Oklahoma State Question 744 (2010)

From Ballotpedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents


Oklahoma State Question 744, or SQ 744, is headed for the November 2010 ballot in Oklahoma as a initiated constitutional amendment. SQ 744 is known by its supporters as the Helping Oklahoma Public Education Act. SQ 744, if it is approved, will amend the Oklahoma Constitution to require the Oklahoma State Legislature to fund public education to at least the per-pupil average of neighboring states. [1]

SQ 744 was initiated by the Oklahoma Education Association (OEA) after the union lost a lawsuit seeking to increase education funding.

Background

While Oklahoma provides per-pupil funding of $6,900, Missouri, Texas, Kansas, Arkansas, Colorado and New Mexico have an average investment of $8,300 per pupil, according to OEA figures. Oklahoma currently ranks 48th out of the 50 states in per-pupil expenditure.

At Charles Page High School in the Tulsa suburb of Sand Springs, teachers from across the state told stories of doing more with less in Oklahoma's public schools: students who are forced to share textbooks, cutbacks in art classes and extracurricular activity travel and one school's track team running in a parking lot because it lacked the necessary facilities.

"Each year, it's a battle to get our kids what they deserve," said Mike Bynum, who teaches physics and chemistry at the high school and is the head boys basketball coach. "What we're asking is something that goes completely against our nature: we're asking to be average.

"Imagine what we can do if we were just average," he said. [1]

Will SQ 744 increase taxes?

At the Capitol, three Republican House members criticized the plan at a news conference. House Education Chairman Tad Jones of Claremore said it would likely force a tax increase, while other lawmakers said it could lead to school consolidation and cuts in road funding.

State Question 640, which voters approved in 1992, says that no tax increase may take effect unless it receives three-fourths support in both the House and the Senate or is approved by a vote of the people. [2]

Support

Rallies in Sand Springs and Midwest City were held in support of the petition.

The petition drive is backed by the Oklahoma Education Association, among other groups, such as The HOPE, or Helping Oklahoma Public Education, and is intended to collect 200,000 signatures by the first week of November. That goal is well above the 138,970 needed to place the question on the ballot.

Parent Shelley Ogan, who volunteers for Tulsa Public Schools, described the shortages of supplies most take for granted at any school: printer paper and ink cartridges. The initiative would require lawmakers to re-prioritize the state budget to fund education and would not require a tax increase, supporters say.

"If we want better workers, stronger employees, a well-educated workforce, we have to make public education a priority," said Becky Felts, OEA vice president. [1]

Roy Bishop: The president of the Oklahoma Education Association says, "We owe it to our children to provide them with an educational opportunity that is at least average compared to the rest of the states in our region." He also stated "we offer our support to the petition and call on all Oklahomans to fight for a better future for our children and for our state as a whole." [2]

Kelly Fry, who works as a teacher in the Midwest City-Del City School District, said one of his children once was in a chemistry class that had a great teacher and great laboratory equipment. But there were no chemicals or other supplies.

"As a parent and teacher, I've seen how difficult it truly is to educate our students at a level that will allow them to compete in today's global society,” Fry said.

Bill Scoggan, superintendent of Mid-Del Schools, said the district spent $87,000 on gasoline for buses in 2003-2004 and will spend $400,000 this year for gasoline.[3]

Media

The Oklahoma Daily asked voters to support the measure in an October 21, 2008 editorial. It said, "With extra funding and good instruction for students, we think the quality of education in Oklahoma public schools will improve dramatically. Oklahomans must vote for the HOPE Ballot Initiative. There is no reason other states should embarrass Oklahoma, especially when it comes to education."[4]

Opposition

Organizations

Organizations that have announced their opposition to SQ 744 include:

