Skip to main content
Tag

PA Budget

Response to the 2024–25 PA State Budget — Education Funding

By Blog Post, Policy Briefs, Press Statements

July 11, 2024

Governor Shapiro and the members of the General Assembly have had about 18 months to respond to the Commonwealth Court ruling that Pennsylvania’s system of funding K-12 education is unconstitutional. And Pennsylvania politicians have had decades to recognize that far too many low-income and Black and brown schoolchildren have not received an adequate education, which has limited their opportunities and denied the Commonwealth the full flowering of their talents and abilities.

The K–12 budget that we expect to be enacted soon recognizes the problem. But it does not put the state on a path to solving it.

It recognizes the problem in two ways.

First, for the first time in our history, the school code embraces a formula that quantifies the problem. The school code says that school districts need $4.5 billion in new funding to adequately and equitably fund our schools. Because of an unfortunate change in how poverty is counted, this amount is somewhat less than the $5.1 billion we believe is truly needed by our school children. But it remains a substantial number.

Second, again for the first time in our history, the General Appropriation bill directs the majority of new K–12 funding to the school districts that are least well-funded. This includes $493 million in the Ready to Learn line item and $60 million in the Basic Education Funding line item that is directed to 11 school districts that are especially underfunded.

These two new initiatives are major achievements.

However, this new spending meets only a bit more than 10% of the total needed to give every child the opportunity he or she needs. And, unlike the House-passed bill HB 2370, the new school code does not set a timeline for filling 100% of the adequacy gap.

We have been calling on the General Assembly to finish the job on school funding. The budget legislation they will soon pass takes up the job. But it is very far away from finishing it.

It is important for the people of Pennsylvania to understand why we have come so far but still have so far to go.

We have come so far because our political leaders understand that more than 70% of Pennsylvanians recognize the need for substantial new funding of our schools. And in the last four months, tens of thousands of them have contacted their state senators, representatives, and Governor Shapiro to let them know that they stand with our children and the future of our commonwealth.

We have come so far because House Speaker Joanna McClinton and Majority Leader Matt Bradford and the other leaders and members of the House and Senate Democratic caucuses have been champions for our kids.

Why does this budget not put the state on a path to meeting its constitutional and moral responsibility to fund our schools? Even though they did not appeal the Commonwealth Court decision, Senate and House Republicans have never put forward a plan to meet their obligation under it. They rejected the Basic Education Funding Commission’s plan. And they have sought to whittle away at Democratic legislative proposals and reject a complete plan to fund our schools adequately and equitably.

We are glad that Republican leaders have agreed to the achievements we noted above but they have refused to go further and accept the long-term plan our kids and the Constitution of Pennsylvania require.

So, while we believe Pennsylvanians should appreciate the important steps forward in the budget this year, we note with sadness that unless Governor Shapiro and the General Assembly enact a plan to fully and fairly fund our schools, another generation of our school children will be denied their constitutional and moral right to an adequate and equitable K–12 education. And not just our kids, but all Pennsylvanians, will suffer as a result

Click HERE to learn how much your school district will receive.

 

July 11, 2024

Op-Ed: A State Earned Income Tax Credit Should Be Part of a Budget Deal in 2024

By Policy Briefs, Press Statements

A State Earned Income Tax Credit Should Be Part of a Budget Deal in 2024

by Marc Stier, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Policy Center

The Pennsylvania state budget for fiscal year 2024–25 is now officially overdue, so we’re still left wondering: What might a deal look like?

There are two critical components that need to be addressed.

The first is enactment of year one of the Basic Education Funding Commission’s plan to adequately and equitably fund education.

Enacting this plan is a moral and constitutional requirement. Failing to meet it would leave the General Assembly to answer to both the voters and the courts. Public opinion polls show overwhelming support for meeting this goal. And while courts are generally reluctant to tell legislators how exactly to spend money, for three reasons this barrier is lower in Pennsylvania right now than in other times and places.

  • Neither Democrats nor Republicans sought to appeal Judge Jubelirer’s ruling that our current system of K-12 school funding is unconstitutional.
  • The Basic Education Funding Commission has put forward a plan that is tailor-made to meet Judge Jubelirer’s concerns.
  • And with a surplus of $14 billion in the bank, a Pennsylvania court can order implementation of that plan without taking the even bolder step of requiring new taxes to fund it.

The second component is the implementation of a state earned income tax credit.

I make the second point with some reluctance. I am concerned—as the Governor and state legislators should be—about using up the state surplus with a tax cut. That surplus is needed to pay ongoing operating expenses and the entire education plan.

Until recently, Senate Republicans seemed to agree. But Republican senators recently enacted, with some Democratic support, a tax cut that would cost the state $2.7 billion in fiscal year 2025–26.

In doing so, Republicans acknowledged that it is entirely legitimate to use the surplus to fund ongoing expenses. A tax cut is as much an ongoing expense as funding for K-12 education.

If we start with the Republican proposal to use $2.7 billion of the surplus in fiscal year 2025–26 for ongoing expenses, the question is how to divide it between the K-12 funding and a tax cut.

The Republican plan to cut taxes by reducing the personal income tax by half a point and eliminating the gross receipts tax is not acceptable for two reasons.

One: it is far too large. The state is going to need $2 billion in fiscal year 2025–26 to fund the second year of the K-12 education plan.

And, two: the plan is heavily weighted to the rich and the corporations that generate electricity. A half-point reduction of the PIT would reduce taxes for the top 1% of taxpayers by $5,435 per year. It would reduce taxes for the middle 20% of families by only $181 per year. And because of the tax forgiveness program, it would most likely not reduce taxes for people in the bottom 20% by more than $20 per year.

In a state and local tax system that already takes 11.8% of the income of the bottom 99% and only 6% of the income of the top 1%, a tax cut weighted so heavily to the richest Pennsylvanians and corporations is unacceptable.

