $120,000 hanging around so I would take my bright, bilingual kids and I would leave the District in a heartbeat. |
Anonymous
| PP, even with DC tag you could save more than 120k being in state for MD or VA with 3 kids, so not sure I follow your logic but glad your kids are "bright". |
Anonymous
|
I realize that no one has much sympathy for people with HHI over $450K but no states impose a sliding tuition scale on their residents for in-state tuition---which is what this type of means testing is.
I've never understood why Congress can't just require the states (ALL of the states, not just DC and MD) to let DC residents pay in-state rates. We have no voting representation, yet we pay federal taxes. The DC tax base is too small (given the large number of government/non-profit and diplomatic buildings which are exempt from RE taxes) to generate revenue enough to sustain a decent public university. |
Anonymous
|
Well, it's hard to cry about people who make >$450k failing to qualify. Obviously, they can afford whatever college their kid can get into. How many people does this really affect? BUT I oppose it. Do states means test their residents for in state tuition? No. It sounds like the beginning of the end of TAG. I just missed having that option for college & I'll be pissed if my kids don't have it, either.
|
Anonymous
You are sorely mistaken. 450 comes to about 250 after tax. That's great, don't get me wrong, but college kills that. A school with a sticker price of 60k (all-in) is a huge hit to that 250 number. One kid, still okay for four years. Multiple kids? Try again. Incomes around 300-500k are hit the hardest by college. Not enough income to pay without feeling a very serious constraint but too much for any financial aid. |
Anonymous
| Agreed that those with HHI may not need funding, but it violates the idea behind the program. If I lived in VA I would get in state tuition regardless of my income. TAG is suppose to compensate for the lack of a publicly funded state school or I thought it was. Correct me if I am wrong |
Anonymous
|
At this point, no matter what reason was when created - the budget environment in Capitol Hill is very different now.
The effect of sequestration has left all sorts of worthy programs strapped and cuts are now hitting even small programs like TAG. Unless Congress is willing to consider new revenue sources (and they won't even raise the gas tax to fund highways) things are going to get much worse. The means testing while not 'fair' is going to get worse and the program may die. What member is going to spend time fighting for wealthy (and +450K is wealthy) DC families when their own constituents are facing cuts to things like Meals on Wheels. |
Anonymous
|
How about DC considering Revenue Sources to fund it? Maybe some sort of commuter tax? Oh wait - we were told we can't do that.
|