|
 The Bolsa-Escola (school grant) emerged as a simple solution to a complex question: it considers schooling the road to overcoming poverty, and the bolsa, an instrument to place the poor in school. In January of 1995, when it was established for the first time in the Federal District (DF), in Brazil, the Bolsa-Escola was therefore based upon two pillars: strong investment in public education and the payment of one minimum wage per family as long as all the family's children were enrolled in school and maintained at least a 90% attendance rate. This is why the program was administered by the DF Secretary of Education.
A monthly bolsa, in the amount of one minimum wage, would not be sufficient to remove anyone from poverty. But 11 years of basic, quality education would indeed be the road to take. To guarantee this, in addition to the monthly payment to the family, an annual bank deposit was made for each child who passed at the end of the school year and enrolled in the next grade.
This program was called the Poupança-Escola (school savings). After completing grades 4 through 8, the student could withdraw up to one-half the amount deposited. Withdrawal of the complete amount could only take place after the student completed high school.
The annual cost of the Bolsa-Escola and the Poupança-Escola was US$ 16.2 million (35.8 million reais) in the DF, where the education budget was US$ 724 million (1.6 billion reais). These programs therefore represented 2.2% of the total amount spent on education in the Federal District.
Inspired by the idea, the Mexican government established a very similar system on a national level in 1997, making large investments in K-12 education and setting a high amount for the monthly bolsa.
In the year 2000, during President Fernando Henrique Cardoso's administration, the Brazilian Federal Government established the Bolsa-Escola throughout the entire country, although the amount of the bolsa was small. The program was under the control of the Ministry of Education.
The Lula government changed all this. It replaced "Escola" (school) with "Família" (family), creating the "Bolsa Família," removing the program from Ministry of Education control, placing it under government assistance, and giving it a profile totally different from the educational objective.
At the commemoration of the Bolsa Família's second anniversary, the President himself affirmed that it does not matter if the program is government assistance or not.
It does matter. By guaranteeing education, the Bolsa-Escola is an investment that emancipates, while the Bolsa Família is the cost of maintaining a family in poverty. The offspring of the children who received the Bolsa-Escola are not going to need this government aid.
The offspring of the Bolsa-Família children will continue depending upon it. The Bolsa-Escola permitted the families to "raise their status in life"; the Bolsa Família guarantees only that they will "continue living." They will ultimately be known, therefore, as permanently dependent "Bolsa Families."
Another difference is the government's relationship with the families. In the case of the Bolsa-Escola, the mothers felt they were remunerated for the work of monitoring their children's learning and school attendance. The suspension of the bolsa payment, if one of the family's children should stop attending school without justification, broke with paternalism.
Seen as a simple income transfer, administered by social assistance, one that does not either require study or invest in the quality of education, the Bolsa Família transforms the family into a submissive debtor of the government, receiving favors and passive to electoral risks.
Besides not educating the children, it "uneducates" the families politically. Proof of this is the analysis that the results of the 2006 election can be determined by these bolsa families' loyalty to the candidacy of President Lula.
It is too bad that, after receiving so many prizes, an educational program has become a government-assistance program. A bolsa created to liberate now imprisons, transforming the children's families into bolsa families.
But worst of all, chances are slim that the Bolsa Família will again become the Bolsa-Escola because the recipient families will resist the school-attendance requirement. This happened in Ecuador, where there was a program of government-subsidized income.
Since it was now impossible to take an already-acquired entitlement away from those families, establishing the Bolsa-Escola would involve an additional expenditure. And since there were not enough resources to fund both programs, Ecuador maintained only the government assistance one, the Bolsa Family program.
Cristovam Buarque has a Ph.D. in economics. He is a PT senator for the Federal District and was Governor of the Federal District (1995-98) and Minister of Education (2003-04). You can visit his homepage - www.cristovam.com.br - and write to him at cristovam@senador.gov.br.
Translated from the Portuguese by Linda Jerome - LinJerome@cs.com.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
....you forget to mention that the DF district is different from the others states !!!
...you forget to mention, as you clearly explained in another article, that in DF, teachers are paid by the federal government...but these salaries must be paid by the states themselves in all other states !!!!
Therefore a simple math, would show you that the numbers you are giving above ...are dead wrong !!!!!
Furthermore...it would seem logical to ALL democrats....that in a democratic country...it is quite illogic that in one state only, teachers are paid a high salary by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT...that is further complemented by the state finance...namely yourself as ex governor.....as you clearly explained, when in all other states, teachers salaries must be fully paid by the state budget only !!!!!!!
That is what you call.....elitism or preferred people !!!!!
the only point I agree with you is that Lula is no better than you. He simply cancels older social programs...and creates new ones...for which he takes full credit....forgetting the cancelled ones....obviously !!!!! This gives the impression of huge new social programs...when they are not !!!!!!
Again and again...shame on you...as an EX EX EX !!!!! you are against....equality !
And you are one of the responsible person that makes you country the world champions of wealth inequalities....after Sierra Leone l
Nothing to be proud of !!!!