What would be acceptable, however, is a state earned income tax credit (EITC) set at 30% of the value of the federal EITC already received by Pennsylvanians.

Why might Republicans accept this?

Well, for one thing, it’s a Republican plan that was initially proposed by Richard Nixon and expanded with bipartisan support many times.

It is a program that has been proven to encourage work.

It reduces poverty more than any other federal program except Social Security.

It is simple to administer, requiring no new bureaucracy but only an additional line on the PA-40 tax form.

By encouraging more Pennsylvanians to file for the federal EITC, it could bring as much as $40 million in federal funds to Pennsylvania at no cost at all.

It helps working people, not with government spending but with a tax credit and would benefit 1.45 million families. The average tax cut for those who receive it would be $773. More than 88% of the benefits would go to Pennsylvania families earning less than $52,100 (and those above that level who get a tax credit have three or more children.) By a small margin, these families disproportionately live in Republican House and Senate districts.

And it would only cost the state $770 million—far less than the tax cut passed by the Senate.

If a tax cut is a necessary part of reaching a budget deal by June 30th, a state earned income tax credit should be part of it.

July 9, 2024

Statement: PPC Opposes Senate School Voucher Bill 1280

By Blog Post, Press Statements

The Pennsylvania Policy Center stands in opposition to Senate Bill 1280, which would force Pennsylvania taxpayers to give billions in handouts to private and religious institutions with virtually no accountability.

After failing to enact a state budget for FY 2024–25 by the deadline of July 1, Pennsylvania Senate Republicans sent a clear message today that they continue to prioritize giving handouts to the wealthy and diverting public funds to private and religious schools over fully and fairly funding our public schools.

On Wednesday, July 3, the Senate Finance Committee is scheduled to consider SB 1280, a new voucher tax credit bill that would cost taxpayers initially about $2.3 billion next year and more in future years.

We oppose SB 1280 because

  • it diverts $2.3 billion in desperately needed funding for our public schools to an ill-conceived voucher program that most Pennsylvanians oppose.
  • it is too small to help low- and moderate-income students attend a private school and would disproportionately benefit relatively well-off families who already have children enrolled in private academies. (Nationally, twice as many parents with incomes over $75,000 send their kids to private school than parents with incomes below $75,000.)
  • it provides absolutely no accountability for the funds spent, giving taxpayers no assurance that the schools receiving these funds provide an adequate education.
  • it allows private schools receiving these funds to continue to discriminate on the basis of race, gender, and sexual orientation, religious and political beliefs of parents, and whether a student is pregnant or has a child, as many private schools in the state already do.
  • it is unfair to Pennsylvanians based on where they reside, as the benefits of this program would largely go to parents and students in areas of the state where there are many private schools, leaving rural families with few options to utilize the vouchers.

Senate Bill 1280 would cost $2.3 billion. It comes just weeks after the PA Senate passed a tax cut with a $2.7 billion price tag for fiscal year 2024–25 that mainly benefits the wealthiest Pennsylvanians.

If SB 1280 is passed, Senate Republicans will have demonstrated that the state has sufficient funds to meet our moral and constitutional responsibility to adequately and equitably fund our schools.

And yet, the Senate still has no plan do that.

Neither the voters nor the courts of Pennsylvania will approve of this failure in priorities.

July 3, 2024

Statement: What We Are Looking for in a Budget Agreement

By Blog Post, PA Budget, Press Statement

The Pennsylvania state budget is now officially late. By all reports, however, House and Senate negotiators, as well as the governor’s office, are working diligently to reach an agreement. We are not concerned by a brief delay as we know that the issues under consideration are complex and that necessary compromises are difficult in a divided government.

We do want to set out some criteria by which we will evaluate a successful compromise.

  1. Enactment of a plan to meet our constitutional and moral responsibility to fully and fairly fund our schools, along the lines proposed by the Basic Education Funding Commission and with first-year funding at the level proposed by Governor Shapiro.
  2. A limited tax cut directed toward the Pennsylvanians who most suffer from our upside-down tax system, ideally by instituting a state piggyback on the federal earned income tax cut.
  3. Enactment and funding of the Grow PA program which would provide scholarships of $5,000 to Pennsylvanians attending a wide range of public and private colleges in fields where there is demonstrated need for more trained workers.
  4. A short path to a minimum wage of $15 per hour with a cost-of-living increase.
  5. New funding for violence-reduction strategies that have been working in Philadelphia and around the state.
  6. Operating subsidies for public transit.

A substantial new investment in the Whole-Home Repairs program.

We have not commented on the Grow PA program before, which was first proposed by Senator Scott Martin and received unanimous support by the full Senate and the House Education Committee. This proposal has many similarities to a plan called The Pennsylvania Promise, which our previous organization developed in 2018 and Senator Vincent Hughes and Representative Jordan Harris introduced at that time. It also has similarities to Governor Wolf’s Nellie Bly scholarship program. We are gratified that Senator Martin has embraced this set of ideas and has championed them along with other Republican and Democratic senators and House members. While the current plan is not as extensive as some of the earlier proposals, it is a good step in the right direction. And it shows that if Democrats and Republicans focus on the critical needs of the state, they can overcome partisan division and enact proposals that will benefit not just the recipients of these scholarships but, by contributing to economic development in the state, all of us. We hope it is a model for a budget that encompasses the five proposals listed above.

 

 

 

July 1, 2024

NEW REPORT: ‘School Funding in PA Remains Inadequate and Inequitable’ 

By Press Release

June 27, 2024

 

CONTACT: Kirstin Snow, snow@pennpolicy.org  

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  

 

NEW REPORT: School Funding in PA Remains Inadequate and Inequitable 

 

Harrisburg, PA—Today the Pennsylvania Policy Center released a new paper, “School Funding in PA Remains Inadequate and Inequitable,” by executive director Marc Stier. The paper highlights the need for proper education spending allowances in the 2024–25 state budget as mandated in the Commonwealth Court ruling on the matter.  

