Utah’s wage levels — as measured by United States Bureau of Labor Statistics methods — are lower than the national average. But how much lower, I believe, is overstated. There are factors that need to be addressed that don’t show up in the statistics, yet heavily influence them. Exposing these factors will explain why Utah is lower than the national average and, I hope, make one more comfortable with Utah’s position.

One of the more often-cited wage measurements is average wage data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). That data shows that Utah’s average wages are only 82% of the national average — the culmination of a slow and steady deterioration from the 96% average that Utah once enjoyed in 1981. Several years ago a fellow economist, looking at this data, asked me, “When will this turn around?” Something within that question instantly brought an answer to mind that I hadn’t seen before. My response, “Not in my lifetime.”

You see, I was born in 1958. I am a Baby Boomer. Keep that in mind. As for BLS and how it measures average wages, it is calculated by taking total wages earned in a quarter and dividing by total workers. Pretty simple. This can be done at the state level as well as the national level. In fact, it is Utah’s state average compared against the national average that produces the 82% shortfall. But that simple a calculation implies that all economies are equal. Experience reveals otherwise. Utah, I will show, is unique, and that uniqueness subtly underscores our statistics.

According to BLS, Utah has the highest percentage — 25% — of part-time employment in the nation. The way BLS calculates average wages — which makes no adjustments for full-time or part-time employment — means Utah naturally is going to be negatively impacted. That’s one uniqueness. But the bigger uniqueness comes within Utah’s demographic structure. We are the nation’s youngest state, with the nation’s youngest labor force. To enumerate, 47% of Utah’s labor force (age 16-65) is 35 years of age and younger. No other state tops 40%. The national average is 36%. Utah stands alone.

That national average is Baby Boomer dominated. They are in their prime earning years. Survey a room full of 30-year-olds (a proxy for Utah) and a room full of 50-year-olds (a proxy for the national average) and calculate the average wage. Bet you find the room full of 50-year-olds has a higher average wage than the room full of 30-year-olds, due to tenure, experience, and advancement. That’s the light bulb that clicked in my mind. It’s not so much a wage problem, it’s an experience shortfall.

Baby Boomers have dominated the national statistics from the time they entered the labor force in totality in the 1980s to their yet-to-happen labor force exit. Twenty-five years ago, when we Baby Boomers were the same age as Utah’s perpetually young population, Utah’s and the national averages were nearly equal. As we Baby Boomers aged and Utah’s high birth rate kept it young, average wages diverged as Baby Boomers became experienced and earned more. Unlike the nation, Utah birthed a second baby boom in the 1980s, and those young workers now impact heavily upon Utah’s average wage calculation. The U.S. aged while Utah stayed young. So as time progressed, Utah’s relationship to the nation moved down to 82%. Until the Baby Boomers no longer dominate the national picture, Utah’s wage in relation to the nation’s will not change, “in my lifetime.”

When state policy makers discuss public school funding, three questions commonly arise. First, does money matter? Next, how much money is enough? And, finally, what could schools do with more money?

Does money matter? Research is sometimes cited that shows a weak statistical link between funding and student achievement. Readers of this research then conclude that the amount we spend on public schools makes no difference. On its face, this conclusion is absurd. Why spend any money at all on public schools if the amount makes no difference? A more careful reading of the research makes clear that, while the statistical link to student achievement may be weak, the operational link to services and opportunities to families and students is strong and real. Where there is more money, class sizes are lower, curricular offerings are broader, more counseling and guidance services are available to students, and the list goes on. The expansive effect of funding on services to students is explicit and unambiguous.

How much money is enough? The question is usually posed in terms of adequacy, as in, “What is an adequate education?” This is a good and challenging question, and has its parallels in every part of our society. We ask, “Is our health care adequate?” “Are our cars as safe as they could be?” “Are our children properly protected in our parks and neighborhoods?” “Could children be safer?” In every case adequacy is a judgment, but one we usually make by comparisons. In our schools, do our children have what most American children have? The facts show that they don’t. They are in larger classes. They are less likely to be able to see a counselor. There are opportunities they won’t have in a Utah school.

What could be done with more money? Much can and should be done. Utah’s students are, on average, in the largest classes in the country. We know exactly how to reduce class size, but it will cost. We struggle to keep some of our finest teachers. We can change that, but it will cost. Each year the Utah State Board of Education proposes specific and detailed programs to improve opportunities for students across our state. The proposals are made based on experience of practicing educators and careful review of what works. These proposals always come with a price tag and, when funded, are carefully and efficiently put in place to improve schools. Many are not funded, but some are. Among the programs already funded and implemented: full-day kindergarten for the most challenged children in the state; accountability programs that ensure that parents are informed of the quality of neighborhood schools; educator compensation programs designed to attract and retain highly skilled teachers.

Utah’s education leaders have created one of the most efficient school systems in the nation, with the lowest administrative overhead in the nation and an unparalleled return on our tax investment. But is it enough? Ultimately, the fiscal questions in a system of public schools are answered through the democratic process. Each citizen must respond to the question “What is good enough for the children in our state?” And, like good health care, quality roads, effective law enforcement, good schools are not free.

We are starting our online Town Hall this Thursday, May 29th with an article by Larry Shumway, Deputy Superintendent at the Utah State Office of Education. He’ll be writing about education funding — does money matter, and what Utah could do with more funding — in response to Utah Foundation’s report on education funding to be released that same day.