President's Update: Spending on Schools Takes Center Stage
Dear Friends:
Putting the fox in charge of the henhouse is the best way to describe a costly and harmful school spending amendment that was proposed by a collection of teachers unions and school bureaucrats. The proposal demanded billions more for public schools. It also sought to eliminate considerable accountability in education spending.
Amendment backers recently admitted lacking the necessary signatures to put this destructive measure on the ballot. However, they have gained the ear of Governor Ted Strickland. News reports indicate the governor will draw heavily from this group as he formulates a school funding plan. In fact, meetings between the governor’s staff and amendment backers have already begun.
We are uncertain what will emerge as the governor’s final school funding plan. However, we do know that Ohio’s government school establishment is fully committed to securing a new school spending plan that gives them more money while reducing their accountability to voters.
To understand the type of input the group will provide to the governor, it is important to first understand what it was prepared to ask of the voters.
Background on the Proposed Amendment and Ohio Spending on Schools
The former proposed amendment, called “Getting It Right for Ohio’s Future” by its backers, would take away from voters and their elected representatives the power of the purse over public education. It would give control of state taxes and spending on schools to the State Board of Education, a group composed half of elected and half of appointed officials, and entirely beholden to the educational establishment.
The Buckeye Institute estimates that based on past budget requests of the State Board of Education the amendment would have:
Cost Ohio taxpayers an additional $35 billion in taxes over ten years;
Increased school spending by almost 10 percent a year, doubling every seven years; and,
Eventually required either the state sales tax to be raised by a penny or the state income tax to grow by 15 percent each and every year to pay for increased school spending.
Further tax increases would be in store as the proposal would have stripped away the best friend of Ohio taxpaying homeowners: the constitutional requirement of voter approval for school property tax increases.
The interests backing this amendment had the most to financially gain from its passage. These include: the teacher unions, both the Ohio Education Association (OEA) and the Ohio Federation of Teachers; other school employee unions; school administrators and bureaucrats through their lobbying associations; and, the same group of school spending lobbies that took the DeRolph lawsuit to the Supreme Court, the Coalition for Equity and Adequacy of School Funding.
Educating Ohioans on the Key Facts of the Proposed Amendment
Watch for the Buckeye Institute to detail and disseminate the following facts regarding the ongoing school funding debate:
The government education establishment favors more spending and less voter control over school bureaucracies. Their proposal does nothing to fix the real problem in Ohio school finance, which is the collapse of productivity in our public schools.
If money were the solution, Ohio’s school finance problems should be solved by now. State spending on school operations has doubled in the past 14 years. The $5 billion dollar school building construction program has modernized facilities throughout the state.
The increase in school spending has nothing to show in terms of improved school quality. The research on this topic is clear: more money does not improve school performance.
What taxpayers spend for Ohio teacher and administrator salaries, pensions and retirement benefits is out of line for the work delivered, and not comparable to other private sector pay scales and benefit packages. The education establishment seeks even greater windfall increases in salaries and benefits for school employees.
Both the governor and the education bureaucrats are determined to make changes to Ohio’s school finance system. This issue is now the most important topic for politicians in Columbus. The Buckeye Institute looks forward to representing the interests of taxpayers, parents and children in this debate as the politicians start tinkering with our tax dollars and children’s futures.
Sincerely,
David Hansen