 

“As the budget deadline looms, this report brings into clearer focus the incredible injustice of Pennsylvania’s school funding,” Stier said. He added, “The most recent data on the distribution of funding among our school districts reaffirms the central conclusion of the school funding lawsuit, as well as decades of analysis: A pattern of funding in which school districts with a high share of students living in poverty or who are Black or Hispanic are the worst off is a clear affront to our state’s constitution and to the promise of equality of opportunity that has long been the touchstone of our state and country. It is also offensive to human decency and morality. The time to fix this problem is now.” 

 

BACKGROUND: Year after year, Pennsylvania Policy Center, our predecessor organization (PBPC) and many others have released research showing both that the vast majority of Pennsylvania K-12 school districts are underfunded and that school districts with a high share of students who come from impoverished families or are Black or Hispanic are disproportionately among them. 

 

That analysis was accepted by Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court judge Renée Cohn Jubelirer who ruled that Pennsylvania’s system of K-12 school funding is unconstitutional. 

 

And yet, with less than a week to go before the fiscal year 2024–25 budget is due, there are still members of the General Assembly who refuse to accept these basic facts. 

 

So here we put forward our most recent update of the data we have provided in the past: estimates of the per-student funding gap in Pennsylvania’s five hundred K-12 school districts divided based on the share of students who live in poverty or who are Black or Hispanic.  Read the report here.  

 

### 

June 27, 2024

Pennsylvania Policy Center and Pennsylvanians Together Budget Summit Release

By Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Kirstin Snow, snow@pennpolicy.org

PRESS RELEASE

 

Pennsylvanians Together, Partners Hold Rally to Demand Tax Justice in PA NOW!

12-Foot Inflatable Corporate Fat Cat, ‘Mr. Riggs’ Made Appearance in Capitol

Harrisburg, PA—Today in the Capitol Rotunda, Pennsylvania Policy Center’s Pennsylvanians Together campaign and partners, including SEIU, CASA, Action Together NEPA, Make the Road, and others from across the Commonwealth joined together for a rally to call upon lawmakers to right the state’s upside-down tax system and demand tax justice NOW!

Pennsylvania has THE MOST unfair tax structure in the country. And now—budget season—is the time to demand a fair share tax plan to pay for the things working families need to not just survive but thrive—things like a fully and equitably funded education for our kids, affordable housing, and a livable minimum wage.

Mr. Riggs, the 12-foot inflatable corporate fat cat, was in attendance, joined by partners and scores of activists from across the state, along with speakers:

  • Marc Stier, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Policy Center
  • Dwayne Heisler, Campaigns Director, Pennsylvanians Together
  • Jody Weinrich, SEIU / PA Joint Board
  • Senator Art Haywood (D)
  • Angelo Ortega, Make the Road PA
  • Hillary Rothrock, SEIU HCPA, United Home Care Workers
  • Daniel Alvalle, CASA
  • Jessica Britain, Action Together, NEPA

QUOTES

Marc Stier: “Pennsylvanians Together is here at the state Capitol today to call for economic justice now and in the future. In the short term, we call for using the $14 billion state surplus to fund the first few years of the seven-year plan to fund k-12 education fully and fairly. In the long term, we call for ensuring that wealthy individuals and multinational corporations pay their fair share of taxes. That would give us the revenue we need to fund the whole K-12 plan as well as make the investments in workforce training and higher education we need to create opportunity and prosperity for all.”

Senator Haywood: “Our tax system is rigged against us. Reducing taxation on everyday people and making the rich pay their fair share is the first step toward fairness.”

Dwayne Heisler: “The Pennsylvanians Together campaign works to ensure that all Pennsylvanians can thrive—not just survive. For too long, we’ve let politicians, who serve the interests of corporations, and the rich divide us based on what we look like, where we come from, where we worship, how much money we have or whether we are native-born or immigrants. By dividing us, they have given us public policies that do too little to help most Pennsylvanians while making the rich and corporations even wealthier. That’s why we demand tax justice now!”

Angelo Ortega: “Whether the problem is storm damage or neglect by previous owners many families in Pennsylvania live in houses that could be wonderful places to live if only they had some care. They might need a major improvement or minor ones. But the costs for these repairs are often beyond the means of the families that own these homes.”

“Fortunately, the Whole-Home Repairs program provides the funds. And when the repairs are made, it benefits not just the family that lives in the home but their neighbors and the local community. But the initial money for the program has run out in most counties in Pennsylvania, so now is the time to add new funding. More money for the Whole-Home Repairs program means we can help more families who need it.”

Hillary Rothrock: “Every month is a struggle to pay my rent, my bills, put food on the table, and pay for medical care. I have medical bills that I make payments on to afford them…” “I have no benefits, no health insurance, no paid sick or vacation time, no 401K or pension. I don’t even get overtime pay or holiday pay.”

“I’m proud to pay my fair share in taxes. But it isn’t fair that my rate is more than double the rate paid by the top 1% of families whose incomes average $1.9 million a year!”

Jody Weinrich: “I believe people … shouldn’t have to live with relatives because they can’t afford housing on minimum wage. And how can anyone think about retirement when they’re making so little?”

“I believe people should be able to take their kids to the park, out to a restaurant, or to see a movie without worrying about money. We deserve a livable wage so we can have dignity in our work. Pennsylvania should be a place where working people can thrive, not just survive.”

Jessica Britain: “I’m here to say that I’m not interested in what we can’t do…what we can do is make a historic, constitutionally and Commonwealth Court-mandated investment in ALL public schools around the Commonwealth.”

“Every student deserves…a safe, healthy learning environment so they can thrive and succeed in school today and live productive, fulfilling lives after graduation.”