"Oklahomans for Responsible Government is shocked to learn of the Oklahoma Education Association's (OEA) decision to take their funding debate to the people. Teachers across this state should take a hard look at who represents their interests. The Oklahoma Education Association has turned their backs on teachers and general education reform by starting this petition."
"It is the lack of education that has OEA leaders making senseless decisions. The mindset of throwing more money at schools that perform so poorly that local parents and children are desperately trying to escape them is WRONG. More cash, year after year, will not change the end result if schools are not required to reform and actually teach students, especially low-income children."
"We have a serious education crisis in Oklahoma but OEA's diverted scheme to create more bureaucracy is not the answer. This issue has already been decided by the Oklahoma Supreme Court and now the OEA hopes to convince voters that more money needs to be thrown on the fire without real change. OFRG will be committed to educating voters that this initiative will only bring more taxes to family pocketbooks and the mass consolidation of our public schools." [5]
  • Americans for Prosperity, which said in a statement that "throwing more money at Oklahoma schools is not the solution for the education challenges" faced by the state. The statement came on the heels of an announcement by the Oklahoma Education Association (OEA) that it would request an additional $850 million from taxpayers to increase per pupil spending.
"We believe that public school funding is either 'too high' or 'about right' just like the 64 percent of Oklahomans that responded to a recent Friedman Foundation survey," said AFP Oklahoma Director Stuart Jolly. "Oklahoma schools have enough money. It's just not being spent wisely." [6]
  • The Oklahoma State Chamber of Commerce which, during SQ 744's petition drive, encouraged Oklahomans not to sign the petition. State Chamber spokesman Matt Robison said the constitutional funding requirement "would handcuff the Legislature by removing its flexibility to develop a responsible budget. Oklahomans should think twice before signing this petition and instead demand accountability from our education establishment through performance pay." [7],[8]
  • The American Federation of Teachers (Oklahoma chapter) which encouraged its members not to assist with the HOPE petition effort, citing the following reasons:
  1. There is nothing in the petition that would specify where the additional funds would be spent.
  2. How many charter schools and/or opportunity scholarships (vouchers) could be financed with $858 million?
  3. This is an election year and funds are needed to help legislators who support public education become elected. Funds should not be diverted.
  4. If taxes were not increased to produce enough funds to reach the regional average, state services from Medicaid, roads and bridges, public safety, to state employees would suffer budget cuts. We oppose public employees losing their jobs for this petition.
  5. If the legislature chooses to try to raise taxes, a 2/3 majority is required to take the measure to a vote of the people. Do we really think in a Republican controlled House that will happen?
  6. The political timing of this effort may prove to be very detrimental to public educations efforts to maintain public and legislative support.[9]

State legislators

Tad Jones, R-Claremore, said lawmakers don't have $850 million lying around the Capitol. Jones, the chairman of the House Education Committee, said, "If we were to cut road funding, eliminate it completely, we would still reach barely half of what the OEA is requesting." [10]

Jeff Hickman, chairman of the House Rural Caucus, who represents five counties in northwest Oklahoma, noted that the OEA initiative is similar to one implemented in Arkansas that led to school consolidation even as lawmakers increased funding.

"It's this simple: The states the OEA cites as models closed rural schools," Hickman said. "And since the OEA plan is very similar to the Arkansas initiative that led to the consolidation of 57 schools, it's hard to believe they don't expect the same thing to happen in Oklahoma. Reducing educational opportunity does not help Oklahoma children. We need to support our schools, not close them."

In Arkansas, lawmakers closed schools and increased taxes as they worked to hike school funding, yet failed to improve student performance. Hickman said it's no surprise Oklahoma students continue to outscore Arkansas kids on the ACT.

"You don't improve education by closing schools - particularly some of our best-performing districts," Hickman said. "We don't need to adopt the Arkansas model in Oklahoma." [11]

Rep. Hickman also said the OEA says it wants to help education but pursues plans guaranteed to force closings of rural schools. He also said public schools received $2.53 billion this year, which included an increase in money, and are expected to receive another $628.2 million in federal funds plus about $1 billion in local funding.

David Dank offered four reasons the HOPE petition initiative is "bad math, bad policy and a bad idea."[12]

"First, anyone who knows basic arithmetic understands why this won't work. Every time you raise Oklahoma's per-pupil spending you also raise the regional average, even if the other states in our region do nothing. That ever-escalating average then becomes the carrot at the end of a stick, forever just out of reach. You can never equal a moving average when what you do drives that average forward."[12]

In addition, since the Oklahoma Constitution requires a balanced budget and, Dank says, the measure would require at least an additional $850 million, either a tax increase or cuts in other programs would be required. Dank adds that Oklahoma schools don;t deserve more money "until they spend the ones they have more sensibly." He argues further that "there is no clear correlation between average per-pupil spending and learning."[12]

Randy Brogdon, R-Owasso, noted, "My biggest concern is that it takes the responsibility of funding away from the Legislature." He said he believes that circulators will get the necessary signatures but that voters ultimately will reject the proposal. "When I am asked about it, I explain the direct consequences," Brogdon said. "They realize right away it is not a logical thing to do."[13]

Media

Four state newspapers (The Oklahoman, Tulsa World, Stillwater-NewsPress, and Enid News) have published editorials opposing SQ 744.

"Tax cuts enacted in recent years aren't the problem," according to The Oklahoman editorial. "The problem is that no amount of money has ever been enough for the OEA, and won't ever be because the union's chief objective is to retain the status quo."[14]

A subsequent Oklahoman editorial states, "It's all about more money. After all, the OEA hasn't supported school consolidation, a later start to the school year, charter schools, vouchers or other programs that might actually make for a better, more efficient use of taxpayer dollars. In winning the fight for higher teacher salaries, they've fought against increased accountability through merit or performance pay. We don't dispute the voters' rights to decide issues of statewide importance. But the OEA only wants that to happen when it will work to its advantage."[15]

"The reason we have a Legislature is so that the representatives of the voters can meet and set priorities, first and foremost budgetary priorities," the Tulsa World opined. "Constricting the hands of lawmakers in this fashion is a recipe for disaster."[16]

The Stillwater-NewsPress Editorial Board came out against the HOPE initiative, stating, "While increasing funding for education is an admirable goal, tying the hands of lawmakers who have many other needs to consider usually results in more numerous and greater problems. Requiring a certain amount of money be put toward education each year, regardless of the economy, relative need or state of other items also funded by taxes, makes it less likely that legislators will be able to handle the next emergency."[17]

The Enid News editorialized on August 27, 2008, saying "We think tying our expenses to the fortunes of other states is foolish. Why would we let other states dictate our policies? We need to handle the situation by ourselves...We say be wary when you are asked to sign this petition."[18]

Petition drive

Paid circulators and volunteers canvassed state fairs and college and high school football games across the state to collect the signatures. The coalition was prepared to send out at least 130 hired petition circulators and volunteer teachers to gather 200,000 signatures. [7]

Signatures Collected

The OEA delivered 234,446 signatures to the Oklahoma Secretary of State, nearly over 100,000 more than the required 138,970 signatures. No challenges were filed within a 10-day protest period that started on December 29th, guaranteeing the initiative will appear on a future ballot.[19] The funding issue likely will be on the General Election ballot in November, 2010, unless the Governor calls for a Special Election prior to that.[20]

Funding for the HOPE ballot initiative

According to a Tulsa World article August 30, 2008, petition circulators are paid $1 per signature and the drive has raised $179,627 since May 1, with all but $100 coming from the OEA or National Education Association. The group hopes to raise as much as $3 million for the entire process, which will include a possible challenge.[13]

The OEA raised $600,000 to pay 250 circulators, and project the total ballot initiative will cost $3 million.[21]

Oklahoman rebukes the OEA

In an August 10 editorial, the Oklahoman takes the OEA to task for sponsoring the HOPE initiative, the newspaper brings up the union's 2005 conduct in opposition to the Stop Overspending petition drive in 2005, writing, "In opposing a 2005 effort to get a Taxpayer Bill of Rights to a statewide ballot, the union encouraged its members to report that petition circulators were bothering or harassing them in an attempt to disrupt the signature-gathering process. Talk about harassment. We'd bet the OEA expects to be able to gather signatures without detractors making false claims against well-meaning petition circulators."[22]

See also

External links

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 News-Star.com: "School funding petition drive kicks off," July 31st, 2008
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 TulsaWorld.com: "Education funding petition started", August 1, 2008
  3. ↑ NewsOK.com: "State teachers seek vote on funds," August 1st, 2008
  4. ↑ The Oklahoma Daily, "Editorial: Students worth money", October 21, 2008
  5. ↑ Oklahomans For Responsible Government
  6. ↑ AFP: "Improving Oklahoma Education Doesn’t Mean Throwing Good Money After Bad," July 31st, 2008
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Tulsa World: "School funding petition under way," August 7, 2008
  8. ↑ The Oklahoma State Chamber
  9. ↑ AFT-OK website
  10. ↑ Tulsa World: "Education funding petition started," August 1, 2008
  11. ↑ OEA Proposal would create enormous unfunded mandate
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 The Oklahoman: Opinion: "Petition idea doesn't add up," Aug. 10, 2008
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Tulsa World: "Education spending petition circulators making rounds, "August 30, 2008
  14. ↑ The Oklahoman: Editorial: "Intro to sarcasm: OEA boss should teach a class," Aug. 4, 2008
  15. ↑ The Oklahoman: Editorial: "Power play: OEA isn't in the voters' corner," Aug. 10, 2008
  16. ↑ TulsaWorld: Editorial: "No solution," Aug. 4, 2008
  17. ↑ Stillwater-NewsPress: Editorial: "Bad idea, good goal," August 22, 2008
  18. ↑ Enid News: Editorial: "Tying education funding to other states’ fortunes foolish," August 27, 2008
  19. ↑ KOCO.com, "Okla. Education Headed To Vote", January 9, 2009
  20. ↑ KSWO.com, "Oklahoma education funding petition met with no challenge", January 9, 2009
  21. ↑ The Oklahoman, "Group to deliver petition for more school funds", October 19, 2008
  22. ↑ Power play: OEA isn't in the voters' corner, August 10, 2008

News Coverage

Videos

Articles

Retrieved from "http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Oklahoma_State_Question_744_%282010%29"
Personal tools