Newsletters & Press

Newsletter 2004

Dear Friend,

Once again we are facing a “crisis” in public education in Mississippi. As we all know by now, there is not enough recurring revenue in the state budget to fund all of the state’s “needs.” The result is that there will inevitably be a difficult budget battle during the legislative session, and much of the debate will center on funding public education which receives approximately 1/2 of the state’s general fund. The Legislative Budget Committee has made funding K – 12 public education a budget priority, while the Governor recommends substantial cuts in the basic education funding formula.

The issue is both complicated and simple. The state funding formula (called “the Mississippi Adequate Education Act” or “MAEP”) is based on the joint principles of adequacy and equity in state support for all 151 school districts in Mississippi. It involves calculating the cost of providing an education in successful middle of the road schools in Mississippi and insuring that every district has at least that level of combined state and local funding on a per student basis. The formula is not designed to provide “Cadillac” funding for schools, nor does it do so. In fact, even with the MAEP formula in place, Mississippi ranks at the bottom of funding for public schools on a per student basis.

The Governor wants to cut funding below even its current shameful level. He does so through a clever sleight of hand. He begins by supporting the final year of the five year teacher pay increase begun by his predecessor, some $97 million statewide. In order to fund the raise, however, he cuts the basic MAEP formula by $155 million leaving the districts woefully short of the money needed to fund basic operations. Last year we underfunded the MAEP formula by $79 million causing districts to spend down their meager cash reserves, increase class size, and, in some cases, raise local ad valorem taxes. In most school districts, additional cuts this year would result in reductions in instructional staff and postponement of critically needed building repair and maintenance.

Exacerbating the problem, at the same time that the Governor is recommending funding cuts, he has proposed substantial changes to K – 12 education that would cost the districts even more money, money he has not provided in his budget. For example, the Governor proposes financial incentives for teachers who serve as mentors. He wants to liberalize the state retirement system “to encourage Mississippi’s teachers to re-enter the public school classroom,” a proposal that the retirement staff tells us would cost the system millions of dollars. The Governor wants to “provide free access to taking the Pre-Scholastic Aptitude Test (PSAT)” and insure that every district offers AP courses. All of these are laudable goals, but they will cost the districts money that has to come from somewhere, and the funding of those programs is not a part of the Governor’s plan.

The Governor’s proposals raise once again the issue of unfunded mandates to the schools, mandates that force them to raise local ad valorem taxes. The funds the Governor allocates for raises won’t cover all teachers, leaving the shortfall to be picked up by the local districts. Likewise the No Child Left Behind Act and the Mississippi Student Achievement Improvement Act (passed by the Legislature) impose requirements on districts that are expensive. All of these programs are worthy, but by not fully funding MAEP the Governor would require local districts to find the money from budget cuts or by raising local taxes. And, by the way, a number of local districts have reached the maximum level of taxes that state law permits and are prohibited from further increases.

Finally, there are the issues with which we began – adequacy and equity. These are both moral and legal issues. The Mississippi Constitution provides that “The Legislature shall, by general law, provide for the establishment, maintenance and support of free public schools upon such conditions and limitations as the Legislature may provide.” Similar constitutional provisions have been the bases for lawsuits across the country, suits that allege that funding of public schools has been not been adequate or equitable. In fact, Mississippi is one of only four states that have never had such a lawsuit. In Kansas, for example, a state judge recently ruled that the state education funding formula was inadequate and ordered the state to add an additional $1 billion to its $3.6 billion public school budget. In Mississippi, if we continue to ignore our own funding formula and cut the funding for our public schools, we can be sure that there is similar litigation in our future.

Those of us who have our kids in private schools may be thinking “why does public education matter to me?” The answer is very simple. In Mississippi 90% of all kids go to public schools, including 80% of all white kids. The future of this state is inextricably joined with the future of public education. Are there problems and issues with the public schools? Of course. We still rank at or near the bottom in achievement, but we are making rapid progress. A number of our scores on national tests have shown dramatic improvement. When 90% of the population depends on public schools for their education, you don’t have to be a professional educator to understand how important it is that we offer an adequate and equitable education in every district in the state.

