by David Safier
The Saturday Daily Star has it exactly right in its editorial, Legislature continues to shortchange kids. “Arizona’s record of supporting public education is abysmal,” it states.
Arizona is the worst in the nation on per-student school spending, according to Quality Counts 2008, an annual education report by the non-profit organization Education Week. Only Utah spends fewer dollars per student, but with other economic factors included, Arizona came in last. Arizona spends an average of $6,232 per student, compared with $8,973 per student nationally.
Arizona also ranked near the bottom for K-12 achievement, teacher pay and chance for student success. There is nothing to be proud of here.
The legislature is in a no-win situation this year, with gallons of red ink spilling everywhere and budgetary needs far exceeding revenue. It doesn’t have the cash to raise school funding, or any other funding, for that matter.
So what should it do? Keep underfunding schools at the current unacceptable levels, or even lower spending and tell school districts to tighten their belts a little further? Cut other programs to find a few extra dollars for schools? Drain the rainy day fund and pass the buck (or lack of bucks) on to the 2009 legislature?
The fact is, there is not enough state money to go around. And as long as everyone keeps screaming “No New Taxes!” we’re going to be stuck with the same problems and the same non-solutions endlessly. We’ll continue to underfund education and health care and alternative energy and our infrastructure needs and on and on, at our own peril. Our quality of life will crumble around us, and the next generations will have fewer economic opportunities than their parents..
This Tax-and-Spend Liberal sees another answer. We need to raise state revenues by raising taxes on individuals who can afford it and by cutting tax loopholes that boost profits for businesses at taxpayer expense. Good public services do not come cheap. If we don’t invest in our state, we will pay the consequences.
I know. I know. To raise taxes in Arizona, everyone who has set foot in the state for the past twenty years has to sign an oath in blood and personally hand it to Russell Pearce, or something like that. (See Mike’s post below, “Why is the GOP’s Top Legislative Priority the Elimination of the State Education Equalization Property Tax Levy?” for a thorough explanation of our tax-cutting mania.) The anti-tax crowd has dug us deeper and deeper into a financial hole. It’s time for us to start facing reality (Don’t the conservatives like to call themselves realists?) and give the government the revenue it needs to invest in Arizona’s future.
I propose to structure this debate by topics and subtopics and try to stay away from rethoric and emotions. My suggestions:
1-How we can improve education with what we have ( I personally belive much more money is needed, but we can’t just wait and do nothing in meantime)
2-How much more we need and how to spend it efficiently ( if we get 1) answered, this one is a breeze)
3-How to get what we need
James,
1) Not enough; I thought we already agreed on that
2)I hope so, the sooner the better
3)Silly question, no answer
4)They cannot; but how is this related to our discussion about finances? More then interested to talk about it some other time
As for the study (see link above) my republican scientist daughter says the methodology is excelent
Dwight, the folks at the tax revolt our out of touch with reality and have published a rag with half-truths, innuendos, baseless allegations and outright lies. The current (first issue, I believe) focuses on the JTED (Joint Technological District). There are countless lies and half-truths about JTED financing, office rental arrangements, and employee status.
The article about the ELL law is full of what can only be complete ignorance or outright attempt to mislead the public.
Throwing money at education may not improve education, but NOT funding education sure as hell hasn’t worked!
Mariana,
To answer your questions, let me ask you: Who runs the teachers unions? teachers or the union bosses?
While we are at, why don’t you answer a couple of my questions?
1) How much of the $6,232 gets to the kid and teacher?
2) Are we ever going means test our education system? I.E. find out what works and what doesn’t?
3) How much our money are the democrats going to spend to make parents love thier kids?
4) How are teachers supposed to educate kids when some of those kids intimdate thier teachers?
Mariana, thanks for the link.(To those who haven’t looked, it’s a lengthy, detailed pdf from The Programme for International Student Assessment). I skimmed it, and I want to look at it more thoroughly. I’m a skeptic of standardized testing, and international testing seems even more problematic, but this material talks about their methodology, which is very valuable. I know all the studies make the U.S. achievement look bad next to other countries, but I’m less than certain that the numbers give a good, comprehensive picture of the differences. However, I admit my ignorance and am eager to learn more.
