Q&A of the Day – Can Florida Afford Universal School Choice?
Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.
Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com
Social: @brianmuddradio
iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station’s page in the iHeart app.
Today’s Entry: @brianmuddradio Is it true that the state can’t afford the school choice program that’s been proposed? We need the facts!
Bottom Line: Ahh yes, the desperation has grown fast and thick within the leftist media apparatus as they fear the status quo monopoly of having largely union-run classrooms carry out union-led education, based on arbitrary maps may be somewhat close to coming to an end. Two weeks ago, as I was breaking out what exactly was within Florida’s newly proposed Universal School Choice plan, I detected a bit of shock on the left. Yes, the proposal was immediately opposed by teachers' unions, which have always opposed school choice. It was also predictably opposed by Democrat politicos across the state as well. There are no more reliable donors to their party, their proposals and their agenda generally than teachers' unions after all (not to mention advancing the educational agenda in the classrooms to raise future generations of potentially indoctrinated children). But what was noticeable to me in the immediate aftermath of the proposal was the lack of a coordinated opposition message. This is unlike the left in our society and our state. From “bans off our bodies” regarding abortion reform policies to the branding of Florida’s Parental Rights in Education legislation as “don’t say gay”, something that literally was never present in the legislation, the leftist political apparatus in conjunction with an equally motivated news media has created prolific results on messaging. So, what was it going to be with Universal School Choice? Last week the decision on the left was that their misinformation campaign would be one of suggesting it was unaffordable.
Any union-led, democrat machine issue-based marketing campaign in Florida now comes against the backdrop of a new reality. Republicans hold a super-majority in the state legislature, which means Democrats can’t stop a coordinated Republican led agenda from becoming law. And also, in terms of the battle over public opinion, Florida’s now a red state. That means changing tactics to attempt to win in the court of the public opinion. Hence, the tactic of affordability. A key example of this coordinated effort is what the Gannet-backed papers (the Herald’s) in the state ran last Wednesday - story headline: Public schools can't afford to lose taxpayer money to private. Sub headline: Universal choice will harm public education. This was backed on the airwaves. An example from public media. Headline: Florida's voucher bill could cost taxpayers $4 billion | WUSF Public Media. Yes, well there’s nothing like fear mongering over potential tax hikes that should naturally scare right-of-center voters, right? But before diving into the validity of the affordability issue, let’s take a step back for a moment. The disingenuousness of the tactic is so hilariously transparent when you do. When in your life have you ever heard teachers’ unions, mainstream leftist media outlets and Democrat politicians say we’ll spend too much on education? Their age-old argument is that we’ve never spent enough. Including even after Governor DeSantis announced yet another record round of teacher pay raises and record spending for Florida’s K-12 education establishment independent of the newly crafted Universal School Choice plan. But now, suddenly, Florida could spend too much on education? It could not be more absurd about face by these people. They’re clearly being both intellectually dishonest and overtly disingenuous in an effort to retain as much control over education as possible. These are the unions, who after all, are on the record saying they know better than parents what should be taught to your kids. So, about the affordability thing.
The central figure used as part of the coordinated effort to advance the unaffordability narrative was Mary McKillip with the Education Law Center. And what was the money quote which made the rounds last week: If new revenue is not found to cover these costs, the public school districts will end up with significantly less revenue to fund the remaining public school students. Which we're estimating would be a drop in state aid per pupil of over $900. This carefully crafted quote played perfectly with the narrative advanced on the left. “New revenue” implies what? Tax increases, right? You might call that the “dog whistle”. And cutting funding by $900+ per pupil. Well...that’s just awful, isn’t it? Who could possibly support a plan which raises taxes while cutting education funding? These people count on you being both ignorant and stupid. Here’s the reality on the ground.
Does the plan require increased spending? Yes. How much? $2.5 billion for the upcoming school year. Do we have to come up with “new revenue”? Nope. Do we have to cut per pupil funding without raising taxes? Nope. Last year’s budget within the state of Florida was $109.9 billion. That accounts for the year we’re currently living in which ends in June. DeSantis’ recently proposed budget for next year calls for spending of $114.8 billion while retaining record reserves for the state (emergency funds) of $15 billion. Remember we only need to account for $2.5 billion. Florida’s economy has been so strong we’re able to increase spending by $4.9 billion while also saving $15 billion for emergencies in the process. That’s nearly $20 billion of wiggle room with which to operate. Only 12.5% of that is needed to pull off the Universal School Choice plan based on the analysis provided by the Education Law Center opposing it. It’s beyond absurd to suggest that Florida can’t afford it without raising taxes or cutting per pupil funding. But the teachers’ union-led education establishment and their supporters are and have been absurd right along. This is nothing new. Just a new issue that threatens their monopoly over our children in lieu of parental choice.