 |
Home | Search | Browse | About IPO |
Staff |
Links |
Legislative Action
Lesson in funding education
Tell Mommy, 'It's not my fault'
By JENNIFER HALPERIN
|
It has become downright depressing to think about reforming the way education is funded in Illinois. Like the federal deficit, the issue has become one that is discussed and debated and written about ad nauseum, yet it never seems any closer to resolution. As everyone keeps reminding each other, an election year isn't the logical time to expect the state's legislature to tackle such a harrowing subject. A politician's pledge to raise constituents' taxes for any reason, even one with the high probability of being necessary to resolve our education woes, rarely draws love and votes from the masses. Some officials promise that next year, after the election is over and the pols are secure for another term, we'll see something actually get done. But Illinoisans have heard similar promises during the past decade, to no avail. Even a lawsuit that was filed in November of 1990 — the Committee for Educational Rights v Edgar — in hopes of reforming the funding formula has not changed the situation. The committee is a group of more than 50 school districts. It contends that the state's school funding scheme violates the Illinois Constitution. Barring any further developments regarding this lawsuit, which now is bogged down in the appeals process, it seems that unless this year's gubernatorial election itself becomes a referendum on the state's method of paying for children's schooling, lawmakers won't feel much pressure to change the funding formula. Judging by the difficult time lawmakers had trying to resolve Chicago's school crisis last year, it's nearly impossible to be optimistic about a reformed statewide education funding formula being hammered out anytime soon, no matter what part of an election cycle the state is in. State Comptroller Dawn dark Netsch, a Democratic gubernatorial hopeful, has been out front on the matter, raising the possibility of increasing income taxes and decreasing property taxes to fund education. Other gubernatorial candidates, unsurprisingly, haven't been as specific on the subject. They've been spending more time arguing over who first came up with the notion of banning assault weapons in the state — not that that subject isn't worthy of discussion, but it's arguably more of a headline-grabber than is the complicated education-finance issue. Bob Leininger is one person who knows about frustrations in pushing legislators to face and then make decisions on the complex issue of funding education. When he announced his impending retirement late last year from his position as state school superintendent, he was credited by many pundits with being a loyal advocate for schools — one who pushed for change in the state's education funding formula even at the expense of political popularity. He supported raising the income tax to reduce schools' reliance on property taxes — the concept being touted by Netsch. Unfortunately, it was and remains easier for lawmakers to sit back and do nothing when it comes to altering the education formula. Legislators are able to excuse themselves from action by pointing to the inevitable gridlock waiting in the legislative chambers to choke just about any changes that happen to crawl one "babystep" in the legislative process. And they're not wrong. This is a situation that has people lining up on so many different sides it's sometimes hard to remember who's aligned with whom. Worse, it demands that some people come out of the ring as losers, which no one is willing to do. It's like waiting for someone to finally say "yes" in the game "Mother May I." |
Key dates in March
Key dates in April
House session days scheduled
House deadlines
Senate session days scheduled
Senate deadlines |
When even the 36 members of the state's blue-ribbon Task Force on School Finance couldn't completely agree on a better way to collect and distribute education money, is it reasonable to expect 177 lawmakers with conflicting regional worries to do so? The lawmakers, civic leaders and education officials sitting on that task force probably were among the better-equipped minds in our state to debate the subject; they even tried to put aside political considerations in trying to hash
32/February 1994/Illinois Issues
out a solution.
The fact remains that while the state's more affluent districts can afford to spend $10,000 or more on a student's education, poorer ones spend far less than even the $3,898 identified as necessary to provide an adequate education. With financial support in the classroom meeting that threshold for only an estimated one in five Illinois students, the state has a mammoth problem.
The task force recommended that the "loser" tag be worn by about 230 mostly rural downstate districts that have relatively low property taxes. (See Illinois Issues, February 1993, page 24.) These districts would have been urged to increase their property tax rates, and state aid would have been diminished accordingly. The "winners" would have been those 300-plus districts, mostly in the suburban Chicago region, with high property tax rates. They would have had to decrease their property tax rates, with the state making up the lost money.
Other proposed solutions, such as the failed 1992 "education amendment," carve out other winners and losers. That proposed constitutional amendment, which aimed to increase the state's share of education funding, would have made suburban residents the losers, as their taxes would have gone up without much added benefit. City and rural schools likely would have emerged as winners.
Fixing the state aid formula will only occur when and if politicians are ready to choose between the districts that need state help and those with heavy tax burdens. Alarmingly, it's hard to predict when (if ever) that will occur because it would anger many taxpayers.
More money is going to be needed one way or another to fund all school districts at the "adequate" level identified by the task force. Some people disagree, talking instead about trying voucher schools, charter schools — any alternative to the dreaded notion of talking about a tax increase.
Eventually, those in power are going to have to show some courage on financing education and face up to an unpopular necessity of doing something. If they don't, what kind of example is our august General Assembly showing to all those children? Don't act. Wait and stonewall. Don't accept responsibility. Just tell Mommy, "It wasn't my fault."
February 1994/Illinois Issues/33
|
|