You have to wonder why some Kansas legislators and leaders are so upset that the state constitution requires them to provide an adequate education for Kansas students.
Is it that they want our children to have a less-than-adequate education?
Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt argued for such mediocrity Tuesday by saying changes to the constitution that would allow legislators more wiggle room in regards to school finance should be put on the November ballot.
Specifically, Schmidt said the state Supreme Court’s requirement that schools meet certain educational benchmarks was not the original intent when voters in 1966 approved how state schools are governed.
In other words, he’d like the state to lower the bar on expected outcomes.
Why? Because a good education costs money.
Year after year, state legislators have failed to fund schools so they can meet what are commonly known as the Rose Capacities, benchmarks for expected outcomes as determined by a 1989 lawsuit in Kentucky called Rose vs. Council for Better Education.
Case after case, the Kansas Supreme Court, enforcer of the constitution, returns to Article 6: “The legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state.”
It’s those 15 words — especially the word “suitable” — that tie conservative legislators up in knots.
But it’s those same words that ensure our schools stay up to par.
Unfortunately, that’s not always been the case.
Before last summer’s infusion, Kansas ranked 31st in spending on education and less than all of our regional peers. While other states were making 20- and 30-percent increases to education in the recession’s wake, Kansas has increased funding by 4.8 percent in the past decade. Predictably, student scores also have slipped.
Many legislators balked when the Supreme Court ruled last summer school funding was inadequate and threatened to shutter schools unless legislators addressed the issue. With their backs against the wall, legislators randomly settled on $300 million spread across two years, though those with knowledge of the issue said two times as much is needed, and indeed, this fall justices said try again.
BECAUSE the tax cuts of 2012-13 depleted state funds to the point of bankruptcy, Kansas is in a pickle. Even with most of those cuts rescinded, the state’s economy is projected to grow only by 1.6 percent for the next several years — less than the rate of inflation — according to the state Department of Revenue.
Legislators threaten across-the-board cuts of 18 percent to other departments — Corrections, Health and Environment, Children and Families, Transportation, and the Kansas Board of Regents — if it is to comply.
Don’t buy it.
The most reasonable option is to take the 20-mill statewide school levy back to 35 mills, as originally included in the 1992 school finance act, and get our schools back onto sound footing. Right there is the $600 million.
The damage done by the tax cuts — and by lowering the mill levy when housing ruled — will take years to overcome.
The sooner we can start, the better.
By refusing to do otherwise, or worse, attack education as an overrated commodity, does a disservice to the state.
We don’t need to change the constitution. We need to accept responsibility.
— Susan Lynn
