Rep. Kathy Tyler (D-4/Big Stone City) and teacher/blogger Michael Larson share my frustration with the South Dakota Republican Party's attitude to funding education. We all say we love our schools, but the Republicans keep finding excuses not to put our money where our mouth is:
It’s so frustrating. Most opponents say they know education needs to be funded. They’ve heard the stories, but there’s always an excuse: state insurance rates are going up, look at the disaster out west, we don’t know what the economy is going to do, the money’s not there (yes it is). A good education system is the foundation for everything else this state wants to do. As one superintendent stated, “We are in crisis mode” [Rep. Kathy Tyler, "Egg on My Face and Maybe Money for Education," Kathy's Corner, 2013.10.28].
Larson finds Rep. Larry Tidemann (R-7/Brookings) complaining that schools need more accountablity before they get any additional money... because, yeah, you know, those darn teachers do all their work in secret, without anyone watching them.
We hear a regular drumbeat of boosterism from Pierre about our great business climate, our strong purchasing power, and other positive economic factors. But when we consider investing in education or health care, that success evaporates. We hear revenue is tight, and there's only a small pie to divide up.
While local schools cut funding for field trips, we always have money to fly state and local leaders to Minneapolis, California, and China to hobnob with wealthy businesspeople and promise them that if they move here, we won't make them pay for schools and roads and the other social investments that make their profits possible.
The state that hates pregnant women but loves the pre-born is doomed to export expensive children: how conservative.
Does more money equal better education?
How much money does education need?
MC taking a break from the Toilet to harass liberals with solutions to problems created by earth haters: how conservative.
Does more money equal better medical care? How much money does education need, MC?
Imagine how great the business climate in the chemical toilet would be if all his women homeschooled his children.
Let me fuse Larry's and MC's points: The U.S. spends twice as much on health care per person as any other country, but we don't get better health outcomes. It's entirely possible to spend money on education in similarly inefficient and unproductive ways.
That said, even efficiently managed hospitals and schools require a certain minimum amount of resources to produce results. Providing more resources makes it possible to do more work. Our Legislature's interim education committee appears to recognize that in recognizing that they should increase school funding to pay for an extended mandatory school year. As mentioned yesterday, Minnesota and Massachusetts are outperforming South Dakota on eighth-grade math test scores, and I think they spend more per student than we do on education.
Michael, I don't think any superintendent or school board is saying to the Legislature, "Give us more money!" without some rationale for that funding. Your superintendent can probably offer a list of practical projects that increased state funding would make possible, things your school can do for kids that simply aren't possible under current tight budgets. The simplest example: paying teachers competitive wages that would expand the labor pool and help us access more quality teachers.
Education isn't going to see increases in funding because as the country ages, more and more resources will be needed to pay for entitlements - Social Security, Medicare and public pensions - as well as the interest on the National Debt. The feds are going to be giving less and demanding more accountability.
Look at Detroit where they cannot fund the promises they have made to the unions and the city workers.
Who wins in a battle of needs between the elderly that worked their whole lives for benefits and the education of our young people? Kids can't vote.
No, it's Republicans who need to show more accountability.
Trillions in cash warehoused in the state tax free benefits whom? SS pays property taxes, video loottery goes into the general fund, infrastructure crumbling: how conservative.
So what are you willing to give up in order to have more funding for schools?
The State budget pie is only so big you can't give to education without taking from someplace else.
How many potential teachers are lost due to the realization they will have to struggle financially if they choose that career?
In looking around our schools, funding has been lacking for quite some time. It is obvious with the technology. I am shocked at the archaic computers that posses the ability to injur should they fall, still in use.
Why would we not want the best and brightest in our state? How is that accomplished by pushing the envelope of frugality? This is like saving money by not changing the oil. Shortsighted, and ultimately expensive.
Teacher salaries are determined by the school board, not the state. If a School board want to give teachers raises, they can either take from something else or try to find more money elsewhere.
One guess why Wall High School scores at the top.
Yes, yes, yes, MC, we've heard that dodge from the Legislature and Governor before: "Your budget depends on the allocations and tax laws we establish, but what you pay your teachers is entirely your decisions, and we have absolutely nothing to do with that decision." Horsehockey!
My whole contention is that your limited-pie view is wrong. The state budget is only so big because our leaders refuse to capture a large slice of the growing economic wealth they proudly tout.
But if we must engage in scarcity budgeting, here's what I'll give up:
(1) The business recruitment junkets mentioned above. Kids before corporations, direct investment in proper public functions.
(2) Pine beetle fight. Futile. Can't beat Mother Nature. Accept that the Black Hills will be brown for a few years, as punishment for our bad management practices.
(3) Assistance to homeowners in Missouri flood plains. Build on the shore in Fort Pierre and Dakota Dunes, and the next time we get a big winter, you pay for National Guard levees out of your own pocket.
(4) State Department of Education and implementation of Common Core. The new standards add no value that good teachers and local administrators can't add on their own. And if the budget really is fixed and you're making me pick, I can get more done for more kids by firing every education official in the SDDoE except for whoever keeps records on teacher certification and transferring that money directly to the schools.
