Columbia Democrats dominated the House discussion of the bill.
JEFFERSON CITY — Gov. Matt Blunt’s higher education recommendation to increase spending survived the first day of House action Tuesday. But because of complicated House rules, higher education money could still vary before the budget debate is over this week.
Reps. Judy Baker and Jeff Harris, both Democrats from Columbia, dominated the discussion, although no amendments to change the appropriation amount were introduced.
Baker said higher education should be more of a priority, and the governor and the budget committee did not propose enough money.
“I think if you went to the citizens of the state of Missouri, many of them, I think a majority of them would say that access to higher education and making it affordable is one of their high priorities,” Baker said.
Blunt proposed the recommendation for a 6.2 percent increase in higher education spending in January. The House Budget Committee proposed a 6.3 percent increase.
Budget Committee Chairman Allen Icet, R-St. Louis County, said Missouri’s four-year institutions requested a 12.6 percent increase for the next budget year that begins July 1.
Baker said granting the 12.6 percent requested by universities would significantly help with tuition costs.
“We don’t even fund our schools at the 50 percent level, so tuition now outpaces the state fund,” Baker said. “We can’t keep allowing our higher education institutions to hobble along on a starvation diet.”
The House also discussed primary and secondary education funding. Several amendments were introduced, including help for teachers with blind students. Amendments were also introduced regarding the Virtual School program, which began last year.
The House budget plan would double the amount of funding the Virtual School program received for the current budget year. The House rejected three amendments Tuesday to reduce that increase.
According to House rules, once the preliminary budget is set, the total amount cannot change. This means if House members want more money added to one section of the budget, it must balance out by the same amount being removed from another part of the budget.
That tends to discourage amendments to increase spending for any one agency, since the amendment sponsor has to identify another agency from which to take the money.
“Well, the challenge of where we go is all about priorities, so if we think that’s a higher priority than something else, then we need to adjust the state budget and put more money into that program and less money into other programs,” Icet said.
The House will not take final action on the education budgets until they finish debate on all of the agency budget bills later this week.