The funding cycle

We keep throwing more and more money at the schools. Despite the insane expenditures, our schools are doing a lousy job. We frequently insist that the problem is that spending is inequitable.

This leads to the insistence that we need to increase funding to schools in areas with lower incomes. We can't take money from the higher income schools. Instead, it all has to be new money.

What happens when we give these schools more money? We saw that here in the state of Washington. The state was ordered by a misguided court ruling to take more control of school funding. This was supposed to be more equitable. Some districts increased teacher pay by 30%. By contrast, well-funded districts saw what was essentially a cost-of-living increase.

Part of the court ruling was shifting funding from the local levels to the state. This meant that numerous school levies were invalidated. The state even imposed a cap. The same teachers who previously demanded a more equitable formula quickly changed their narrative. They insisted that the state should not restrict how much districts could add through levies.

One thing that became very clear was that teachers were not looking for a more equitable funding model. They were looking for ways to manipulate the system to maximize their own bank accounts. They started by demanding more pay for districts with limited funding. When this was addressed, they insisted that districts that were already doing well financially should be able to increase funding through levies. This of course brings back the inequitable model that they were complaining about, once again allowing them to demand more money.

It has become far too clear that this is just one big game for teachers and their corrupt unions. All they care about Is money. They try to hide this behind equity, but they have proven that equity is not their goal.