 

###

June 3, 2024

Statement on Completion of PA State Budget

By Blog Post, Press Statements

Six months after the general appropriation bill was passed by the Pennsylvania House and Senate and signed by Governor Shapiro, the House, and Senate today took the necessary step to complete the state budget by passing the Fiscal and School Code bills. These code bills are necessary for two reasons. First, some of the previously appropriated funds cannot be spent without the programmatic instructions found in the code bills. Second, some elements of what we think of as the budget consists of tax credits that cannot be included in the General Appropriation bill.

Like any bill that must pass a House controlled by Democrats and a Senate controlled by Republicans, the School and Fiscal Code bills contain many compromises.

From our point of view, it is unfortunate that the School Code includes an additional $150 million in funding demanded by the Senate for our existing tax-credit-based school voucher programs, the Education Improvement Tax Credit, and the Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit. But while we believe these programs are a problematic use of the tax dollars that should go to our public schools, the program has been tweaked a bit to reduce the amount of overhead that the organizations that pass funds to private schools can keep: from 20% to 10%. Some minor  accountability measures have been added to the program but it appears that the full suite of accountability measures that House Democrats have proposed—which would finally allow us to understand who, if anyone actually benefits from these programs—were not included. Schools that received tax-credit vouchers  will continue to be able to discriminate based on religion, disability, LGBTQ+ status of students of their parents, academic performance and on the basis of whether a student is pregnant or has had an abortion.

We are also distressed that the $100 million in Level Up funding for our most severely underfunded schools was not included in the Education Code.

On the other hand, there are some important programs—detailed below and championed mostly by Democrats the Senate and House—that will benefit students in our public schools and community colleges, as well as working people who are caring for children or seniors.

We detail these good programs below. But what this compromise should show us is that those who say there is no tension between vouchers and public school funding are mistaken. Over the last ten years or more, Republicans have continued to hold public school funding and other programs hostage to continued funding of our existing school voucher program.

Much of the language in the School and Fiscal Code bills deals with housekeeping matters that are not subject to much controversy. However, a few important decisions have been made after a long discussion between the parties.

SCHOOL CODE (HB 301)

Educator Pipeline Support Grant Program. This program provides grants of $10,000 to student teachers or $15,000 if the student teachers work in a school with high turnover. This is an important program that will help address our teacher shortage.

Libraries. The School Code authorizes an additional $70.47 million in subsidies to public libraries across the state.

Student Teacher Flexibility. This provision will allow retired teachers to be hired as substitutes without losing their pensions. This is another program that will help address our teacher shortage.

Mental Health. The School Code transfers $100 million appropriated for COVID relief to the School Safety and Security Fund. Ninety million dollars in funds will be distributed to school districts, career and technical schools, charter and cyber charter schools, and intermediate units to enhance student mental health treatment.

Environmental Repairs Program. The Environmental Repairs Program will provide grants to school districts, career and technical schools, charter and cyber charter schools, and intermediate units for the abatement or remediation of environmental hazards in school buildings including the abatement or remediation of lead.

FISCAL CODE (HB 1300)

Some of the important elements in the Fiscal Code have been moved from the Tax Code, including the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit.

Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit. This part of the fiscal code enhances a program that was initiated in last year’s budget, a state tax credit for the costs of caring for children and other dependents (such as seniors) when such care is necessary for taxpayers to hold a job. The language in the Fiscal Code increases the amount of tax credit that Pennsylvanians can take. The current child care tax credit is increased from 30% to 100% of the federal child care and dependent tax credit.  The size of the child care tax credit is based on income. The largest  biggest tax credit would now be $2,100, up from  $630, under current state law for  families making with an income  $43,000 who spend  $6,000 or more on  care for two children.

Public School Facility Improvement Grant Program. This program will be established in the Commonwealth Financing Authority to provide grants to school districts and career and technical education centers for upgrading facilities. The $100 million in the General Appropriation bill for Level Up will be transferred to this program.

Environmental Repairs Program. The Fiscal Code transfers $75 million in unallocated appropriated funds to the Environmental Repairs Program established in the School Code.

Indigent Defense. The Fiscal Code establishes an indigent advisory committee within the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency. This will allow the $7.5 million in the General Appropriations bill to be spent on indigent defense. Pennsylvania has long been one of the few states that does not provide state funds to protect the constitutional right to an attorney.

WHAT REMAINS UNDONE

Earlier this week, our new advocacy campaign Pennsylvanians Together held an event with Santa Claus pointing to 13 pieces of legislation that the House had passed but that had not passed, or even been considered, by the Senate. You can find that list here.

Unfortunately, of the great pieces of legislation on that list, only the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit is found in the bills that have, or will be, passed today. So, still stalled are important pieces of legislation that would raise the minimum wage to $15, cut taxes for working families, provide additional funding for the Whole-Home Repairs Program, reform the Corporate Net Income Tax, provide a shield for abortion providers and those from other states coming to Pennsylvania seeking an abortion, open a window for survivors of sexual abuse to sue their abusers, enact two gun safety laws, protect public workers from dangerous work conditions, allow workers who are not working due to labor-management disputes to receive unemployment insurance, create a cost of living increase for retired teachers and public servants, and extend Pennsylvania’s anti-discrimination law to LGBTQ+ people.

December 13, 2023

Penn Policy Center Statement on PA Budget Passage

By Blog Post, Press Release, Press Statement

July 5, 2023

For Immediate Release

Contact: Kirstin Snow, snow@pennpolicy.org

Penn Policy Center Statement on Budget Passage

Governor Shapiro’s letter announcing that he would line-item veto the appropriation for vouchers in the budget passed by the Senate last week clears the way for the House to also pass the budget and send it to the Governor for his signature.

Enacting a budget that doesn’t include a voucher plan is a victory, especially because that plan would have likely been a first step toward the destruction of public education in Pennsylvania. We are grateful to Democrats in both the House and the Senate for standing strong against vouchers.