Guys, I have homework for you:
http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/13/39725224.pdf
If “We are getting ripped off by these union teachers” how come “teachers still have to dig in their paltry paychecks”? It’s either, or; cannot be both.
Thank you Francine, Dwight and Representative Kavanagh,
David Safier states that AZ spends “$6,232 per student” compared with the national average of “$8,973.” Friends that is too much money – way too much. We are getting ripped off by these union teachers in government schools.
Can David Safier or anyone else tell me how much of that $ 6,232 gets to the student or teacher? Why is it that teachers still have to dig in their paltry paychecks for school supplies?
60% of state budgetary expenditures go to Education and we still get crap. You wouldn’t run the military that way, why are we entrusting our greatest national treasure in such a manner?
Arizonans, we should look to the future which requires a workforce that is smarter, more agile and effective in the 21st century. I propose our State Legislators look at a sweeping innovative initiative that uses a combination of tax credits and vouchers. This initiative should be means tested with periodic not just annual standardized tests. The legislature can set a goal of reducing the state budget of 10% per year if and only if the scores and every measurable benchmark goes up.
We can do this and we can get better. But we have to be strong enough to want to change and commit ourselves to following trhough for the better.
People tend to choose the facts and figures that best advance their agendas – a natural but not always honest approach. In the case of education, liberals always judge Arizona’s educational system by how much we spend and not by how much we achieve, as measured by student scores on standardized tests.
If you look at Arizona’s national rankings on school academic achievement, we tend to usually come in a bit below the national median. That ranking would probably be above the national median were our schools not overpopulated with the children of illegal immigrants, who due to their lack of proficiency in English, drag Arizona’s scores down.
I know that I will be accused, once again, of playing the “illegal card,” but it is unavoidable because so much of Arizona’s problems are aggravated by illegal immigration and education is one of them.
Many liberals would have us spend more per child, which conservatives do not necessarily oppose, and then judge achievement not by standardized tests that facilitate inter-state and inter-school comparison, but by subjective tests like portfolio submissions. That’s what bugs conservatives.
Fancine:
I don’t want to “Flame You” but your continued usage of the word “COMMUNITY” reminded me of Hillary’s ” It Takes a Village!”
Now thats Communism at its “Flaming Best” WITHOUT THE FAMILY being involved in raising there kids!
This IS what IS WRONG with Society and no amount of Money being thrown at Schools will “REBUILD THE FAMILY!”
Its NOT about the VILLAGE or COMMUNITY its about the FAMILY!
The Breakdown of our Socirty began in the 1960’s as court ruling after ruling BROKE DOWN THE FAMILY not the COMMUNITY Francine!
Obama is Correct when he speaks about this very issue in his COMMUNITY is NOT the Fault of the COMMUNITY but the “FAMILY!”
You ALL got yourselves into this mess now I SUPPORT ” THE ARIZONA TAX REVOLT” and “PROP 105″ to stop the further funding of Illegals in our schools, using our Healthcare, and destroying our Hospitals and adding strain on our TOTAL INFASTRUCTURE in PIMA COUNTY!
Freezing Property Taxes as seen in Florida sends a message to Isabelle Garcia; Raul Grijalva and Alex AROD Rodriguez on the TUSD School Board asking for 3 million dollars to FUND LA RAZA studies while Grijalvas Daughter wanted to CLOSE 4 Schools to balance the BUDGET ” IS NUTS FOLKS!”
Don’t buy into Mikes CRAP!
% not $
Madame, most respectfully, what qualifies you or anyone else how much anyone should pay in taxes?
You want me to be respectful. Well, I would say that if you were going to Trader Joes and you cleared aisle 1 of all of its items for sale, paid for it on the credit card and made yourself a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich and threw out the rest, then I would say YOU ARE THROWING MONEY AT YOUR HUNGER.
