Education must be a state budget priority
Businesses should be able to find the world's best-educated workers among our state's own citizens. Recently, the governor signed a majority-vote state budget for the 2012-13 fiscal year that sidesteps the state's top priority of jobs with cuts to education that could only worsen our future state economy.
Time and again, Californians and especially business owners have consistently ranked education as one of their top priorities for state spending, but with this recently passed budget, North County school districts and families across the state have reason to doubt whether it is a priority for the Governor and the majority party.
The basics of the budget continue to propose funding the Proposition 98 minimum guarantee at around $53.6 billion, $2.9 billion of which assumes the voters approve the governor's tax increase later this year.
Assuming that voters will approve a total $8.5 billion in tax increases to fill spending gaps this year, however, is an unnecessary risk. There is no guarantee that voters will choose to raise taxes. Relying on tax dollars that may never materialize fails to responsibly address our budget problems head-on in a way that improves the long-term fiscal and economic outlook for California. The state should only be in the business of spending money it has.
But what is most concerning about this plan are the automatic midyear trigger cuts slated to go into effect should taxes fail at the ballot. Of those potential and painful cuts, 99 percent will directly impact our K-12 schools and higher education system amounting to $5.9 billion, of which $5.4 billion will affect K-14 education. As written, the trigger cuts go into effect even if revenues improve throughout the year.
Despite the Democrat's claims that tax increases are the only way to solve the state's chronic budget issues, there were other options that would have fully funded education without relying on the possibility of collecting revenue from new taxes.
Both the non-partisan Legislative Analyst and the Republican caucus offered alternatives that would have reduced or avoided these painful trigger cuts. Information on those alternatives can be found at www.cabudgetfactcheck.com. Unfortunately, the majority party in Sacramento disregarded these proposals.
Should the trigger cuts be pulled, the budget includes provisions allowing school districts to cut the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years by as many as 20 days each year. This component unnecessarily targets student learning when other flexibility options are available to assist schools better manage their scarce resources. Yet, the budget did not include any flexibility options.
Although the budget is finalized, I believe that the legislature will be back in November if the taxes fail. We cannot let these proposed trigger cuts stand. At stake, is the very future of our state. Between now and November, I will keep fighting to make sure our schools have the resources they need to prepare our children for their future.
Businesses should be able to find the world's best-educated workers among our state's own citizens. Recently, the governor signed a majority-vote state budget for the 2012-13 fiscal year that sidesteps the state's top priority of jobs with cuts to education that could only worsen our future state economy.
Time and again, Californians and especially business owners have consistently ranked education as one of their top priorities for state spending, but with this recently passed budget, North County school districts and families across the state have reason to doubt whether it is a priority for the Governor and the majority party.
The basics of the budget continue to propose funding the Proposition 98 minimum guarantee at around $53.6 billion, $2.9 billion of which assumes the voters approve the governor's tax increase later this year.
Assuming that voters will approve a total $8.5 billion in tax increases to fill spending gaps this year, however, is an unnecessary risk. There is no guarantee that voters will choose to raise taxes. Relying on tax dollars that may never materialize fails to responsibly address our budget problems head-on in a way that improves the long-term fiscal and economic outlook for California. The state should only be in the business of spending money it has.
But what is most concerning about this plan are the automatic midyear trigger cuts slated to go into effect should taxes fail at the ballot. Of those potential and painful cuts, 99 percent will directly impact our K-12 schools and higher education system amounting to $5.9 billion, of which $5.4 billion will affect K-14 education. As written, the trigger cuts go into effect even if revenues improve throughout the year.
Despite the Democrat's claims that tax increases are the only way to solve the state's chronic budget issues, there were other options that would have fully funded education without relying on the possibility of collecting revenue from new taxes.
Both the non-partisan Legislative Analyst and the Republican caucus offered alternatives that would have reduced or avoided these painful trigger cuts. Information on those alternatives can be found at www.cabudgetfactcheck.com. Unfortunately, the majority party in Sacramento disregarded these proposals.
Should the trigger cuts be pulled, the budget includes provisions allowing school districts to cut the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years by as many as 20 days each year. This component unnecessarily targets student learning when other flexibility options are available to assist schools better manage their scarce resources. Yet, the budget did not include any flexibility options.
Although the budget is finalized, I believe that the legislature will be back in November if the taxes fail. We cannot let these proposed trigger cuts stand. At stake, is the very future of our state. Between now and November, I will keep fighting to make sure our schools have the resources they need to prepare our children for their future.