Sadly, while the enacted budget is likely the best that can be achieved at this date, it is not a good one. While it includes bout a 5% increase in total spending, after taking inflation into account, the increase is not substantial. If not for what House Majority Leader Matt Bradford aptly called the “distraction” of the voucher issue, Governor Shapiro could and should have worked more closely with the Democrats in the legislature to reach an agreement with Senate Republicans on a better budget, one closer to the budget passed by the House a month ago. Such a budget would have:

  • provided the additional funding for basic education, special education, the Level Up program, and the remediation of toxic schools needed to meet the requirement of the Commonwealth Court decision on school funding.
  • invested more than an additional $50 million in the Whole-Home Repairs program.
  • provided more funding for subsidized child care and pre-K education.
  • excluded a cut in funds for gun violence prevention, at a time when those programs have had some positive impact in cities around the state.
  • included a long overdue increase in the minimum wage in our state.

And at this point, the General Assembly has not passed funding for Temple, Pitt, and Penn State, which means that in-state tuitions at those institutions, which is already among the highest in the country, will skyrocket.

These and many other needed public investments in higher education, —which we will detail in a more complete review of the budget in a few weeks—could have been paid for by the accumulated $13 billion surplus without raising taxes on Pennsylvanians.

So while avoiding the worst outcome, this budget fails to deliver all that Pennsylvanians need from our state government.  Democrats in the General Assembly and the House Democratic leadership did step forward this year and enacted a far better budget than we have seen in many years. But they didn’t get the help they needed from the governor to get their plans enacted against the opposition of Senate Republicans.

 

The Pennsylvania Policy Center creates the tools that political officials, opinion leaders, grassroots organizations, and the people of PA need to expand our vibrant democracy, secure our freedom, and seek economic justice in Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania Policy Center

 

July 5, 2023

Saving Public Education in Pennsylvania, Where It Began

By Blog Post, Op-Ed

Originally published on PennCapital-Star.com

The budget stalemate in Harrisburg hasn’t been primarily about whether some budget line items go up or down by a few hundred million dollars. Those kinds of disputes are easy to resolve. Rather, it’s been about whether Pennsylvania will start down a radical, extremist path that leads to the destruction of public education in our state.

As we celebrate the birth of our country, we should remember that public education is central to the ideals that led to, and grew out of, American independence. And we in Pennsylvania should resolve not to compromise those ideals as the state passes its budget this year.

The American Revolution was not just a political revolution against the King and Parliament. It was also a social revolution against the hierarchal society they represented, a society in which everyone knew and kept in their place. It was a revolution to give all white men, no matter whether they started out poor or rich, real freedom and an opportunity to better themselves—and, in doing so, contribute to the well-being of the whole country. Over the following 200-plus years, we have expanded their vision and still seek freedom and opportunity for all people, no matter what they look like, no matter their gender, and no matter who they love.

Creating opportunity for all does not just mean tearing down the barriers of aristocracy. Founders like Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, and Adams realized that unless access to a good education was available to all, opportunity would be limited to only a few.

They also realized two other things. First, the future of the country required our citizens to have a civic education centered around American ideals. And second, the rapidly growing economy in the early 19th century needed workers who would only get the necessary education if it were publicly provided.

Cities, towns, and villages provided free public education as early as 1639. Many colonies and every new state after 1776 required local communities to create public schools.

As it became clear that the benefits of public education spread far beyond local communities, states began to support those schools. Under the leadership of Thaddeus Stevens, who was the great educator before he became the great liberator, Pennsylvania became the first state to do so in 1834.

Private schools have always existed alongside the public schools, and Pennsylvania today offers business tax credits that provide $350 million in support for private schools.

But Republican extremists from outside Pennsylvania, like billionaire Betsy Devos, Donald Trump’s Secretary of Education, have always wanted much more: a radical, voucher-based alternative to the public school system in every state. When Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court plainly said that our public schools are inadequately and inequitably funded, Republicans lied and said it called for more support for private schools.

And now the Senate Republicans are holding the state budget hostage for what looks like a small investment in vouchers. That Betsy Devos and other billionaire extremists embraced it, however, shows us that the ultimate goal of the program is the total replacement of public schools. States that have taken the first step in this direction, like Ohio and Arizona, have been traveling down that slippery slope ever since they first enacted a voucher program with declining funding for public schools.

What would be wrong with a privatized school system?

Most importantly, it would be an elitist system, in which wealthy parents would supplement state vouchers to attend schools that were far better funded than the schools the rest of our children could attend. The promise of America, to offer real freedom and equal education to all, would come to an end. England’s rigid class system, which our founders sought to displace, would be recreated here.

This elitism would not only block the way forward for working people, it would especially affect Black and brown people, who have far fewer resources to attend private schools but receive no more under the voucher plan proposed here and in other states. A privatized education system would be an inherently racist one.

Second, our children would no longer attend schools that teach American ideals. There are too many who attend schools that teach religious ideas that conflict with our ideals and that undermine respect for science and rational thought itself. And the private schools attended by the wealthy would, implicitly or explicitly, teach their students that they are members of the elite, who deserve to rule over the rest of us.

And third, economic growth, which grew because of our huge investment in public schools and the skills and talents of our people, would slow down as fewer people have access to an excellent K-12 education and the opportunities for further education and training it creates.

Like the British monarchs and aristocrats before them, the wealthy elitists who back vouchers think that America’s success depends on people like them having outsized political and economic power.

We need to remind them and their supporters, among whom are Republican legislators and Governor Shapiro, that the success—and the soul—of America depends on fairly and fully funded public schools that provide opportunity and freedom for all.

 

 

July 5, 2023

PRESS RELEASE: Update on PA Budget Negotiations

By Press Release
July 3, 2023

For Immediate Release

Contact: Kirstin Snow, snow@pennpolicy.org

Update on Budget Negotiations

With $13 billion in accumulated surplus and a budget from the governor that proposed modest additions to state spending on policies that have broad support, one would expect that making a budget deal would be easy.