We are terrible at educating children not because we don’t spend enough. Parts of the 3rd world create more engineers and doctors that we do and the total cost of their education is but a fraction of what we spend. Garbage in and garbage out, and we are paying through the nose to bore these kids in the world’s most inefficient form or daycare.
Where are the parents? No amount of money is going to make both parents love their kid. Talk to teachers, you will see that we saddle these teachers with kids from horrible family situations.
Then we place all these restrictions on the teachers regarding discipline and authority in the schools. We don’t teach them anything – because the curriculum is outdated. We don’t pay our teachers anything but we require them to have all of this education.
We have Union teachers at govt schools that are failing our next generation from failed families and you want to throw more money at it. Start taxing everyone equally at 100$ and see if we get different results.
I love this “throwing money” line! When I shop in Trader Joe’s and I want food, I have to pay for it. Is that throwing money at my hunger? Please, don’t be simplistic. Taxes are the dues I pay to live in this democracy. The public education system is what has made this country great by enabling people to educate themselves, have jobs and raise families. There are fair taxes and unfair taxes. The most unfair tax is the sales tax which falls disproportionately on those who spend all of their money to get by. A graduated income tax is the least regressive because it takes more from people who have more and less from those who have less. That way, we all pay our fair share. No taxes? Well, let’s see what that would look like. Wanna build your own roads? bridges? Etc (lots of etc, too much to enumerate here).
The concept of “from each according to his/her means and to each according to his/her needs” is decried as communism. I’m not willing to throw out an idea because the wrong group espoused it. (Please don’t flame me – I’m an old lady!) Either we are a society/community or we are not. Frankly, I prefer to be part of a society/community. It’s way too long for this post, but what I cherish about this democracy is that we have a safety net (Social Security) for the elderly and for children and for those who try though they may, need a hand up (not a hand out). I found many of these ideas beautifully set forth in two books: Jared Bernstein’s “All Together Now: Common Sense for a Fair Economy” and Gary Hart’s “The Courage of our Convictions:A Manifesto for Democrats”.
We are a country of 300 million people. It isn’t an easy task to make a community out of such a large number. But the sense of community that we are all in this together is, for me, the preferable model. While I have no objection to sharing with those who have less than I do, I don’t fancy corporate welfare and an income tax system that rewards investment over labor. (Remember: I’m an old lady – don’t flame me!)
David,
I would hope that throwing money is not the only way we benchmark education.
David,
I agree with closing loopholes and raising taxes, but -like my GOP penpal- I’d like to know what you mean by “the people that can afford it”.
One topic at a time! I’ll try to stay on “money” for now.
Yes, we can save money.
I agree with the fact that small schools (not small districts) can save money on busing, clean the air, make the schools and streets safer, create a better community and provide some kind of much needed exercise. We can do that in the future, when we build new schools. Don’t close small schools!
We can save money by cutting on bureucracy, paperwork, No child left behind, etc
May be other ways, I don’t know, school finances make my head spin. How does TUSD spend $2.5 Million in administrative costs (not including teacher’s salaries) just to oversee their Hispanic Studies? What exactly means “overseeing”? As I said, I don’t know much about these things, but I’m willig to learn.
No cuttings and savings will change the fact that we spend less per student than any state in the USA.
So we need more money! (How to improve education WITHOUT spending much more, I hope it will be the subject of another post).
How do we get more money???
GOP Spartan, do you suggest a flat tax on education, or generally speaking?
Any other ideas? I don’t mind paying more taxes even I’m not sure I can consider myself middlleclass and my kids graduated from college many years ago.
PS Not all charter schools outperform the traditional ones.
PPS No, we cannot run a school (education) like a business because it is not.
I’m in favor of investing in education; I have two kids in the public school system.
However, there are some fundamental flaws with AZ’s system. First of all there is an incentive to the schools to bus kids. This is the dirty little secret schools keep because while the schools aren’t allowed to profit, they are allowed to shift costs. Schools that aren’t very efficient at educating kids based on the current per pupil funding formula make up for it through busing. Why do you think TUSD wants to close schools and bus the kids somewhere else? Closing the four schools only will save $4 million.
