can be seen in the contents of a proposed Continuing Resolution introduced late. Friday night by the House Republican Leadership. Alyson Klein of Education Week presented the education cuts in this blog post, upon which I am relying.
It is important to realize several things. First, as with any cuts in the CR, the fiscal year began October 1st, so the impact of percentage cuts carries even greater impact. Second, states and local school authorities are currently struggling to balance their budgets, and were already proposing cuts - in most cases severe, in some cases massive and catastrophic - based on their loss of revenue. In almost all cases they presumed the revenue specified in the President's budget proposal, which this CR slashes fairly severely.
I want to explore the implications of some of what the Republicans have proposed and what it means for public education, in the short term and - should the Republicans come close to getting their way - the long term implications of these cuts.
First, as presented in Klein's blog, the cuts are listed as compared to what was enacted in FY2010. In a sense that is somewhat unfair, because the proper comparison should be with what the President proposed for FY2011 - some of the cuts that Klein lists are identical with those proposed by the President.
Second, some of the cuts in programs proposed by the President were because he was not replacing the funding provided through stimulus spending, a fair chunk of which was used to help states and local governments with their funding needs. Thus some of the cuts they have had to make in their own budget proposals are not affected by this CR.
Still, it helps put things in something of a context of what those lower level governments face when one realizes that the drop from FY2010 in Title I spending, which is the most important expenditure for schools with children of high poverty, is going to be $693.5 million.
Let's look at those items where the Republicans propose spending even less than the President.
The one that jumps off the page is this: Pell grants would be cut by a total of $17.5 billion from the president's request, or, as Klein puts it, and "$845 cut to the maximum per-student grant of $5,550."
Pell grant funding does not affect funding at lower levels of government, although since the grants are a primary way for those of lesser economic means to attend higher education, such cuts would greatly restrict college access for many who would lack the funds even for community or state institutions.
The Obama administration had proposed consolidating a number of programs, especially in the case of literacy The Republican response is to eliminate programs entirely. Consider the following, again courtesy of Klein:
• Even Start Family Literacy program: $66.5 million
• Mathematics and Science partnerships: $180 million
• Striving Readers program: $250 million
• The Obama administration's $50 million high school graduation initiative, which is a fairly new program
• Literacy Through School Libraries: $19 million
• Education Technology State Grants: $100 million
• Foriegn Language Assistance: $26.9 million
• The National Writing Project: $25.6 million
• Ready-to-Learn Television: $27.3 million
• Civic Education: $35 million
• Elementary and Secondary School Counseling: $55 million
• Smaller Learning Communities: $88 million
• Tech Prep State Grants: $102 million
• Teacher Quality Partnerships: $43 million
In addition to these cuts,
21st Century Community Learning Centers would get cut by $100 million. And two college access would be cut: TRIO by almost $25 million, GEARUP by $19.8 million.
There are places where the Republicans do not cut, because they are willing to fund things they ideologically support: helping districts create pay-for-performance programs, Charter schools, and Teacher Quality State Grants.
Among other programs losing funding are some that have strong political connections, albeit mainly on the Democratic side: Teach for America and New Leaders for New Schools. One that does more to improve teaching than almost anything, the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), also loses all $10.6 million of its Federal standards. I am myself National Board certified, and undergoing that experience was the best professional development I have had. There are fewer than 100,000 national board certified teachers out of the millions currently in our public schools. An unwillingness to support this process seems shortsighted - NBPTS has been the single most important vehicle in improving teacher quality. The Teacher Quality State Grants are helpful, but do not replace what NBPTS does.
Obviously the Republican proposal is a starting point. One can see similar slashes in other departments, especially of programs favored by Democrats. This should not surprise us. Remember, the House leadership is being pushed by the Tea Party majority within its caucus to make even greater cuts.
Neither the Obama administration nor the Democrats in the Senate are going to agree. Klein quotesSen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, as saying the GOP approach "would knock the legs out from under our nascent economic recovery, kill jobs, and do virtually nothing to address the long-term fiscal crisis facing our country. Try as they might to convince the American people otherwise, it is simply not possible to balance the budget by targeting 15 percent of federal spending—no matter how deep the cuts are."
The extremity of the proposed Republican cuts - in other fields as well as education - make it more than possible that the House and Senate will be unable to agree on a CR to continue funding the federal government during the current fiscal year: the current CR expires on March 4.
Think further - the President has yet to offer his proposals for FY2012, which begins in October. If we have gridlock over current year spending, think how much worse it will be for the budget leading up to a Presidential election.
I am a teacher. The severity of finances for both my state and my school district - even without the impact of any of the proposed additional cuts by Republicans - is already jeopardizing the educational health of our students. I have recently been involved, in my capacity as the senior union representative for our more than 100 teaches, in lobbying at both state and local levels. We run the risk of losing some of our best teachers, young and old, because states are targeting teacher pensions. For those of us more senior, some of the proposed changes almost force us to retire at the end of this year lest we find ourselves having to pay out more than we would be receiving in additional benefits over the future years, or being forced (as in my case) to work into our 70s in order to receive all the pension benefits to which we would otherwise be entitled. For younger teachers, extending the time for vesting serves as a wakeup call - if it can be extended for an additional five years now, when they might be one or two years away from vesting, who is to say that in another five years it won't be extended yet again - the rabbit being dangled in front of the grayhounds racing around the track. In a time when we are already seeing furloughs, eliminations of stipends (in my case 7,000 in stipends this year), and no date in the future when we will again even get COLAs (forget about step increases), the temptation to take one's skill set to another field becomes even greater.
Those are personal issues, affecting teachers. But if teachers are affected, so are students. IF students are affected, so is the future of this country.
Look again at what the Republicans are proposing. Then ask yourself this simple question - do our very wealthy really need the extension of the additional tax cuts so badly at the expense of the children of the rest of us? Because that is one way to describe the choice the Republicans in the House would have us make.