Yet the budget deadline came and went.

House Democrats passed a budget four weeks ago with more funding for a number of programs, including education, where they added to basic education funding and special education funding, and added the popular Level Up program back into the budget. They then passed a minimum wage bill that was not perfect but would put Pennsylvania on a path to $15. Governor Shapiro embraced both plans.

Senate Republicans passed a profoundly flawed budget, at the last minute, that rejected most of the House plan. Its worst element, however, was the inclusion of a $100 million down payment on a radical plan, sponsored by extremist billionaires like Betsy Devos and Jeffrey Yass, to destroy our public school system. Then they left town.

The House Democrats had already made clear that there will be no voucher program adopted this year or for as long as they are in the House majority. (And given that their stance on all the critical issues is totally aligned with the majority in public polls, they may well be in the majority for a long time.)

So, we’re back to square one.

How did we get here?

First, negotiations started later than usual. There were new political circumstances: a Democratic House majority that did not really take power until the special elections in March, a new governor, and new leadership in the Senate. The new people, with power in their hands, had to take time to build relationships, internally and externally, and learn the ropes of the budget process.

Second, in an extraordinary display of political chutzpah, having lost the education funding case in court, the Republicans tried to twist the decision—which calls for a new, fair system of funding public schools—into a mandate to radically restructure our education system by privatizing schools.

Third, the Republicans not only misread the opinion of the courts but may have misread Governor Shapiro as well. The governor signaled his willingness to support a modest Lifeline scholarship program during his campaign and has continued to do so ever since. However, his support was contingent on funding public schools fully and fairly. When public schools are so radically underfunded, any allotment of money for vouchers takes away critical funds from these schools. And the Senate Republican budget does far less than the House Democratic budget. While the Governor has not been as clear as we’d like, we hope his unwillingness to embrace the Senate budget indicates that he’s having second thoughts about the school voucher plan. As he thinks about his political future, the Governor must be concerned that the endorsement of the Senate plan by anti-government extremists Betsy Devos and Grover Norquist reveals that Republicans see Lifeline scholarships not as a supplement to public schools, but as a foot in the door for a radical restructuring of education funding in Pennsylvania.

Fourth, it appears that many Republicans don’t understand that they lost the last election: in fact, their gubernatorial candidate lost in a landslide. They lost the House majority for the first time in over a decade. While Senate Republicans did not lose seats—mostly because that chamber remains more gerrymandered than the House—the political landscape has shifted. But Republican expectations have not shifted with them.

The Republicans can legitimately claim a role in setting funding levels in the budget. But there seems to be a faction among Senate Republicans that is taking its cues from national Republicans, who think they can hold hostage any necessary government action—whether it is a state budget or an agreement to avoid default—until they get their way, no matter how radical their proposals are. This is, sadly, a product of the belief among Republican extremists that theirs is the only legitimate governing party. That, however, is not the view of most Pennsylvanians. Democrats here in Pennsylvania are not going to embrace extremist, radical ideas in the budget process any more than President Biden allowed it in Washington.

And fifth, Senate Republicans apparently believe that any delay in the budget will be blamed on Governor Shapiro. They fail to understand that, even before his effective leadership in managing the recent I-95 repair, the governor is widely admired and is in the best possible position to wait for them to accept political reality. And the Governor surely understands that the radical intent of the Lifeline program is deeply unpopular with Democrats, not just in Pennsylvania but around the country.

The House Democrats have accepted political reality. They have enacted many of their proposals (which are, frankly, progressive) but have done so in ways that have not pushed the envelope; and on many issues, they have won Republican support. When the Senate Republicans recognize political reality as well, they will be able to strike a budget deal with the House Democrats and Governor Shapiro.

###

The Pennsylvania Policy Center creates the tools that political officials, opinion leaders, grassroots organizations, and the people of Pennsylvania need to expand our vibrant democracy, secure our freedom, and seek economic justice in Pennsylvania.

www.pennpolicy.org
July 3, 2023

Update on Pennsylvania Budget Negotiations

By Blog Post

With $13 billion in accumulated surplus and a budget from the governor that proposed modest additions to state spending on policies that have broad support, one would expect that making a budget deal would be easy.

Yet the budget deadline came and went.

House Democrats passed a budget four weeks ago with more funding for a number of programs, including education, where they added to basic education funding and special education funding, and added the popular Level Up program back into the budget. They then passed a minimum wage bill that was not perfect but would put Pennsylvania on a path to $15. Governor Shapiro embraced both plans.

Senate Republicans passed a profoundly flawed budget, at the last minute, that rejected most of the House plan. Its worst element, however, was the inclusion of a $100 million down payment on a radical plan, sponsored by extremist billionaires like Betsy Devos and Jeffrey Yass, to destroy our public school system. Then they left town.

The House Democrats had already made clear that there will be no voucher program adopted this year or for as long as they are in the House majority. (And given that their stance on all the critical issues is totally aligned with the majority in public polls, they may well be in the majority for a long time.)

So, we’re back to square one.

How did we get here?

First, negotiations started later than usual. There were new political circumstances: a Democratic House majority that did not really take power until the special elections in March, a new governor, and new leadership in the Senate. The new people, with power in their hands, had to take time to build relationships, internally and externally, and learn the ropes of the budget process.

Second, in an extraordinary display of political chutzpah, having lost the education funding case in court, the Republicans tried to twist the decision—which calls for a new, fair system of funding public schools—into a mandate to radically restructure our education system by privatizing schools.

Third, the Republicans not only misread the opinion of the courts but may have misread Governor Shapiro as well. The governor signaled his willingness to support a modest Lifeline scholarship program during his campaign and has continued to do so ever since. However, his support was contingent on funding public schools fully and fairly. When public schools are so radically underfunded, any allotment of money for vouchers takes away critical funds from these schools. And the Senate Republican budget does far less than the House Democratic budget. While the Governor has not been as clear as we’d like, we hope his unwillingness to embrace the Senate budget indicates that he’s having second thoughts about the school voucher plan. As he thinks about his political future, the Governor must be concerned that the endorsement of the Senate plan by anti-government extremists Betsy Devos and Grover Norquist reveals that Republicans see Lifeline scholarships not as a supplement to public schools, but as a foot in the door for a radical restructuring of education funding in Pennsylvania.