Full funding of the MAEP formula will be our number one legislative priority.

A second priority will be funding the Medicaid budget. The issues are complicated, and the need is great. Some 780,000 people in Mississippi rely on Medicaid for their health insurance. At the same time, the cost of the program is increasing at nearly 20% per year, an unsustainable rate. At this point, neither the Governor’s office nor the Legislative budget staff have good solutions to the problem of increasing costs. There is much work to be done. Whatever happens, you can be sure that protecting the health care of 25% of Mississippi’s population will be a major issue in the 2005 legislative session. None the less, cutting the cost of the program will be imperative if we are to balance the budget.

Shifting gears, throughout my five years of service, I have been opposed to tax increases, and I remain opposed to any increase in general taxes such as the sales and income taxes. However, as a result of our serious budget shortfall, I will support an increase in the tobacco tax during the next session. The proposal will be to use the additional income to fund a portion of the Medicaid program thereby freeing up state general funds to help fund the MAEP formula. I will support the increase with reluctance, but I am convinced the budget situation is critical and that this approach offers our best chance of both maintaining the vital Medicaid program and adequately funding public education. The proposal would have the additional benefit of reducing smoking, particularly among youngsters.

A word or two about the recent special legislative session to consider issuing state bonds. There has been a lot of misunderstanding of the House’s actions during the session. Here’s what happened. First, the Governor called us into session with no warning to the House leadership. The Speaker and the Chairman of Ways and Means (the committee that would handle the proposed legislation) were notified on a Thursday that the session would begin on the following Monday. In the usual case, the Governor works in advance with the legislative leadership to try to agree on an agenda and a timing that will insure that the process will work as smoothly as possible. Not so in this case. And the lack of notification is not merely legislative pique. The practical effect of the lack of advance warning is that the leadership did not know the details of the Governor’s $107 million bond proposal until he released them on the Monday the session began. And, in spite of the pressure from some in the public and in the press, both the Ways and Means Committee and the full legislature have a duty to examine any proposal that spends the taxpayers’ money very closely, and that takes time.

Both during and since the session I have often heard “Why don’t you just pass the Governor’s bill?” The answer is that the legislative branch has responsibilities just as the Governor does. Early on the House took the position that the process should be open and that projects other than the few proposed by the Governor should be considered. The concern wasn’t political, but practical. During the prior legislative session no capital improvement bonds were issued, and there were a number of projects that were planned and ready to go. On some of these projects, construction had already begun but had to be halted because no bond bill passed in the regular session. Initially the Governor would not agree to any expansion of the list, in effect holding state agency, university and community college projects hostage until his proposal passed. The House stood firm for an open process that would fund critical state needs, not just a few projects for private businesses.

The Senate and the Governor ultimately concurred with our position. In fact, the Senate added numerous projects to the final bill, more than doubling the number of projects proposed by the House. The process was not pretty, but the checks and balances of the system did what they were designed to do. The legislative process worked. In the House the bill passed 117 to 3. Democrats and Republicans came together to put aside their philosophical differences and fund critical state services. At a press conference announcing the passage of the House bill, the Democratic Speaker was flanked by Democrats and Republicans, a show of solidarity rarely seen in recent years. Once the Senate and the Governor signed on, the bill quickly became law, and the special session was over.

Looking forward, because of the budget problems this will be a tough legislative session. As a member of the Appropriations Committee and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, it is likely that I will be in the middle of the action. This year’s budget is an example of a problem that has no good solution. Be assured, however, that I will do all in my power to reach a result that makes good use of your tax dollars while prioritizing the essential functions of government – education, health care, public safety and transportation.

As we move into 2005, I hope that you and your family had a very happy holiday season. As always, thank you for the honor and privilege of representing you in the Mississippi House of Representatives. If I can ever help you in any way, please do not hesitate to call.

Yours,

Cecil