advertisement

WHAT OTHERS SAY: Reality of Missouri school funding: It gets worse every year

Thursday, June 6, 2013 | 6:00 a.m. CDT; updated 4:54 p.m. CDT, Friday, June 7, 2013

When Missouri House Budget Chairman Rick Stream, a Kirkwood Republican, bragged last month that lawmakers approved K-12 education funding at the “highest level in the history of Missouri,” he was telling the truth.

But not really.

Almost every budget in Missouri produces more education dollars than the one the year before. Mostly that’s because of the realities of inflation. If the education budget is measured in constant dollars, the story is entirely different. Schools have less buying power nearly every year.

Politicians want their constituents to think that they’re putting education at the top of their priority list because funding goes up in terms of total dollars. The lawmakers are insulting the intelligence of Missourians.

When Mr. Stream, or Speaker of the House Tim Jones, R-Eureka, or Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat, talk about education funding, they rarely, if ever, use the most important comparison: the amount of general revenue dollars the state is investing in schools, compared with how much money they spend on everything else.

How the funding is computed

This is how priorities should be measured. If the state budget is a pie, the general revenue pie is the one that matters most. It’s the pile of money that the state uses to pay for schools, for health care, for roads and prisons.

In fact, as a percentage of the overall general revenue pie, the slice devoted to education has been shrinking since 2002. It’s gotten smaller under Democratic and Republican governors and under Democratic and Republican-controlled legislative bodies.

It’s gotten smaller because Missouri politicians don’t value education as much as they would have you believe.

Here are the important numbers:

In 2002, lawmakers spent 37 percent of the general revenue budget on education. While the gross number of dollars has mostly increased since then, the percentage of the total budget spent on education has decreased. Last year, lawmakers spent 36.5 percent of the total general revenue budget on education. The 2014 budget calls for a “historic” low of 35 percent.

The numbers are similar using total budget dollars (including federal pass-through money). A little more than 22 cents of every dollar in the state’s $24.8 billion total budget will go to education in 2014. Before 2005, at least 25 cents out of every dollar went to K-12 education.

Mr. Stream could just have accurately said that Missouri lawmakers funded K-12 schools in the 2014 budget at the lowest level in history, at least compared with other state priorities.

Put it in perspective

This is the perspective that is too often missing in Missouri budget and policy discussions.

Until Missouri actually makes education the priority elected officials pretend it is, then future generations will be ill-prepared to compete with children from other states and other countries.

The amount of money state lawmakers invest in K-12 schools is 40th in the nation, whether considered as per-pupil cost or based on personal income, according to Census Bureau statistics.

No matter how you slice it, Missouri’s lawmakers value education less than their peers in 39 other states do. Now they’re bragging about a budget that spends less money on education compared to other priorities than possibly any budget in Missouri history.

It’s time for actions to meet the rhetoric. It’s time for business leaders to impose their will on the lawmakers who beg them for campaign funds.

Does Missouri want education to be a top priority or not?

Money won’t solve all the woes of public schools, but it is a clear sign of a state’s priorities. In that regard, Missouri is falling behind.

Copyright St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Reprinted with permission.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

Michael Williams June 6, 2013 | 7:28 a.m.

"Does Missouri want education to be a top priority or not?"

Me: Of course. But since the education establishment seems bent on doing it wrong, folks like me remain in tax revolt. Change your ways and we're on board.
___________________

"Money won’t solve all the woes of public schools..."

Me: Ain't dat the troof. Billions spent in this state over the last 40 years and folks like me see little-to-no progress...lots of wheel spinning, but going nowhere.

More money solves few problems. Wise spending solves many problems. We need less of the former and more of the latter.

(Report Comment)
Ellis Smith June 6, 2013 | 8:37 a.m.

In both Missouri and elsewhere in primary, secondary and higher education there has been far too much growth in administration and far too little emphasis on improving education (teaching) itself.

It must incredibly frustrating to be a truly dedicated teacher or professor and be forced to be a part of this crap (and I use that word advisedly). Have we forgotten the primary purpose of an educational system is to teach students?

Let's now get much closer to home: How is it that one of the four campuses of so-called University of Missouri System can successfully operate without academic deans while the other three campuses cannot? Granted, that campus only had three academic deans to begin with (beginning in 1963*), and has never any assistant academic deans. What IS an assistant or associate academic dean, anyway?

That's hardly the only instance of "packing" an administration.

Also, if two campuses** can employ the academy system of operation (which utilizes alumni knowledge and expertise in a formal, structured manner, and at no cost to Missouri taxpayers), why can't all four campuses at least consider its use?

*-Before 1963 it also had none.

**-UMKC and MS&T

(Report Comment)
Fritz Otweiler June 6, 2013 | 8:59 a.m.

Article IX, Section 3(b) of the Missouri Constitution clearly states that not less than 25% of the states revenue shall be spent on public (non-higher) education. Current k-12 education funding significantly exceeds that constitutional minimum, with k-12 receiving 30% or more of state revenues.
Legislators, educators, citizens, and reporters who care about finance and education would do well to talk less about how much education COSTS and start talking instead about how education is COST EFFECTIVE.
Neither the legislature, nor the Department of Elementary and Secondary Ed,nor any of the non-profit education groups ostensibly chartered to improve education, nor the media are engaged in any review of which schools and districts accomplish the highest learning gains with the least amount of dollars.
Unless or until that occurs, all discussions of k-12 education funding (including this article) are merely exercises in opinion and politics, uninformed by the data which is readily available.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements