RSS Feed MenuAccording to the New Jersey Star Ledger, Republican governor Chris Christie is cutting $475 million in aid to school districts, $62 million in aid to colleges and $12 million to hospital charity care. Among a number of other programs, he is slashing state subsidies for the popular New Jersey Transit system. Higher transit fares are the least of Christie’s problems, however, as grumbling state employees, union workers, angry special interests, and a hostile media line up to oppose the governor’s move.
Realistically, Christie has little choice in the matter. With a budget deficit topping $1 billion dollars, and a projected 2011 deficit of nearly $11 billion dollars, Christie has called a state of emergency. Rather than begging for money at the federal trough, Christie is forcing his own government’s hand. The proposed cuts will force state government to make the necessary tough choices that state agencies and school districts were able to offset during the housing bubble and years of artificially high property taxes.
“I take no joy in having to make these decisions. I know these judgments will affect fellow New Jerseyans and will hurt,” Christie said. “This is not a happy moment. However, what choices do we have left?” This is the key question, and nobody – including Christie’s political opponents – has a better answer than Christie himself.
According to Democrats, Christie is robbing Peter to pay Paul. State aid to schools will have to be replaced with local funds, leading either to higher property taxes to pad school district coffers, or to serious cuts in bloated local education budgets. “This is an easy thing to pick someone else’s pocket — you’re taking the money from local taxpayers to fill your budget,” said Stephen Sweeney, the Democratic state senate president.
Barbara Keshishian, president of New Jersey Education Association, warns that Christie’s cuts to education could have “serious unintended consequences for the future of our public schools.” Newspapers are calling the cuts “draconian”.
This fiscal belt-tightening, however, lays bare a number of problems with the current public education system – not just in New Jersey, but across the country. Public school has traditionally been funded almost entirely at the local level, and school districts still receive the majority of their funding from local property taxes. Over the years, however, school districts have increasingly leaned on state aid to shore up their budgets.
This, in turn, has led states to rely more and more heavily on federal funding and the strings attached to that funding. Federal education spending sky-rocketed under the No Child Left Behind program, and peaked in 2009 with the federal bailout of the states. Now Democrats in Congress and the president are trying to entrench the federal government even further into the American education system, despite any indication that such involvement actually helps failing schools.
At the same time, parents across America have begun to opt-out of the public school system. Turned off by increased federal involvement, union entrenchment, and unresponsive school administrators, parents have flocked to charter schools, magnets, and private institutions. In 2010 and 2011, with no bailouts to fill empty state treasuries, and with shrinking student populations, school districts will finally be forced to make the cuts they should have made years ago.
Moreover, schools and local governments will need to start considering ways to make their schools more competitive. This will require rethinking teacher merit pay, the power and overreach of teacher and administrator unions, and the outdated use of tenure to protect teachers from even the most basic accountability.
Christie is on the right track in New Jersey, meeting the crisis head on and tackling it before it overwhelms his state and brings government to a halt. Now local governments across New Jersey and across America need to consider the implications. With states like California and Arizona teetering on the brink of fiscal collapse, perhaps it’s time for those states to consider taking a similar approach to state spending, while shifting more of the responsibility of government back to local communities.
On the education front, school choice and competition is vital for America’s schools if they are to remain autonomous and effective. Relying forever on state or federal aid, and allowing the federal government to further enmesh itself in local education is the wrong approach to fixing our nation’s schools. Not only is it a dangerous fiscal proposition, but one which threatens our children with mediocrity in the name of egalitarianism.
In New Jersey, the question remains whether Christie’s cuts will go far enough, and whether local governments and politicians on both sides of the aisle will be able to work together to make the transition as painless for New Jerseyans as possible. Christie may have popular support for his proposals now, but that could drop off just as quickly as the fiscal crisis deepens. If that happens, and states can’t balance their own budgets, the federal government promises to become even more involved in educating our children. Chris Christie understands this. The question is, will the rest of America have the courage to do the same?
balconesfault // Feb 16, 2010 at 5:01 pm
At the same time, parents across America have begun to opt-out of the public school system. Turned off by increased federal involvement, union entrenchment, and unresponsive school administrators, parents have flocked to charter schools, magnets, and private institutions.
You do realize that charter schools and magnets are both part of the public school system?
