This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Apr 18, 2004
Education funding: Sanford, House push toward the dismantling of
public education
JAN McCARTHY
For the
Herald-Journal
The S.C. House of Representatives recently adopted
a budget package that under-funds public education by roughly $270 million.
Adopting many of the recommendations of Gov. Mark Sanford, the House majority
offered itself as a willing accomplice in the governor's bid to effectively
dismantle public education in South Carolina.Consider that three rounds of
mid-year budget cuts since December 2002 have left good teachers without jobs,
good schools without funding for their programs and good class-size reduction
initiatives ruined. Those cuts were not restored by the 2003 budget, which
relied on one-time federal dollars for even the appearance of fiscal
responsibility, and they formed the baseline for the cuts adopted in the 2004
debate.The House budget plan would be devastating for South Carolina. Only a few
years ago, the state enjoyed the beginning of a modest renaissance and
advancement in public education priorities. For the first time, it wasn't
unthinkable that education observers may, in less than a decade, rank South
Carolina in the same breath with our neighbors, North Carolina and Georgia, in
education quality.Our students' standardized test scores have improved faster
than in any other state in the nation, outpacing other states' scores annually
for the past five years. Twice in the past two years, Education Week magazine
ranked our teachers highest in the nation in quality.Suddenly, however, the
state is reversing course. In adopting the Wal-Mart-style race to the bottom,
Sanford and his House compatriot, House Ways and Means Chairman Bobby Harrell,
threaten amazing progress that so many educators, students and parents worked so
hard to achieve.How?Wade back through the Education Accountability Act of 1998,
which established and funded the state's new standards and accountability model.
Wade farther back through the Education Improvement Act of 1984, which levied an
additional penny on the state sales tax for a handful of specific education
programs. (Although it's worth nothing, while reviewing this history, that
Sanford's present effort to block-grant state funds to school districts will
effectively eliminate the provisions of the EIA, since EIA line items will be
rendered impotent in the name of "flexibility.")To see the blueprint of the
Sanford-Harrell plan in context, you have to go all the way back to the
Education Finance Act of 1977, the bedrock of our state's modern education
funding. At EFA's heart is a funding formula for the "base student cost," the
dollar figure that represents the annual per-pupil expenditure. EFA requires the
state Board of Economic Advisors to use the formula to identify this cost, then
requires the Legislature to appropriate the funds for it.For the past quarter
century, EFA's base student cost was sacrosanct. Education Superintendent Inez
Tenenbaum observes that lawmakers "moved heaven and Earth" to fund it. When the
state Supreme Court in the late 1990s interpreted the Constitution to require a
"minimally adequate" education, lawmakers of every stripe agreed that the EFA
and its base student cost fit the bill.But lawmakers haven't fully funded the
EFA since 2000. In 2003-04, the base student cost should be funded at $2,234 --
a paltry sum compared to our neighbors' funding of per-pupil expenditures -- and
Sanford-Harrell shortchanges it by $407 per child. With more than 665,000
students attending grades K-12 in South Carolina, the difference amounts to more
than $270 million.South Carolina can never expect to leave the bottom of the
nation in education -- and cannot expect talented young people to enter the
teaching profession -- if state government continues to turn a callous eye
toward true needs in education.For educators seeking wisdom from House leaders,
the budget debate was an exercise in futility. More than two dozen amendments
seeking to restore cut funding to education programs, or to increase funding,
were beaten back by the House majority. The Governor's Institute for Reading,
the Writing Improvement Network, the John de la Howe School, neighborhood
homework centers, teacher quality programs and adult education programs were a
few of Sanford-Harrell's casualties.Of the Spartanburg County delegation, only
Reps. Mike Anthony and Brenda Lee voted consistently for the pro-education
amendments. Reps. Lanny Littlejohn, Scott Talley and Joseph Mahaffey voted
consistently against them.During the three-day debate, only one pro-education
budget amendment was adopted: a measure co-sponsored by Rep. Bob Walker of
Landrum to devote $2 million of lottery funds to reading programs in middle
schools. While Walker's effort was appreciated, his chosen source of funding
reflects a weaker commitment than those demonstrated by others. Lottery funds
are temporary and unreliable, so a good idea that wins public opinion this year
may dissolve next year, leaving schoolchildren right where they started --
behind.What message is sent by these events to South Carolina's educators and
schoolchildren? In an election year, toeing the House leadership's line is more
important and valuable than funding public schools.Jan McCarthy is president of
the S.C. Education Association.