But what you don’t hear is that the district will still get the per pupil funding but will end up getting more money from the state because the budget for transportation is not included in that formula but is based on the number of kids being bused and the amount of transportation miles the schools pile up.
Transportation costs eat almost 25% of the statewide school’s budget. If we chopped up these mega districts like TUSD and focused on smaller community based schools where the kids could walk or ride a bike to school, or even possibly give them a bus pass to use mass transit we could literally save hundreds of millions of dollars.
You guys on the left should be in favor of this because of how much hydrocarbons school buses spew into the air. Just this one approach alone would be able to do wonders for our kids by immediately infusing the money into the classrooms and for teacher’s salaries. Oh yeah, it will also make Al Gore, the high priest of global warming happy.
Then there are other efficiencies in administration cost reduction. Again TUSD spends $2.5 Million in administrative costs (not including teacher’s salaries) just to oversee their Hispanic Studies. This is not a state required curriculum, but a “touchy-feely” out of the goodness of the taxpayers heart program. Again, cutting this would pour an instant $2.5 Million into TUSD, enough to give every teacher a hefty raise and put money into the classroom for actually teaching the kids the tools they need to succeed in the business world.
What I was challenging Mr. Safier on was the “raising taxes” issue. While it seems like the simplistic solution for a shortfall in funding, the ripple effect and economic detriment must be assessed. The road to hell is paved with good intention but by not doing a full economic chain analysis you usually end up with bigger problems than when you started.
If we started running our schools with the mindset of a business, where you’re graded on the quality of product (kids) you produce and the efficiency (fiscal stewardship) in which you did it, we’d all be better off.
Imagine if instead of that silly AIMS test to evaluate schools we had the schools poll their graduates, 5, 10, and 15 years after graduation for the amount of their annual salary. If one school district had an average graduate income of $45,000 and the other had one of $90,000. Which one do you think parents would send their kids to?
We must think out of the box on education. Just pouring money into it is not the answer. The charter schools have already demonstrated this. They receive 25% less funding than traditional public schools yet out perform them in every category.
I’d still like an answer to my original question. Just who are “the people that can afford it?”
GOP Spartan,
I hate Communism more than you do since I lived most of my life in a communist country. So far we are on the same page.
But…most communist countries did a pretty good job in educations; however, they failed to provide the political, socio-economic environment to keep the work force from fleeing their land. There is a huge infusion of capital in former communist countries nowadays BECAUSE of the asumption of existing well educated workforce. The realty turned out to be different; most young and middle aged workers already left the country to work elsewhere because they are so sought after.
Now, I strongly belive in capitalism. It makes sens to me to invest where I get the best return for my money and that is Education.
I know just enough history and economics to hurt me and not enough to be dangerous.
If you want to look at history, though, take a look at the income tax rates by income during the 1950s and the rates today. If we had rates today anywhere near what they were during Eisenhower’s tenure, when, if I have my economic history correct, the economy was doing fairly well, the howls from the hinterlands on the right would echo and resound throughout the land.
David,
Please define “people that can afford it” for us folks out in the hinterland of leftists policies.
Will you go by net income? Gross income? Disposable Income? People with low tax liabilities? People who own property? People who actually pay taxes?
For far too long there have been far more tax eaters in AZ than tax payers.
How about an idea that allows “ALL” Arizonans to pull the wagon equally instead of the current mindset of letting a few workhorses do it while the rest of the state rides in it.
Wealth distribution and propagation of the Nanny State is not the solution.
Creating an economic incentive to encourage growth has time and time again demonstrated that it produces more revenue for the treasury and that tax increases have time and time again stifled growth and decreased revenue.
It’s time we went to a flat tax/fair tax so everyone contributes equally to the state rather than the current Leninist/Marxist mentality of “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs).”
History has proven Communism doesn’t work, wealth distrobution doesn’t work, taxation to create prosparity doesn’t work. I know you taught English, but hopefully you dable from time to time in history.