Educational Budget Cuts Will Children of Today

Educational Budget Cuts

Will children of today become leaders of tomorrow? Unfortunately, this looming question continues to resonate in the hearts and minds of many parents and educators. Today, many elementary and high schools throughout the United States are receiving less state funding than last year in at least 37 states, and in at least 30 states school funding now stands below 2008 levels -- often far below (Fabian, 2011). How could such a travesty have emerged in such a vital system, which is the foundation of this country? Simply, the guilty culprit is the nations huge deficit that continues to grow. Moreover, the failure of the federal government to extend emergency fiscal aid to states and school districts is of primary concern. Most states have failed to balance their budgets through spending cuts and to devise revenue-generated streams, thus creating a substantial funding gap. Subsequently, budget cuts affect all dependent constituents, leaving an immense gap in the U.S. educational system that needs immediate resolution.

Nation's Consequences

Funding cuts at the state-level K-12 have large consequences for local school districts. In the U.S., approximately 47% of total education expenditures derive from state funds (Fabian, 2011). Cuts within the state level prove that local school districts need to either reduce the academics services, raise more revenue to bridge the gap, or both. Specifically, cuts in state aid may particularly affect school districts with low-income children. States typically distribute general education aid through formulas that concentrate on additional funds to high school districts with a significant number of low-income and high-need children and/or with lower stages of taxable wealth. Consequently, reducing the formula funding may result in tremendous cuts to the general state funding for less-wealthy and higher-need districts unless a state extend themselves to protect the districts.

Insomuch, cuts have prolonged the recession and diminished the recovery. Federal employment data show that school districts began reducing the overall number of teachers and other employees in September 2008, when the first round of budget cuts began taking effect. The job losses have accelerated in the last year as the cuts have deepened; by September 2011, local school districts had cut 278,000 jobs nationally compared with 2008 (Oliff & Leachman, 2011). Chiefly, such job losses have lessened the purchasing power and economic consumption for these families.

Additionally, budget cuts counteract and undermine education reform. Accordingly, the lack of funding hinders the ability of school districts to deliver high-quality education (Ginsberg, 2009). Ultimately, these negative consequences will affect the nation's economic and educational competitiveness. Although many states and school districts have embraced reform initiatives, deep funding cuts hinder implementation of these reforms. Ironically, while the country is trying to breed workers to become proficient, both technologically and globally, huge educational funding cuts seek to undermine a critical foundation for this country's future success.

Opposing View

Sadly, state Senates across the country continue to pass unfavorable budgets despite widespread objections over its deep cuts, particularly to K-12 education and universities. Lawmakers concede that the proposed cuts are painful, but they were necessary to balance the state budget and avert further borrowing. Many Senators share the same mental paradigm because many states have been bleeding red ink for years due to reduce federal aid. Therefore, the money has to come from somewhere, whether in the form of budget cuts or increase taxes. Surprisingly, state Senates do not hold the perspective of the public, whereby the public feels that Senate leaders violating their responsibility to their constituents.

Call-To-Action

If the state fails to meet their obligation to the public schools, local property taxpayers and students will be the ones who suffer the consequences. School boards will be forced to raise property taxes, eliminate programs that have contributed to students' outstanding academic achievements, and eliminate teaching jobs. Insomuch, school districts possess little ability to replace lost state aid on their own. Given the poor real estate markets, it is difficult for many school districts to raise more money from the property tax without raising rates, which is politically difficult undertaking. Furthermore, less funding means less professional development opportunities to improve teacher quality, to heighten school readiness for young children, and to transform the lowest-achieving schools. It is very difficult to improve the quality of education while losing teachers, raising class size, and eliminating school programs. Ultimately, the nation's students will pay the price, thus affecting the nation's future leaders.