By Dick Miller
WE.CONNECT.DOTS: Public education in Pennsylvania has been a sordid political battleground for 25 years. According to the Washington Post, this state has the worst school-funding inequalities in the nation. “Per pupil spending in Pennsylvania’s poorest school districts is 33 percent lower than in wealthiest ones.”
The release of a year-long study by the state’s Basic Education Funding Commission this week offers a glimmer of hope that the future might bring corrective action. The 15-member commission spent the last year soliciting and studying ideas for new school funding formula.
“Pennsylvania is one of only three states without a consistent basic education formula,” according to State Representative Mark Longietti (D-7, Mercer County), a commission member. Poor school districts here actually get less state money than wealthy ones.
The intrigues of several forces have created a perfect storm. None is dominant, but neither has any been completely stifled.
1. Pennsylvania’s K-12 education system is funded through a combination of local (53 percent), state (36 percent) and federal (11 percent) sources. In 2012, Pennsylvania ranked 44th in the percentage share of education costs provided by the state. Its 36 percent rate compares to a national average of 45 percent.
2. The transition from an industrial economy to a technical one creates a demand for higher quality education at a time when businesses don’t want to pony up their share. Large industries with numerous workers once bolstered cities and boroughs, paying massive real estate and wage taxes to local schools. Today technical businesses hire less workers and operate on smaller taxable real estate, sending their taxes to suburban areas. In Pennsylvania, an adjustment in tax bases to offset this disparity has yet to occur.
3. Legislation adopted around 1990 provided more access to state funds by districts with clout with their local lawmakers. As a result, additional funds flowed to grant programs deemed “competitive” rather than “corrective.” Most of this money went to the wealthier districts with better grant writers or strong political connections in Harrisburg. Need and fluctuations in tax bases and enrollment contributed little to decisions affecting disbursement of state funds.
4. During that time, a movement to diminish public education and substitute privatization grew stronger. Charter schools do offer more local choices. Several of the owners of these charter schools have become millionaires who write larger campaign checks than superintendents, principals and teachers. These charter schools, of course, do not pay teachers as well as the public districts.
5. Charter schools and untargeted public funding feed those in Harrisburg who would destroy teacher unions. This movement accelerated when Republican Tom Corbett became governor and the legislature was solidly under control by his party. President Obama poured additional monies into education as part of his recovery plan for the Great Recession. Corbett refused to replace those funds when the Federal recovery effort expired. This assault resulted in the loss of 25,000 public education jobs.
6. Teacher unions have yet to come to the table. While unions in the private sector delivered concessions and rollbacks to keep their employers afloat, teachers continued to get annual raises and enjoy good benefits. Many teachers do not consider themselves unionists and members of other unions don’t consider teachers as brothers and sisters.
The 2014 election may not contribute toward solving the funding problem. True, new Gov. Tom Wolf ran on the promise of restoring public education funding. He won big but had no down ballot coat tails. Republican actually increased voting margins in both houses of the General Assembly. Many Republican legislators do not recognize there is a funding problem. Not a single example of a Republican losing a legislative seat last year due to his/her support of Corbett slashing school funds can be found.
We await the price of correcting this inequity. One law that states school districts cannot receive less funding than the year before regardless of decreases in enrollment, adds to the expense of the remedy. The Commission intends to roll out a new formula in the next few weeks. Realistically, 6-8 years is needed to establish parity, with taxes raised every year. Wolf would shorten that time but the Republican legislature will never provide the votes.
Bottom Line: Even our national policy on funding of public education shares blame. In most other nations the greatest influx of funds to public education comes from national sources. In the U.S., federal funds account for only 11 percent. Greater funding from a national tax base can reduce inequities in public education so long as Washington does not act like Harrisburg.