Fourth, it appears that many Republicans don’t understand that they lost the last election: in fact, their gubernatorial candidate lost in a landslide. They lost the House majority for the first time in over a decade. While Senate Republicans did not lose seats—mostly because that chamber remains more gerrymandered than the House—the political landscape has shifted. But Republican expectations have not shifted with them.

The Republicans can legitimately claim a role in setting funding levels in the budget. But there seems to be a faction among Senate Republicans that is taking its cues from national Republicans, who think they can hold hostage any necessary government action—whether it is a state budget or an agreement to avoid default—until they get their way, no matter how radical their proposals are. This is, sadly, a product of the belief among Republican extremists that theirs is the only legitimate governing party. That, however, is not the view of most Pennsylvanians. Democrats here in Pennsylvania are not going to embrace extremist, radical ideas in the budget process any more than President Biden allowed it in Washington.

And fifth, Senate Republicans apparently believe that any delay in the budget will be blamed on Governor Shapiro. They fail to understand that, even before his effective leadership in managing the recent I-95 repair, the governor is widely admired and is in the best possible position to wait for them to accept political reality. And the Governor surely understands that the radical intent of the Lifeline program is deeply unpopular with Democrats, not just in Pennsylvania but around the country.

The House Democrats have accepted political reality. They have enacted many of their proposals (which are, frankly, progressive) but have done so in ways that have not pushed the envelope; and on many issues, they have won Republican support. When the Senate Republicans recognize political reality as well, they will be able to strike a budget deal with the House Democrats and Governor Shapiro.

 

July 3, 2023

Pennsylvania Policy Center Update on Pennsylvania Budget

By Blog Post, Press Statement

With $13 billion in an accumulated surplus and a budget proposal from the governor that only proposed modest additions to state spending on policies that have broad support, one would expect that making a budget deal would be easy.

Yet the budget is due today, and no deal is imminent. While House Democrats passed a budget weeks ago, not only is no resolution in sight but it appears that a great deal more work needs to be done to reach one.

Why?

First, it seems like negotiations started later than usual. There were new political circumstances: a Democratic House majority that did not really take power until the special elections in March, a new governor, and new leadership in the Senate. The new people with power in their hands had to take time to build relationships internally and externally and learn the ropes of the budget process. And they were all wary of taking bold steps that might come back to haunt them.

House Democrats decided to move first and passed a bolder budget than the one proposed by the Governor, with more funding for education and new funding for the Level Up program and other critical priorities. Then they passed a minimum wage bill that was not perfect but would put PA on a path to $15. Governor Shapiro embraced both plans.

Senate Republicans, however, have been holding back—apparently, for a number of reasons.

First, they don’t seem to understand that Republicans lost the last election: they lost the governor’s race by a landslide. And, they lost the House majority for the first time in over a decade. While Senate Rs did not lose seats—mostly because that chamber remains more gerrymandered than the House—the political landscape has shifted. But Republican expectations have not shifted with them.

Second, there seems to be a faction among Senate Republicans (there certainly is in the House Republican caucus) that is taking their cues from national Republicans, who seem to think that they can hold any necessary government action—whether it is a state budget or an agreement to avoid default—hostage until they get their way. This is, sadly, a product of the belief among Republican extremists that they are the only legitimate governing party.

Third, Senate Republicans apparently believe that any delay in the budget will be blamed on Governor Shapiro. What they fail to understand is that, even before his effective leadership on the I-95 issue, the governor is in the best possible position to wait—if necessary, for a few weeks or more to reach a budget deal.

Fourth, despite losing in the courts, Republicans have been trying to twist the Commonwealth Court decision, which calls for a new, fair system of funding public schools, into a mandate to radically restructure how we fund our schools by privatizing them. This, together with their willingness to hold the budget hostage to their demands, has led Senate Republicans to make their school choice voucher program, Lifeline Scholarships, a top priority.

And fifth, Governor Shapiro, perhaps inadvertently, encouraged the Senate Republicans by reiterating what he said on the campaign trail—that he was not opposed to Lifeline scholarships provided they did not take away from funding public schools. Senate Republicans took his statement and ran with it despite two problems. First, when schools are so radically underfunded, any money for vouchers takes away critical funds from public schools. And second, it became quickly apparent that the Republicans see Lifeline scholarships not as a supplement to public schools but as a foot in the door for a radical restructuring of education funding that Democrats will never support. The appearance of a letter signed by anti-government extremists Betsy Devos and Grover Norquist in support of the Lifeline Scholarship program has made that abundantly clear.

Last night, the House Democrats, who have been the most consistent and straightforward players at the table, made it clear that there will be no Lifeline scholarship program adopted this year or as long as they are in the House majority. (And given that their stance on all the critical issues is totally aligned with the majority in public polls, they are likely to be in the majority for a long time.)

So, we are back to square one. The House has put a fiscally sound budget on the table that makes a strong down payment on meeting the constitutional and moral obligation to fund our schools. They have passed a good minimum wage proposal. They have recognized that they might not get everything they want in a final deal but have told everyone what they want.

It’s time for the Senate Republicans to recognize political reality and come to the table with the House Democrats and Governor Shapiro and strike a deal.

June 30, 2023

Penn Policy Speaks in Support of House Budget on K-12 Education

By Blog Post, Press Statement

Remarks by Marc Stier, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Policy Center, at a PA School Work press conference in support of the House passed budget for 2023-2024

In March, Governor Shapiro put forward a proposed budget that many of us said had the right priorities but did not offer enough funding for critical needs, including K-12 education. Last week, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed a budget—with the support of Governor Shapiro—that added funding in many of those critical areas.

