Note: California does it right !
New York Times . Editorial. 8/29The children entering kindergarten and first grade this school year were not yet born when the Great Recession ended in mid-2009. Incoming high school seniors were not yet in middle school.
But in many states and localities, the wounds to school budgets from recession-era cutbacks are still large, leaving schools with more students and less money. Recent data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows that as of last year, 25 states were still spending less per student than before the recession, adjusted for inflation, and cuts in seven states exceeded 10 percent. In 31 states, local government spending per student fell between 2008 and 2014, the latest data available (adjusted for inflation). It is safe to assume some improvement in recent years, but even so, there is clearly a long way to go before overall spending catches up with enrollment and inflation.
Some states, however, don’t seem particularly interested in addressing the shortfalls, while others, notably California and Minnesota, have moved decisively to do so.
The difference has at least as much to do with political priorities as financial challenges. In part, persistent shortfalls in school budgets reflect the depth of the recession and the fitful recovery. To a lesser extent, they also reflect stagnation in federal help, which accounts for nearly 10 percent of school budgets.
But in states with the biggest school-budget cuts, much of the pain is self-inflicted, because they have cut income taxes in recent years, creating budget shortfalls that make it impossible to adequately finance their schools. Kansas is the most notorious for such counterproductive tax cuts; other offenders include Arizona, North Carolina, Oklahoma and Wisconsin. Oklahoma, in particular, is vying with its neighbor Kansas for the title of most fiscally reckless. Repeated cuts to Oklahoma’s income tax have resulted in deep and chronic budget shortfalls, and yet the top tax rate went down again in January, from 5.25 percent to 5 percent. The lost revenue has been offset in part by a reduction in the amount of assistance the poorest Oklahomans can derive from the state’s earned-income tax credit.
In contrast, California voters in 2012 approved increases in sales taxes and income taxes on wealthy residents. Earmarked for education, the new revenue was enough to restore much of the state’s school budget, which had been cut deeply in the face of the recession. At the same time, reforms to the state’s school-spending formula have directed more money to low-income schools. Minnesota raised income taxes on wealthy residents in 2013 and is using some of the revenue to bring full-day kindergarten to all school districts and help more low-income families afford preschool.
Investment in education is crucial to improving long-term productivity; conversely, failure to invest in education portends the decline of living standards over time. Some states are doing their best, and yet the challenges seem bigger than their best efforts, while others are clearly failing to rise to the challenge. The federal government could play a more constructive role in supporting the leaders and coaxing the laggards. It could offer aid to states, contingent on improvements to their school budgets. It could also earmark a portion of infrastructure spending for school building, repair and renovation, helping to make up for a devastating decline since the recession in school capital spending by states and localities.
Every child deserves a good education, but, as a new wave of kindergartners anticipate their first day of school, it is important to acknowledge that not every child is getting one.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
New York Times . Editorial. 8/29The children entering kindergarten and first grade this school year were not yet born when the Great Recession ended in mid-2009. Incoming high school seniors were not yet in middle school.
But in many states and localities, the wounds to school budgets from recession-era cutbacks are still large, leaving schools with more students and less money. Recent data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows that as of last year, 25 states were still spending less per student than before the recession, adjusted for inflation, and cuts in seven states exceeded 10 percent. In 31 states, local government spending per student fell between 2008 and 2014, the latest data available (adjusted for inflation). It is safe to assume some improvement in recent years, but even so, there is clearly a long way to go before overall spending catches up with enrollment and inflation.
Some states, however, don’t seem particularly interested in addressing the shortfalls, while others, notably California and Minnesota, have moved decisively to do so.
The difference has at least as much to do with political priorities as financial challenges. In part, persistent shortfalls in school budgets reflect the depth of the recession and the fitful recovery. To a lesser extent, they also reflect stagnation in federal help, which accounts for nearly 10 percent of school budgets.
But in states with the biggest school-budget cuts, much of the pain is self-inflicted, because they have cut income taxes in recent years, creating budget shortfalls that make it impossible to adequately finance their schools. Kansas is the most notorious for such counterproductive tax cuts; other offenders include Arizona, North Carolina, Oklahoma and Wisconsin. Oklahoma, in particular, is vying with its neighbor Kansas for the title of most fiscally reckless. Repeated cuts to Oklahoma’s income tax have resulted in deep and chronic budget shortfalls, and yet the top tax rate went down again in January, from 5.25 percent to 5 percent. The lost revenue has been offset in part by a reduction in the amount of assistance the poorest Oklahomans can derive from the state’s earned-income tax credit.
In contrast, California voters in 2012 approved increases in sales taxes and income taxes on wealthy residents. Earmarked for education, the new revenue was enough to restore much of the state’s school budget, which had been cut deeply in the face of the recession. At the same time, reforms to the state’s school-spending formula have directed more money to low-income schools. Minnesota raised income taxes on wealthy residents in 2013 and is using some of the revenue to bring full-day kindergarten to all school districts and help more low-income families afford preschool.
Investment in education is crucial to improving long-term productivity; conversely, failure to invest in education portends the decline of living standards over time. Some states are doing their best, and yet the challenges seem bigger than their best efforts, while others are clearly failing to rise to the challenge. The federal government could play a more constructive role in supporting the leaders and coaxing the laggards. It could offer aid to states, contingent on improvements to their school budgets. It could also earmark a portion of infrastructure spending for school building, repair and renovation, helping to make up for a devastating decline since the recession in school capital spending by states and localities.
Every child deserves a good education, but, as a new wave of kindergartners anticipate their first day of school, it is important to acknowledge that not every child is getting one.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
No comments:
Post a Comment