Showing posts with label OEA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OEA. Show all posts

Friday, August 1, 2008

OEA Proposal Would Create Enormous Unfunded Mandate

A constitutional amendment promoted by a teacher's union would impose the largest unfunded mandate in Oklahoma history and could require massive budget cuts to vital agencies or enormous tax increases on working families.

"The Oklahoma Education Association's proposed constitutional amendment would require major reductions in crucial needs such as roads, public safety and health care programs; increased taxes; or both," said state Rep. Tad Jones, a Claremore Republican who is vice-chair of the House Appropriation and Budget Committee and Chair of the House Education Committee. "It's completely unnecessary. The Legislature has provided record-setting appropriations for schools for several years in a row, including significant teacher pay increases, and our commitment to education remains strong."

Nearly 50 cents out of every Oklahoma state tax dollar currently goes to education. This year, total state, local and federal funding for public schools will exceed $4.15 billion and the National Education Association's own figures show Oklahoma spends about $6,944 per student - more than the cost of a year's tuition at either OU or OSU.

In fact, Oklahoma's public school expenditures as a percentage of gross state product rank 17th highest in the nation, so Oklahomans actually devote a larger share of their available dollars to schools than most states.

Aside from potential cuts, any tax increases indirectly required by the OEA initiative would be devastating to working families already struggling to get by, Jones said.

"Oklahomans can't afford higher taxes," he said. "We recently lowered income taxes and raised the standard deduction for working families and retirees. To reverse course at a time when Oklahomans are facing $4 gas would create a real hardship for many."

The potential cuts to state programs forced by the OEA would be felt across the state.

"Oklahoma roads are in desperate need of repair and the eight-year plan approved this year will be imperiled if the OEA's constitutional amendment is adopted," said state Rep. Mike Thompson, an Oklahoma City Republican who chairs the House Transportation Committee. "How will it help our economy to put more money into schools if our roads look like a minefield and our bridges are on the verge of collapse?"

A recent review by USA Today found that Oklahoma has more than 5,000 bridges considered deficient - the second-most in the nation.

Public safety programs could also be imperiled by the OEA's plan.

"There are about 25,000 inmates in Oklahoma prisons and, contrary to the urban legends, those men aren't 'non-violent offenders;' they're murderers, rapists, child molesters and drug dealers," said state Rep. Rex Duncan, a Sand Springs Republican who chairs the House Judiciary and Public Safety Committee. "Recklessly cutting our public safety budget would literally endanger lives."

The OEA plan could also endanger the future of many schools.

State Rep. Jeff Hickman, chairman of the House Rural Caucus, who represents five counties in northwest Oklahoma, noted that the OEA initiative is similar to one implemented in Arkansas that led to school consolidation even as lawmakers increased funding.

"It's this simple: The states the OEA cites as models closed rural schools," Hickman said. "And since the OEA plan is very similar to the Arkansas initiative that led to the consolidation of 57 schools, it's hard to believe they don't expect the same thing to happen in Oklahoma. Reducing educational opportunity does not help Oklahoma children. We need to support our schools, not close them."

In Arkansas, lawmakers closed schools and increased taxes as they worked to hike school funding, yet failed to improve student performance. Hickman said it's no surprise Oklahoma students continue to outscore Arkansas kids on the ACT.

Fact Sheet on the OEA’s “HOPE” Initiative

OEA Claim: Oklahoma schools receive very little tax funding.

FACT: Nearly 50 cents out of every Oklahoma state tax dollar already goes to education. This year, total state, local and federal funding for public schools will exceed $4.15 billion and the National Education Association’s own figures show Oklahoma spends about $6,944 per student – that’s more than the cost of a year’s tuition at either OU or OSU.

OEA Claim: Other states dedicate more resources to education than Oklahoma does.

FACT: The National Science Board found that Oklahoma ranks 17th in the nation in public school expenditures as a share of gross state product, so Oklahomans actually devote a larger share of their available dollars to schools than most states.

OEA Claim: Other states in the region are outperforming Oklahoma due to alleged funding differences.

FACT: Oklahoma students achieved an average composite score of 20.7 on the 2007 ACT tests, outperforming students in Texas, Arkansas, Colorado and New Mexico, even though those states spent “more” per pupil (at least on paper).

In reality, Oklahoma schools are more efficient than schools in surrounding states. Contrary to the claims of the OEA, Oklahoma is a model for other states, not the other way around.

OEA Claim: Oklahoma taxpayers are “currently providing enough resources” to pay for an $850 million increase without any problem.

FACT: The OEA’s plan would create the largest unfunded mandate in Oklahoma history. Again, nearly 50 cents out of every Oklahoma tax dollar already goes to education. To take an additional $850 million from other agencies would require drastic cuts.

The state could eliminate all road funding and still not come close to meeting the OEA’s demands.

Or the state could free all violent criminals and close every prison and still not come close to freeing up enough money for the OEA.

Or the state could eliminate all programs helping abused children and battered women and still not generate the money the OEA wants.

In fact, the state could eliminate road funding and the budgets for the Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Conservation Commission, Department of Consumer Credit, Corporation Commission, Department of Environmental Quality, Insurance Commissioner, Department of Labor, Department of Tourism, Water Resources Board, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Public Safety, Department of Veterans Affairs and the Supreme Court combined, and it would still not free up enough money to meet the OEA’s demands.

OEA Claim: The HOPE initiative will not mandate a tax increase.

FACT: When a court order forced Arkansas to implement its version of the HOPE initiative, the Arkansas Legislature was forced to pass a $400 million tax increase in February 2004.

In Oklahoma, it would take a 46 cents per gallon increase in gasoline taxes or similar measure to generate the $850 million demanded by the OEA.

OEA Claim: The HOPE initiative will not force school consolidation.

FACT: Arkansas’s rural Democrat-dominated Legislature was forced to eliminate 57 school districts when implementing their version of the HOPE initiative to dramatically increase school funding. During that process, every school with fewer than 350 students was on the chopping block. There are between 200 and 250 districts that size in Oklahoma.

Arkansas’ version of the HOPE imitative led to higher taxes and fewer local schools and they still lag behind Oklahoma on student performance. It is bizarre, to say the least, that the OEA now champions the Arkansas model for Oklahoma.