But we don't have to fire anyone. We don't have to stop doing any of those things. As Larry says, we've got lots of wealth warehoused in this state, just waiting to be tapped for the public good.
Even in a post-coal world Wyoming is going to invest in education.
Isn't South Dakota constantly competing with Minnesota for people, industry, jobs, etc. How can we be competitive in not only attracting but also keeping people here when Minnesota is able to accomplish this for public education:
The budget increases E-12 funding by $485 million, including:
• More Funding For Every School in Minnesota. The budget invests an additional $234 million in the school funding formula, providing schools with an increase in funding in each of the next two years.
• All Day Kindergarten for Every Child. The budget invests $134 million to help Minnesota school districts provide optional All-Day K to every student, free of charge. Currently, only 54% of Minnesota’s Kindergarten students have access to free all-day Kindergarten, with thousands of families having to pay out of pocket.
• Reforming the Special Education Formula. The budget invests $40 million in special education reform, providing needed funding reform and greater funding equity for schools.
• Early Learning Scholarships for 8,000 Kids. The budget invests $40 million in scholarships that will help thousands more children attend high quality child care and preschool to ensure that children are prepared for Kindergarten and beyond. Families will be eligible for up to $5,000 in scholarships.
• Repaying our Schools. The budget accelerates repayment of the money that the state borrowed from our schools in previous bienniums.
• Testing Reform to Improve How We Measure Student Achievement. The bill will help move away from punitive testing standards, to help districts implement college and career readiness exams.
http://mn.gov/governor/newsroom/pressreleasedetail.jsp?id=102-60467
SD can provide more aid to education as several other commenters have shown. An even better plan would be a state income tax with a large part of that dedicated by law to public education.
I am well aware of the automatic Pavlovian response to the words "income tax." It will destroy SD's economy; people will leave in droves; no businesses will come here. And that would be different from the past several decades how?
You all know the colloquial definition of insanity: "Doing the same thing over and over . . ." Economically, that's exactly what the great state of South Dakota has been doing since the 1960s. (Give or take.)
The only changes I've seen is our rich are getting richer and poor getting poorer, small towns crumbling, number of farms imploding, etc. Great educational systems are a major draw for immigration from other states.
Oh South Dakota, quit shooting yourself in the foot, and other areas.
66 counties: "The top five states in terms of most local governments per resident, including the Dakotas and Kansas, all reliably vote for Republican presidential candidates."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-28/reagan-revolution-misses-tax-fiefdoms-flourishing-in-u-s-.html
I'm all with my good friend Larry in reducing the number of local governments. I think once the 4 new districts have been set by our legislatures 75% of them will vote conservative, and 25% will split their vote between libbie and nutjob.
That might not be a bad idea. Shall we add county consolidation to the list of sacrifices we'll make to fill in the finite pie MC is serving the schools?
But if we consolidate counties, someone will say we also have to consolidate schools. Shall we cut county governments by half, and fold school governance into those remaining county commissions?
Consolidation isn't a completely bad idea. I needs to be fleshed out a bit.
I am a bit concerned how we are evaluating teachers and learning. I want our kids to be able to look at a problem, and be able to work through it and come up with a solution. Tests are important, but they should not be the end all and be all school.
While I can understand some benifit to common core. it should flushed.
How much money does education need? 5.00 or 5 gazillion? 5% or 95% of the state's budget?
Look, if one seriously wants to argue about education funding, one needs to recognize that free market principles are at work when teachers select where they want to teach. I had a eureka moment this early fall when I realized I would like to be a teacher. I have a masters in public administration, and a double undergrad major win economics and government. And I have not desire to teach in this state. The pay is poor, the benefits are poor, and teachers are not respected. Since the education field is an open market, once I obtain my license, I will be moving 30 miles east where my salary doubles. Money buys talent; respect keeps talent here. SD seems to give neither to their public education field.
MC, you argument strikes me the same as noting a starving man and saying that too much food causes problems, so we should not offer food.
How much money does SD education need? I assert applying a simple business model - to attract the best and brightest to our schools, we need to invest at a level higher than those schools and industries attracting those candidates now. If you want the best math/english/social science/art teacher, pay those teachers a wage that attracts the best math/english/social science/art minds away from school vocations.
Bravo, Mike, for making this point. Unfortunately for SD students, a hiring dearth of qualified applicants is becoming more and more real each year.
MC give us a break. Cut spending so much on prisons and roads spend some money on people i.e. Teachers, and Students.
Steve, I think your argument hits the nail on the head. All our neighbor states pay their teachers significantly better.
Mike, I'm sorry our stinginess means we will lose you.
MC, on how much, we don't need to aim at an arbitrary number; we need to aim at making more possible. But as we've discussed previously, it is clear that South Dakota state government is choosing to spend less on education than other states, who apparently are outpacing us in teacher recruitment and in math scores. I don't think there is a magic dollar figure, but if there is one, it's not the one Governor Daugaard gives us now.