Skip to main content

Spending Big on Public Education


Well, it’s not quite a record, but it’s close. Last school year (2018-19), per-pupil spending on public education in Oklahoma reached $10,000 (rounded by $4 and adjusted to 2015 dollars), only a little behind the zenith reached ten years earlier. That year (2008-2009), the federal government threw money at banks and states in an effort to reverse the beginning of the Great Recession. Across the nation, public education was at first insulated from the recession’s effects while taxpayers suffered job and home losses. But now, despite a gradual decline in public education funding for several years, Oklahoma’s public education spending has speedily and fully recovered, and then some.

For several years, per-pupil spending in Oklahoma public schools fell to levels last seen in the 1990s. But then, two years ago, Oklahoma’s legislators apparently resolved to show they could spend as freely as any before them. Funding had recovered almost to the level seen in 2000 (see the chart). 

Average Per-Pupil Spending in Oklahoma Public Schools (2015 Dollars)
Average Per-Pupil Spending in Oklahoma Public Schools (2015 Dollars)
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, OK Dept of Education, author calculations

This year, we fully see the renewal of a trend nearly as old as public education itself, that even after accounting for inflation, per-pupil spending relentlessly increases from one decade to the next. Would that we could see a matching increase in performance.

For those of us who don’t assume spending money automatically means accomplishment, it is reassuring that thus far, it appears that the decade-over-decade inflation-adjusted spending per pupil will not increase as much as the decade before. In fact, the two decadal increases prior to this one, from 1990 to 2000 and from 2000 to 2010 both saw increases that were less than the decade before. This is a new trend, although the increase from 2019 appropriations is not reflected in the chart so far. In nearly 100 years of Oklahoma public education spending history gleaned from old editions of the Statistical Abstract of the United States (compiled by the Census Bureau) and Oklahoma state statistics, only the 1960s had previously not seen a bigger increase in per-pupil spending than a decade earlier. 

During the 1980s and 1990s, there was a lot of emphasis nationally and in Oklahoma on equalizing funding in public education across school districts. Predictably, equalization was accomplished mostly by increasing spending in historically low-spending districts. Districts where spending had always been absurdly high didn’t see much in the way of reductions in spending, at least not in Oklahoma.

Today, one would be hard-pressed to find a child in Oklahoma experiencing anything close to an impoverished education. The teacher protests a few years ago had nothing to do with education, impoverished or otherwise. They had everything to do with maintaining the public schools as a jobs program for adults. If they were about education, then why are teachers never organized to fight the bureaucratic bloat in the public schools where every teacher position is matched by a non-teacher position? Teachers complain, but they’ve never been organized to protest the absurd lack of discipline foisted on their classrooms that teachers themselves identify as a barrier to learning. Where are the protests over discipline?

Best I can tell right now, there is no real effort by Oklahoma’s legislature to improve anything in public education, just an effort to curry its favor. That means spending money, and doing little else.

Byron Schlomach is Director of the 1889 Institute. He can be reached at bschlomach@1889institute.org

 

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.


Popular posts from this blog

Can Government Force You to Close Your Business?

1889 Institute takes no position on whether any or all of these measures are warranted or necessary, or whether their economic fallout would inflict more human suffering than they prevent. We are simply evaluating whether they are legal.   With the unprecedented (in the last 100 years at least) reaction surrounding the outbreak of Covid-19, questions that few living legal scholars have considered are suddenly relevant.   Can a quarantine be ordered?   Can a mass quarantine, lockdown, or “cordon sanitaire” be ordered? Can businesses be ordered to change their behavior?   Can businesses be ordered to close? Can state governments order these measures? Can local governments order these measures? My legal brief addresses these issues from a statutory point of view; it is clear that state law gives the governor and mayors broad authority in a state of emergency. They must, of course, do so in a neutral way that they reasonably believe will help preve...

1889 Institute's Statement Regarding School Closures

The 1889 Institute, an Oklahoma think tank, has released the following statement regarding Joy Hofmeister’s proposal to keep schools closed for the remainder of the school year. We at the 1889 Institute consider Joy Hofmeister’s proposal to close Oklahoma’s schools for the rest of the school year a gross overreaction to the coronavirus situation. Even in the best of times and circumstances, suddenly shifting every student in the state from traditional classrooms to online distance learning will have negative educational consequences. This in addition to the economic burden on two-earner families forced to completely reorder their lives with schools closed. We believe many of our leaders have overreacted to worst-case scenarios presented by well-intended health experts with no training or sense of proportion in weighing the collateral damage of shutting down our economy versus targeting resources to protect the truly vulnerable. We say reopen the schools and stop the madness. ...

Destroying Others’ Property Is Violence, No Matter How It’s Done

With characterizations of protests and riots that have occurred over the last several months as “mostly peaceful” and headlines that include “peaceful demonstration intensified,” and “Fiery But Mostly Peaceful Protests,” it’s clear many in the press do not consider property destruction to be violent. Most likely, they mean most of the protesters haven’t physically harmed anyone. Still, during the very same protests, a large proportion of the “peaceful” participants , in obvious acts of aggression and hostility, have vandalized and stolen property. In fact, property destruction and theft are acts of violence, and are therefore legitimately defended against, not because these acts feel threatening, but because they are, in and of themselves, violent.   Nevertheless, it’s common to hear many condemn individuals who use or threaten force in defense of their property. After all, if no one is physically harmed, or even actually threatened, how can damaging inanimate objects possibl...

Protecting Your Rights: Interpreting Law by Its Plain Meaning

When deciding whether people have broken laws, should judges consider the intent of the legislators who wrote the law? Or simply consider the plain language of the law as written? Legal scholars have debated this question for decades. However, there is only one answer that protects We The People. The Declaration of Independence states, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” This means, among other things, that only laws actually voted on by the people (or their validly elected representatives) can be legitimately enforced. Any purpose not written into the law was not voted on, and so should not be imposed. What does this have to do with interpreting laws? In the republican form of government, the citizens speak through their elected representatives. These representatives pass laws collectively, almost always through two legislative bodies (House and Senate) and an executive (President or...