Editorial: School-money shuffle

May 6, 2005

School-money shuffle

Though Tallahassee exerts more and more control over local school districts through FCAT grades and other ploys, Tallahassee has paid less and less of the costs since Gov. Bush hit town in 1999.

In the budget to be approved today, the state will pay 56.6 percent of school costs. In the last pre-Bush budget, the state paid 61.2 percent. Rather than hold off on more tax cuts, lawmakers decided that counties should impose higher taxes on homeowners to pay for schools.

Note that the state pays a smaller percentage even though voters in 2002 approved an amendment requiring Tallahassee to pay for smaller classes. Gov. Bush this year continued his assault on that measure, which he opposed and promised to thwart by "devious" means. The most basic ploy has been to "give" districts class-size money by robbing it from other necessities, such as paying for higher utility bills and keeping up with growth. Budget starvation is amplified in South Florida -- where voters put the amendment over the top -- because of unfair financing formulas designed to benefit the northern counties of GOP leaders.

Another of Gov. Bush's class-size attacks appears to have failed, with the Senate refusing to put repeal on the ballot. But in one of the most politically cowardly acts in recent history, the House and Senate have agreed to delay crucial steps in class-size reduction until after Gov. Bush leaves office in January 2007. That move would postpone the time when parents would see firsthand the full benefits, perhaps making it easier to make another run next year at repeal. The ultimate motive, however, is to make someone else clean up the financial mess Gov. Bush created by not paying for smaller classes year-to-year.

Is he running for the Senate or the White House? For sure, Gov. Bush is running away from a problem Florida voters told him to solve.

Posted by Staff at May 6, 2005 6:23 PM
Comments

The Post is at it again.

They scrupulously avoid talking about dollars and descend into percentages knowing full well that the absolute State contribution is rising. But, quoting only percentages is an attempt to mislead the reader.

When some costs are mandated, the 'nice to have" expenditures are reduced. That is the way it is with both personal and public expenditures.

For some reason, the Post seems to believe that State should raise taxes rather than the school boards. On the other hand, the State could reduce non school expenditures, but then the Post would complain about that. It seems the Post believes that government has this unlimited amount of dollars to spend on whatever the Post thinks it should. We should be glad that the Post is not our elected reperesentatives. We couldn't afford them.

The Post then assumes there will be great benefits from class size reductions. The Post forgets that California saw only increased costs and few if any benefits in the quality of education. The whole class size argument is an chimera. But, never mind that, all that counts to the Post is more expenditures. And it that doesn't work, just spend more.

They close with the obligatory ad hominem against the governor. Too much MoDo and Molly. What is it about the left that makes them think these ad hominems are actually clever?

Rick

Posted by: Rick Caird at May 6, 2005 6:10 AM

Kudzu.com: Mosquitos are breeding.  Ready for the bites?
Today's deal from DealSwarm.com
AJC Breaking News Updates