The House budget adds the basic education fund to the governor’s proposal. It includes new funding for the Level Up program, which provides additional money for the 108 least-well-funded school districts and adds money for special education and for repairing toxic schools. The House budget, which Governor Shapiro embraced, is a good down payment on what the state ultimately must do to meet the constitutional and moral requirements to fully and fairly fund our schools.

The additional funding in the House budget for education and other needs is made possible by the new revenue budget estimates provided by the Independent Fiscal Office. The IFO projects that the state will have almost a billion dollars more for the current and next fiscal years than the governor projected in March. At end of this fiscal year, on June 30th, the state will have a $13 billion accumulated surplus including the Rainy Day Fund and the General Fund surplus. If the House budget is adopted, the state will still have a $10.5 billion surplus on June 30th next year.

Contrary to some critics’ opinions of the House-passed budget, it does not reduce Rainy Day Fund but adds a bit more than $500 million to it. The House budget, like the Governor’s budget and any other budget that will be enacted this year, does draw down the accumulated General Fund surplus. That is exactly what it should do. The General Fund surplus is a product of tight budgets during the pandemic, federal pandemic aid, and a faster-than-expected recovery from the recession created by the pandemic. It was created by our tax dollars, and it should be used to support the needs of the state as identified by the people of Pennsylvania.

And that is what the House budget proposal does, as shown by the result of a poll carried out by Data for Progress last week.

The poll shows that 64% of Pennsylvania voters believe we are facing a severe teacher shortage in the state, and 69% of them believe that there are significant differences in education quality provided by public schools across Pennsylvania because some schools do not receive enough funding.

That does not mean that Pennsylvanians oppose our public school system. By a 26-point margin, Pennsylvania voters don’t want to replace our existing public school system with private schools funded by vouchers. Rather, they understand that our schools are not, but should be, fairly and adequately funded: 67% believe state government should be doing more to ensure that public schools are sufficiently funded, and 66% think that state government should be doing more to ensure that public schools are equally funded.

The Pennsylvania House budget passed last week does exactly what voters want— it takes a critical step forward in fully and fairly funding our schools.

June 15, 2023

Pennsylvania Policy Center Statement on General Fund Budget Passed by PA House

By Blog Post, Press Statement

For Immediate Release
Contact: Kirstin Snow, Communications Director, snow@pennpolicy.org; 215-510-9336

Harrisburg, PA–Marc Stier, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Policy Center, today released the following statement after the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed HB 611, a 2023-24 General Fund Budget, on party line vote.

“In March, Governor Shapiro proposed a budget that had the right priorities but proposed too little spending in certain key areas, including K-12 education, workforce development, and housing. The budget passed by the House of Representatives today follows the governor’s priorities but adds spending in areas we believe deserved additional support. That spending is supported by additional revenue expected in both the current fiscal year and in years 2023-24.

Going beyond the governor’s budget proposal, the House budget includes:

·      An additional $100 million in basic education funding

·      A $225 million Level Up supplement to the 108 most underfunded school districts in the state.

·      An additional $50 million for Special Education.

·      An additional $250 million for school facilities maintenance and improvements.

·      An additional $30 million for job training programs and $14 million for career and technical education.

·      $200 million for an expansion of the Whole Home Repairs program.

·      An additional $52 million for general support, facilities support for PASSHE schools; and $24 for PHEAA grants for students.

·      An additional $66 million for community and economic assistance programs and $30 million for the Keystone Communities program.

·      An additional $45 million for childcare services and assistance.

The first five items in the list constitute a strong down payment on the spending that will be necessary to meet the constitutional requirement to provide an adequate education to every child in Pennsylvania. The sixth item—funding for job training—is, we believe, a critical investment for Pennsylvania workers and our economy. And the seventh item, the addition to the Whole Home Repairs program, will take an additional step forward in helping low- and moderate-income Pennsylvanians deal with the current crisis in affordable housing.

Despite these welcome additions to Governor Shapiro’s proposal, this is a fiscally responsible budget plan. The state remains on pace to have a more than $13 billion budget surplus at the end of the current fiscal year, including an $8 billion operating surplus and over $5 billion in the Rainy Day Fund. This is a far greater surplus than is necessary or reasonable to maintain. The House budget for 2023-24 expects an ending balance of $5.6 billion before additions to the Rainy Day Fund, essentially the ending balance the governor proposed in March. The additional funding proposed by the Appropriations Committee is supported by higher revenue expectations for the current fiscal year ($663 million) and Fiscal year 2023-24 ($461 million) compared to the governor’s March projections. These higher revenue expectations are based on the IFO’s recent projections and are in keeping with both recent revenues and consensus estimates for growth in the Pennsylvania economy over the next year.

In addition, the House passed proposes to add an additional $558.7 million to the Rainy Day Fund. The governor’s budget did not propose adding anything to the Rainy Day Fund. If this budget is adopted, at the end of the 2023-24 fiscal year, that is on June 30, 2024, the state will still have an accumulated surplus of over $10.5 billion, including a General Fund operating surplus of $5 billion and a $5.7 billion Rainy Day Fund.

Given the large surplus, the higher than expected revenues, and the urgent needs of Pennsylvanians—including the need to fully and fairly fund our schools—it would be irresponsible not to enact a budget along the lines passed by the House Appropriations Committee. We commend Chairman Harris and the Democrats who devised this proposal. We hope that the Republicans who opposed it will reconsider when the bill comes to the floor of the House and the Senate.”

###

The Pennsylvania Policy Center aims through its research and policy development to create the tools political officials, opinion leaders, grassroots organizations, and the people of Pennsylvania need to expand our vibrant democracy, secure our freedom, and seek economic justice in Pennsylvania. 

www.pennpolicy.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

June 6, 2023