The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) would like your input on a possible planned extension to the I-85 Express Lanes. GDOT will hold Public Information Open Houses (PIOHs) in Jackson County and northern Gwinnett County on:

Gwinnett County
Thursday, March 21, 2013
4:00 PM-7:00 PM

Gwinnett Chamber of Commerce, Gwinnett Center Atrium
6500 Sugarloaf Parkway
Duluth, Georgia 30097

Jackson County
Thursday, March 28, 2013
4:00 PM-7:00 PM

Braselton Police & Municipal Court Bldg.
5040 Highway 53
Braselton, GA 30517 

Motorists that travel the of the I-85 North Corridor are invited to learn more and provide feedback on potential plans to extend the northbound and southbound I-85 Express Lanes from Old Peachtree Road to Hamilton Mill Road. The project would include newly constructed lanes for the full distance of the extension.

All vehicles, including those designated as "toll-exempt," must be registered on an active Peach Pass account and have a Peach Pass transponder mounted inside or on the vehicle to use the I-85 Express Lanes.

Given that the extension would add a new lane rather than utilize an existing one, I strongly support this proposal.  More capacity, even if in the form of a toll lane, is a good thing.

Zell Miller scholars must graduate high school as the valedictorian or salutatorian, or with at least a 3.7 grade-point average and a 1200 on the SAT’s math and reading sections. While in college they must maintain a 3.3 GPA.

For a full tuition scholarship, high requirements are appropriate.  However, Democrats, want to reduce the requirements for the Zell Miller award.

Democrats want to expand the scholarship to students who graduate in the top 3 percent, regardless of their SAT score.

While I can see some justification for expansion of the pool from the top two graduates in a class to some very small percentage of the top of the class, dropping SAT requirements is the wrong direction for a merit-based scholarship.  When I graduated from Central Gwinnett, there were students in the top ten graduates of my class - a number within an expanded 3% eligibility pool - who were high high-caliber and deserved a merit award.  Just last week, I interviewed Georgia Tech President's Scholarship candidates, Tech's highest scholarship, and not all candidates were either valedictorian or salutatorian.  If these students are in the running for a President's Scholarship, they are more than deserving for consideration for a Miller scholarship.  Where I take exception with the Democrats' proposal is dropping the SAT requirement.

Before I address why I think SAT (or ACT) scores should be part of the Zell Miller selection process, let me touch on a point of criticism of the Miller process.

In its first year, Zell Miller Scholarships went largely to suburban Atlanta students, according to an AJC investigation. That has been a point of contention for rural areas of the state where students face great economic challenges in affording college. Those rural students post similar GPAs to their suburban counterparts, but trail them in SAT performance [emphasis added], which knocks them out of the running for a Zell Miller scholarship.

I take exception with the criticism that rural students have problems affording college.  While I am sensitive to this concern - I did not leave high school flush with cash for a college education - the Zell Miller scholarship was established specifically as a merit award not a need-based award.  To the degree that society benefits by increasing the general level of education of the populace, there is a place for need-based awards.  But I firmly believe there is also a place for merit awards.  Those that excel at the highest academic levels should be rewarded and encouraged.

Furthermore, the complaint that the Miller scholarship distribution is uneven across the state, in and of itself, is fairly hollow.  Unequal distribution of someting is only a problem when certain eligible groups do not have the same access and consideration as that afforded to other groups.  In this case, the rural students did not meet the SAT requirement.  "That's not fair!" scream, typically, the left.  Why?  Did they not take the same SAT as the metro Atlanta students?  Hence, there is no reason to eliminate the SAT for fairness reasons.

You may ask "They are already testing for academic achievement with GPA and class rank, so why do you need to take the SAT into account?  That only makes it harder for rural students with high grades to get the scholarship."  To put it bluntly, all high school GPAs are not created equal.  The valedictorian of one school might not be in the top 3% of another.  An A in one school or one course of study may demonstrate higher academic achievement than another.  With well over 160 school systems in the state, getting grading parity across all those districts makes an apples-to-apples comparison difficult.  There needs to be some element of the evaluation process that is standard across all students.  The SAT fulfills this need.

You could argue that so long as there are no limits to the number of scholarships - all qualifying students receive the award - a deserving student in Gwinnett is not denied a scholarship by a student from south Georgia receiving the scholarship under the expanded standards.  That may well be true, but, despite what Democrats often think, the pool of funds for these scholarships is not bottomless.  Expanding the standards automatically increases the required funding.  Should the economy take another downward turn, these commitments by the state would need to be met.  This would require reduction in the number and/or amount of HOPE Lite scholarships which negatively impacts the goal of supporting the educational level of the state.  Ultimately, given the potential for demagoguery of education, the required funding could come at the expense of core functions of the state government or from the pockets of taxpayers.

Personally, I simply take issue with the watering down of academic standards.  Call me a snob, an elitist, or whatever but I went to a university that required academic excellence for admission and demended continued, if not greater, excellence to succeed and obtain a degree.  I believe strongly in recognition of the best and brightest in academics, for these students are the future leaders of our nation, our government and our industries.  There are areas in education where reductions in academic eligibilty are acceptable.  One example is the proposed reduction in HOPE GPA requirements for technical education to 2.0 from 3.0.  While mastering this material is no less import at a technical college than at a four-year university, technical education, by definition, is far more practical than theoretical.  Hence, a 2.0 GPA does not indicate that a student cannot effectively utilize their classrom learning.  But watering down academic standards for the premier merit-based scholarship in the HOPE program is a non-starter.