G.O.P. Assembly Leader Proposes To Save California Public Education Cuts Without New Taxes--By Shifting School Money From Democ

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Bill Cavala
A veteran of over 30 years in Sacramento

At the heart of any discussion of the state’s budget deficit lies funding for public education. In the late 1980’s, California’s voters determined that at least 40% of the state’s general fund revenues should be used to back up local property taxes – limited by 1978’s Proposition 13.

That means any cuts in state spending that exclude k-12 funding will fall upon the remaining 60% of the general fund. That means huge cuts in higher education, corrections, and health/welfare spending. To avoid these cuts, which could mean the early release of felons from state prisons, the GOP looks to cut public education – then to claim that the cuts won’t matter.

GOP leader Mike Villines is specific: “We can get more money in the classrooms without raising the deficit” (or raising taxes).

Villines would do this by shifting money from urban school districts to rural and suburban seats. Or, should we call them “Republican” school districts.

While the courts restrained the legislature’s natural desire to provide more money to districts represented by the majority, the use of mandates and categorical aid has at least let the urban school districts grab the lion’s share of funding to deal with their lion’s share of the problem.

Teaching children for whom English is a second language is difficult. Teaching children from homes broken up by poverty is difficult. Teaching children who come from neighborhoods where underworld activity provides greater economic benefits than education is difficult. Teaching children in schools where violence is commonplace makes retention of good teachers difficult. Teaching children who lack the benefits of pre-schooling and of a home situation that encourages education is difficult.

While all teaching is difficult, teaching in a typical urban school district is more difficult. Money may not solve these problems, but it helps. Reducing this money to solve budget deficits doesn’t help. Diverting money from urban districts to rural and suburban districts isn’t “fair”, it’s REPUBLICAN.