In fact, most magnets are direct creations of the school districts they reside within, creating a critical mass of elite (oh no! elite!) students which makes it cost-effective to incorporate high end classes like differential equations, latin, calculus based physics, and others that most schools just don’t have the talent pool to fill. Those schools also provide a value to those students by providing them the opportunity to learn and compete with the best students from throughout a geographically large district, and thus prepares them better for elite (oh no, elite!) universities.
Even charter schools are required to meet accreditation and curricula standards, and are funded by the public. Often charter schools provide a grounds for alternative education methods that are difficult to pull off without a very highly trained and motivated teacher pool … and unfortunately the size of that pool is limited, particularly given the salary competition for top end college graduates from corporate America. So states charter these schools to provide a method for the public system to include and fund these alternative learning methods (as well as to ensure that a certain level of quality is being provided on the public dime).
By the way – here’s something to provide a chill down the spine of most Frum Forum readers. If you want to find Howard Zinn’s “People’s History of the United States” included in a High School curricula, go check out your local magnet school. There’s a pretty decent chance it’s a primary source.
kevin47 // Feb 16, 2010 at 6:30 pm
My American History class proudly featured Howard Zinn amongst its multi-media offerings. This wasn’t a magnet school. Zinn is popular across all public education platforms. The class sucked, and did nothing to prepare me for my elite college education.
But that’s neither here nor there. In a sane world, parents would be rewarded for opting out of the public school system. But this isn’t a sane world, and our public education system exists not to educate, but to provide jobs.
Good for Governor Christie for being willing to take on the interests of overcompensated government employees. They are well organized and (especially in New Jersey) willing to do anything to defend their interests.
balconesfault // Feb 16, 2010 at 8:24 pm
In a sane world, parents would be rewarded for opting out of the public school system.
I’m sure those rewards exist in God’s Kingdom, where those not tainted by the evils of the public school system will get to sit that much closer to the Almighty.
kevin47 // Feb 17, 2010 at 12:02 am
“I’m sure those rewards exist in God’s Kingdom, where those not tainted by the evils of the public school system will get to sit that much closer to the Almighty.”
They also exist in every other market in existence, where if you don’t use something, you don’t have to pay for it. Good analogy though, with the God thing. Is that an example of this “nuance” you go on and on about?
Mike at The Big Stick // Feb 17, 2010 at 10:07 am
To be fair – magnets and charter schools aren’t really an ‘opt-out’ of public schools. They are designed to offer two things: 1) A different learnign experience from mainline public schools and 2) A sense of ‘elitism’ for the kids lucky enough to make it in. In my opinion the second factor is most important. My daughter has attended a magnet-type school and the kids are constantly told that there is a high expectation because there is a waiting list and always someone willing to replace them and put in the hard work. That drives results in exactly the same way that private schools drive results by creating a sense of elitism. At that age, sometimes it’s good to puff up kid’s egos a bit.
E.D. Kain // Feb 17, 2010 at 12:13 pm
Look – charters especially really do offer an ‘opt-out’ from the public school system. They are still public, but they are largely not part of the ’system.’ Teachers are often not unionized. Charters have much more autonomy, are much less connected to the larger bureaucracy. Is it perfect? Not at all. But it’s the direction that’s important – away from big government, federal involvement, and so forth – toward autonomy and local control. Away from big labor, too, for that matter.
kevin47 // Feb 17, 2010 at 12:57 pm
I would say charters are certainly an opt-out, and that magnets are not. That isn’t really relevant to the post. The question is whether parents perceive charters and magnets as an opt-out. Magnets typically arise in urban areas where a district is at risk of losing motivated students.
What would magnet parents do if magnets weren’t available? They would opt-out via charter or private school. So call it opt-out lite, but the fact is that parents are frustrated with a system devoted to perpetuating its own bureaucracy rather than meeting the needs of students.
12-year-old girl arrested for doodling in class - E.D. Kain - American Tory - True/Slant // Feb 18, 2010 at 3:35 pm
[...] school choice. If this is the direction our schools are headed, maybe it’s time to not only break Washington’s increasing hold over our education system, but break the public education monopoly up entirely. I support [...]
Meanwhile, at True/Slant (and elsewhere) | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen // Feb 22, 2010 at 12:16 pm
[...] Also, at FrumForum (and yes, I really do hate that name) I talk about Chris Christie’s state of emergency. [...]
The Winds of Education « Vogue Republic // Feb 25, 2010 at 6:27 pm
[...] for school choice. If this is the direction our schools are headed, maybe it’s time to not only break Washington’s increasing hold over our education system, but break the public education monopoly up entirely. I support public [...]