What's Wrong with Oklahoma State Question 744? Part I

In the past, I've written a brief summary of the issues that Oklahomans will face if SQ744 passes the ballot in November.  I wrote a letter to the editor which was published back in March.  Now, I think I should go into more detail about what is wrong with SQ744.

First, let's start with the Ballot Title.  A Ballot Title is the text that is presented on the ballot in an attempt to let voters know what they are voting on.  Ideally, it would be unbiased and state all of the facts, but that is rarely the case.

This measure adds a new Article to the Oklahoma Constitution. The Article concerns the amount of money the State provides to support common schools, pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade. The Article requires the State each year to provide an amount of money per pupil that is at least equal to the average of the amounts spent per pupil by the states surrounding Oklahoma: Missouri, Texas, Kansas, Arkansas, Colorado, and New Mexico. If the average of the amounts spent per pupil by the surrounding states decreases for any year, the State must provide the same amount of money per pupil as the previous year. The amount spent per pupil means the amount spent for the day-today operations of schools and school districts, including instruction, support services, and non-instruction services, but not including building projects or debt. The Article requires annual reports on education spending and school performance. Common schools must be funded in this manner within three years.

The first thing you might have noticed is that there is no mention in the Ballot Title of where this funding will come from.  If you choose to listen to Becky Felts, President of the Oklahoma Education Association, then the funding for the HOPE Act is truly counting on "hope."

"The growth in economic revenue over the course the next years will fund SQ 744 without doing any harm to any other state services." - Becky Felts

So according to her, we will experience phenomenal economic growth in the next few years.  Wow.  Can she accurately predict my future, too?  You know, there's an old saying:  hope in one hand, spit in the other, and see which fills up faster.  It most definitely rings true here.

So where is this funding REALLY going to come from, when all that hoping doesn't pan out?  There are two courses of action that the State of Oklahoma can take, and the People will not like either of them.  You can either drastically cut funding elsewhere in the state's budget, or raise taxes.  There are no two ways about it, and there is minimal chance of fixing it later.

Let's move on to the next important part of the ballot title:

The Article requires the State each year to provide an amount of money per pupil that is at least equal to the average of the amounts spent per pupil by the states surrounding Oklahoma: Missouri, Texas, Kansas, Arkansas, Colorado, and New Mexico. If the average of the amounts spent per pupil by the surrounding states decreases for any year, the State must provide the same amount of money per pupil as the previous year.

Did you actually read that?  If this measure passes the ballot, then it will not be your Representatives and Senators deciding on education funding, but rather the Legislatures of other states.  If you vote YES on SQ744, you are voting to give away control of Oklahoma education spending to other states.  I don't think I can make it any more clearer than that.  Well, maybe I can, but I try to keep this blog as family friendly as possible.

Those two sentence spell it out pretty plainly, but most people won't be sure of what exactly they say.  Those sentences state that the State of Oklahoma will have an obligation via the Oklahoma Constitution to spend at least the average of surrounding states per pupil, and can never decrease that spending.  In other words, our education spending will initially go up nearly $1700 per pupil, and if Texas raises theirs, then we have to raise ours, and if Arkansas raises theirs, then we have to raise ours, but if Colorado decreases theirs, we cannot decrease ours.  This is how you are giving control of your tax dollars to other states.

I keep thinking I should put it more bluntly, but like I said... "family friendly."

The amount spent per pupil means the amount spent for the day-today operations of schools and school districts, including instruction, support services, and non-instruction services, but not including building projects or debt.

If your feathers haven't already been ruffled, then this last section of the Ballot Title likely will.  This section says, point blank and simple, that the increased funding can be used for anything that the local school board desires other than building projects or debts.  Yes, Oklahoma's teacher salaries are behind other states', but Oklahoma also has a lower cost of living than many of those states.  But I think a lot of the support for this measure comes from that.  Anyone in business knows that you can't increase performance by increasing someone's salary, but I know that is what a lot of the supporters of State Question 744 are hoping for.  In addition, you cannot increase the performance of students just by increasing the amount of money you spend on them.

Later this weekend, I'll go over the actual measure that is being voted on.  If you're like most Oklahomans who go to the polls, you probably think that the text you see on the ballot itself is what you are voting for.  Nope, it doesn't work that way.