I Support Public Schools, but not SQ 744

In addition to electing a new State Superintendent this year, Oklahoma voters will face another major education decision when they vote on State Question 744. If approved, it would require state spending on public schools to increase to the regional average over three years.

Although I am a strong supporter of our public school system, I cannot support this measure. I believe our next State Superintendent must provide the leadership necessary to improve our schools, and that includes taking a stand on issues even when the politically expedient response is to stay silent. Oklahomans deserve to know where their next State Superintendent stands on SQ 744, and why.

I will be voting against State Question 744 for several reasons. First, I am opposed to unfunded mandates, and SQ 744 would be one of the biggest unfunded mandates in Oklahoma history. One independent analysis predicts it will cost an additional $1.7 billion once fully implemented.

Because SQ 744 has no funding plan, the Legislature would have to choose between massive cuts to other parts of government, massive tax increases, or a combination of both. A legislative study found that paying for SQ 744 would require income or sales tax increases as great as 40 percent, or 20-percent across-the-board budget cuts to other agencies. And those figures were based on a price tag of just $850 million, not the $1.7 billion now projected.

The potential budget cuts would actually devastate some important areas of education. Early childhood programs could be eliminated, harming low-income children. CareerTech programs could be cut, reducing access to hands-on learning that opens the doors to future employment. Cuts to higher education could force tuition increases of as much as 20 percent per year for the next three years, making college unaffordable for Oklahomans.

Furthermore, there is no requirement for the extra $1.7 billion to actually go into the classroom. Oklahomans would simply be handed a massive check with no invoice showing where the money will be spent.

Ironically, SQ 744’s only specific provision says the money cannot be used for one area of need. Although many schools struggle to maintain buildings, SQ 744 declares the new money cannot be used for capital expenses. So even if State Question 744 passes and your taxes skyrocket, you may still have to approve additional bonds and increase property tax payments to maintain infrastructure.

SQ 744 is simply bad policy. It would create an enormous financial burden on all Oklahomans. It would endanger other areas of government such as roads and prisons and even many education programs.

Instead of providing a plan of action, SQ 744 substitutes hype for vision and empty slogans for leadership. We can do much, much better.

I encourage you to join in me voting against SQ 744.