Home > Uncategorized > This Just In: Half of the States Spending Less On Schools Now Than in 2008

This Just In: Half of the States Spending Less On Schools Now Than in 2008

August 29, 2016

Today’s NYTimes editorial, “Back to School With Budgets Still Tight“, opens with these sobering paragraphs:

The children entering kindergarten and first grade this school year were not yet born when the Great Recession ended in mid-2009. Incoming high school seniors were not yet in middle school.

But in many states and localities, the wounds to school budgets from recession-era cutbacks are still large, leaving schools with more students and less money. Recent data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows that as of last year, 25 states were still spending less per student than before the recession, adjusted for inflation, and cuts in seven states exceeded 10 percent. In 31 states, local government spending per student fell between 2008 and 2014, the latest data available (adjusted for inflation). It is safe to assume some improvement in recent years, but even so, there is clearly a long way to go before overall spending catches up with enrollment and inflation.

The editorial then describes the especially egregious instances of slashed spending (Oklahoma and Kansas) and praises the efforts of two states, California and Minnesota.

It is interesting— and not at all surprising— to note that the parsimonious states are all led by Republicans who refer to public schools as “government schools” and the two states singled out for their expansive and future oriented spending are led by progressive Democrats. I’m sure if you dig into the data you’d find that the DISTRICTS who recovered from the Great Recession are those serving affluent children whose local taxpayers can dig deeper into their pockets and those who remain stuck are the ones serving children raised in poverty. In the meantime, we continue to read that “choice”— NOT more funding— is the solution to fixing the “failing” schools serving poverty stricken children. If parents who can afford to spend more on their child’s education are doing so money MUST make a difference. In the meantime, parents who reside in communities who cannot raise more money and cannot afford to spend more themselves are left to choose from a list of substandard schools with programs that do not begin to match those offered to affluent children. And we wonder why it is increasingly difficult to move from one socio-economic start to a higher one.

%d bloggers like this: