Hill 1

Brielle Hill

Dr. W. Gin

Law, Politics, and Society

6 May 2017

The Lack of Funding for Education in America

In the 2014 school year, at least 31 states provided less state funding per student than in

the 2008 school year, and in at least 15 states, the cuts exceeded 10 percent. The future of our

country depends heavily on the quality of education that younger generations receive. However,

it seems that instead of raising the public K-12 funding, many states have decided to do exactly

the opposite. The benefits of investing in the education system means hiring and retaining

qualified educators, reducing the sizes of classes and expanding access to higher quality early

education. When education funding is cut future generations are the ones that suffer the most.

How will the next round of doctors make it to medical school if they do not have a good

foundation? The cost of this status quo is that future generation that enter into the public

education system are suffering because of a lack of funding. Another cost is that many of these

future generation will not get the proper education needed to further their education which can

cost our society future jobs and careers. The benefits of this status quo are none. Public education

is suffering terribly due to the lack of funding for proper books, equipment, and educated

teachers.

“Most states raised ‘general’ funding per student slightly this year, but 12 states imposed

new cuts, even as the national economy continues to improve. Some of these states, including

Oklahoma, Arizona, and Wisconsin, already were among the deepest-cutting states since the

recession hit.”i Many states find themselves cutting the funding for K-12 education as a result of
 Hill 2

the 2007-2009 recession that heavily reduced state revenue. The responsibility for funding K-12

education lies with the states but because there is a nation interest in the quality of public school

education the federal government provides assistance. A primary source of federal K-12 support

began in 1965 with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which authorizes

grants for elementary and secondary school programs for children of low-income families,

school library resources, textbooks, and other instructional materials. State taxpayers also invest

in K-12 education. “Total taxpayer investment in K-12 education in the United States for the

2004-05 school year is estimated to be $536 billion.”ii While it seems that the United States is a

world leader in education investment but nations that spend less still manage to achieve higher

levels of student performance. The question remands, where does the money go? There are many

elements when it comes to funding education. From teacher salaries to the cost per student, many

states vary in how much the shell out to the K-12 education fund. However, lots of states still

find other areas more important. For example, many states find it more important to spend

money on prisons, road damages, and other less important stuff than education. Instead of

making education a priority states just add it to a list of things to do. There are a couple of

alternatives that would be beneficial to changing the way states spend and prioritize the money

going to education. Two alternatives that I recommend would be to look at the programs that are

designed to support education and see if they are really doing just that. Another alternative would

be to reevaluate the spending dedicated to prisons and find a good balance to distribute the

money properly between prisons and education.

The first alternative would be to look in to organizations, such as the lotteries, that are

designed to support education with the money they make. The point of this alternative is to

monitor whether or not these organizations are actually doing what they were designed to do.
 Hill 3

"And while about one third of all lottery money returns to state budgets, critics say the money

tends to replace -- rather than supplement -- existing funding for the targeted programs.”iii About

two-thirds of lottery money is set aside for prizes and then a small fraction, 5 percent nationally,

is allocated to administration which covers things like salaries and advertising, what is left of that

money is for the states to spend. State lotteries that participate in games like the Mega Millions

are sold to the public as enterprises that would benefit public schools with millions of dollars in

proceeds a year. “If you look at the payouts from lotteries to schools, you might be impressed by

the numbers. In California, for example, all lottery donations to public schools from kindergarten

through college, total $24,018,713,472 since 1985. Yes, that’s $24 billion. K-12 schools alone

have received a total of $19.3 billion.”iv However, public schools in California are still having to

hold fundraisers to keep the building lights on. The problem seems to be that instead of relying

on the money that comes from lotteries in different as additional funding, legislatures have used

the lottery money to pay for the entire education budget and spent the money that would have

been used if there was no lottery cash to be spent on other things. Because of this logic, public

school budgets, haven’t gotten a boost because of the lottery funding. Like many other places,

the lottery in Texas, as a fun game that would reap big rewards for public education. According

to the American-Statesman, in 1996, “lottery proceeds paid for about two weeks of schooling for

Texas students.”v However, by the year 2010, the money covered barely three days. The question

is no longer whether programs, such as the lottery, actually help in funding public schools

because that answer is a definite yes. However, the money does not do what is was intended to

do or what it promises to do. In this alternative, it is important to propose that instead of using

the money that comes from the lottery as an only source of money for education spending it
 Hill 4

would be wise to use the money for what it was originally intended for, as an additional source

of income to education.

In this alternative, I propose that the states begin to reevaluate the way that they are

separating the funding for education. States will need to implement a program that evaluates and

mentors how the money is being allocated to education. While some critics believe that lottery is

not helping to fully fund education, the idea remains that the reason there is no solid statistical

proof that can confirm or deny how helpful lottery funds are to education. The reason for this is

because one, in most states lottery is being used as a sole source of income for education and

two, states are not recording and keeping track of how they spend the proceeds they receive from

the lottery. In this alternative, I recommend that states begin to keep track of how the money

from the lottery is being used for education. It is also important to remember that this alternative

is not a solve all alternative, instead it is a one-step solution to the bigger alternative, which is,

reevaluating our priorities as states and redirecting the funding of education so that the money in

our budge exceeds prison spending so that we are actually able to use the lottery money as an

additional source for income into education instead of the only source.

The cost of this alternative would be having to hire state employees that are educated and

trained to keep record and track of the states lottery funds. According to the Bureau of Labor

Statists, the average annual wage for a government employee in 2014 was $51,733vi. Therefore,

states would have to pay the new employee hires about that same amount due to the federal

salary freeze. That is a small cost compared to the struggles that public education has to deal

with. Another cost of this alternative would be having to sacrifice lottery proceeds, by no longer

using lottery proceeds as the sole provider for education funding, states would have to figure out

a way to use the lottery funding for what is was designed for causing them to scrabble and look
 Hill 5

for another, smarter way to fund education fully, and use lottery as an alternative. The benefits of

this alternative would be that education funding would be reevaluated and can now be beneficial

to public schools in many states. Another benefit would be that states now have public and

sufficient records of where their money is being spent. A major problem of states around the

country is that they cannot keep track of where their spending is going and that makes the people

of these states suffer when they are looking for funding for things that matter, especially

education.

The political feasibility of this alternative is high. The feasibility is high due to the fact

that I am not requiring an increase in taxes or for anything to be done that may affect the tax

payers. This alternative is strictly about implementing a program that mentors and keeps track of

state funding for education. Since a huge concern for the American people is increasing taxes,

this alternative would be a plus for them because it will not require money to come out of their

pockets. The political feasibility of this alternative is also high because it is a program that a lot

of inner city families will appreciate because it is a step in the direction of helping public

schools, while middle and upper class families will be satisfied because it does not affect private

schools and is not requiring anyone to make a sacrifice to the middle class education system that

they are ok with. This alternative will only require higher or maybe even promoting existing

government employees that can properly manage and evaluate spending records.

According to the U.S. Department of Education, “State and local spending on prisons and

jails has increased at triple the rate of funding for public education for preschool through grade

P-12 education in the last three decades, a new analysis by the U.S. Department of Education

found.”vii The budgets of our states reflect our values as a country and proves that our priorities

are clearly not in order. As a country we must make the decision to make an investment into
 Hill 6

children’s education instead of criminals’ futures. Instead of investing in punishment states must

start investing in prevention. Reports show that the United States has 5 percent of the world’s

population but more than 20 percent of the world’s incarcerated population. An alternative to the

lack of funding for education would be to spend less money on crime and prisons. For example,

the states of Louisiana spend nearly $700 million on prisons versus the $10,490 they spend per

student. The state reports some of the lowest 2012-2013 Nation Assessment for Education

Progress scores in the country. Instead of focusing on bettering the education of the next

generation the state is paying a salary for an in school police officers and for highway

construction. The idea is that mass incarceration is designed to deter crime and make states safer

but the numbers show that that isn’t the case. The pattern that most children follow is to drop out

of school and turn to the streets which leads to crime. However, the question is why are these

kids not making it through school and feeling the need to turn to crime. Framing my alternative

to cut the funding towards prisons and incarceration to increasing funding of education would be

easy. In order to frame my alternative, I would use children and the lack of education that they

are receiving and how it contributes to crime which is why we have mass incarceration,

prevention over punishment. Researchers have said that a 10 percent increase in high school

graduation rates would result in a 9 percent decline in criminal arrest rates. According to CNN

Money, data from 40 states depict how much government money is spent per year to educate an

elementary/secondary school student compared to the cost of keeping an inmate imprisoned.viii

The gap of those cost was nearly $10,000 more dollars to keep an inmate imprisoned in all 40

states than to educate a student. I would frame my alternative as a way to kill two birds with one

stone. By increasing our funding into education we would be simultaneously bring crime and

mass incarceration down. Framing the alternative like this is important because while education
 Hill 7

is the most important part of the alternative a lot of state citizens and taxpayers still may feel

uncomfortable about their safety. Prevention over punishment is the smartest way to go because

it is easier to prevent something from happening than it is to punish. That is proof when it comes

to the budgets. The reason why it cost so much to keep an inmate in prison is because it is

housing and much more, whereas, in education it is only 7 hours out of the day. The sustainable

political support needed for my policy change would be easy to gain if everyone involved

understood the value of education over incarceration. I would try to highlight the benefits of

states that have chosen education over prison by implementing my alternative on a trial basis in a

particular state.

From 1980-2013, there has been an 324% increase in state and local corrections

spending and a 107% increase in public kindergarten to 12th grade education spending.ix There is

a link between a lack of education and incarceration because it is proven that those who do not

complete high school end up in prison. “Two-thirds of state prisoners have not completed high

school and some findings suggest that black men between the ages of 20 to 24 lacking a high

school diploma may have a better chance of going to prison than getting a job, according to the

DOE.”x Today’s world proves that mass incarceration does not make us safer yet all of our state

resources are going to a system that doesn’t help anyone. “Prison spending is still a fraction of

overall pre-K through 12 education spending: States spend $71 billion on prisons and $534

billion on schools each year. But that combined state and local prison budget is now over an

eighth the size of the school budget. Back in 1990, prison spending was a sixteenth the size of

education spending.”xi When we frame punishing criminals over educating our future it sends a

message to children and their parents that education is no longer important as it is to punish a

criminal. It sends a message that there is nothing left to do but sit back and receive what is given
 Hill 8

to you. However, by taxpayers spending more money on prisons for a criminal system that can

use some reevaluating, they are living in neighborhoods without providers, fathers, mothers,

which leaves a cycle for these children to have to escape from.

The cost of this alternative would be to decrease the money spent on prisons and mass

incarceration and redirect the money to education. When states begin to decrease its funding

towards prisons they will eventually have to begin to release inmates who have been convicted

of nonviolent crimes to make up for the lack of funding. While this isn’t the first time that this

has been done it will still create a panic amongst the tax payers and the political powers in states.

The benefits of this alternative is that it will make a way for education funding to increase. By

cutting and redirecting prison funding states are giving a new opportunity to public schools.

They are allowing inner city schools the opportunity to deliver an education that can benefit the

future of the students that attend the school. Like the first alternative this alternative does not

require the increase of taxes or even bringing in a new form of revenue. Instead this alternative is

looking at the funding that states are already receiving and asking these states to reevaluate their

priorities and redirect the money they are already receiving to a much more deserving cause. The

benefits of this alternative far out way the cost but in this political atmosphere that we are in they

are just not enough.

The political feasibility of this alternative will be a little more difficult. However, the

important way to go about passing this alternative would be to go through political channels

before attempting to go through courts. The courts have a history of not making a huge change

when it comes to education and I believe that in order to achieve a positive response for this

alternative we must frame it as a way to not only benefit inner city public schools but a way to

benefit all public schools. While the alternative would start off with helping out inner city public
 Hill 9

schools with less resources the funding once it is built up and finically stable again. While a lot

of middle class families who send their children to public schools will first off feel cheated once

the alternative is put into place, we will work extremely hard to continue to frame the alternative

to ease peoples’ minds. The alternative should not be looked at as a way to increase taxes

because that is not what it is meant to do. This alternative is meant to decrease the money and

taxes that are already spent on prison and crime in the states and redirect that funding towards

education. Most tax payers should not see this as a huge problem because they are already

paying taxes and would not see a difference whether it be towards education or crime. Another

big problem with the political feasibility would be convincing tax payers that just because their

money is no longer going to prisons and crime does not mean that crime will increase in their

states. The problem with this is because with the money decrease in prisons, inmates with less

violent crimes will have to be released. However, the solution to this problem would be to show

that inmates with nonviolent crimes have been released on more than one occasion and very

rarely do they bring crime back to communities. This is a very simple alternative to a budgeting

issues and I do believe it can be passed without all the extra political backlash. As long as

America can reevaluate its priorities and realize that improving education can in return improve

other aspects such as crime.

In conclusion, while both alternatives would be greatly beneficial to the problem of lack

of funding in the education system, when considering the political atmosphere, we are currently

living in today the best alternative would be the first alternative. Monitoring and beginning to

keep record of how the states are spending the lottery proceeds is the best way to being to reform

the education funding. This alternative is not requiring too much of the public or of the political

leaders who will have to pass it. The political feasibility of this alternative is a lot higher than the
 Hill 10

second alternative. Starting with reevaluating how lottery proceeds are spent is a good step in the

direction of reevaluating the entire education fund. This alternative is also something that can be

done on a state level without federal interference. This alternative would maximize the benefit of

beginning to reform education funding and could be the first step in providing future generations

with the proper education that they deserve. Going with this first alternative is beneficial because

it is not too risky, it is not asking to add more money but instead it is using the money that is

already coming in and finding out a better way to spend the money in a beneficial way. The first

alternative will also make a pathway to the second alternative and make redirecting money a lot

easier because states have begun keeping record and monitoring exactly how money is being

spent. Both alternative are designed to be started with the public schools that are in desperate

need of more funding to improve education. The goal of all alternatives in this paper is to start

them on a trial basis with education systems that need the most improvement and expand them

into all education system that require funding as long as they are public.

i
Michael Leachman, Nick Albares, Kathleen Masterson, and Marlana Wallace, “Most States
Have Cut School Funding, and Some Continue Cutting,” Available at:
http://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/most-states-have-cut-school-funding-and-
some-continue-cutting
ii
Archived Information, “10 Facts About K-12 Education Funding,” Available at:
https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/index.html?exp
iii
David Goldman, “Does Powerball really fund education?” Available at:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/13/news/powerball-education/.
iv The Washington Post, “Mega Millions: Do lotteries really benefit public schools?” Available

at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/mega-millions-do-lotteries-really-
benefit-public-schools/2012/03/30/gIQAbTUNlS_blog.html?utm_term=.2adac6890fbd.
v The Washington Post, “Mega Millions: Do lotteries really benefit public schools?” Available

at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/mega-millions-do-lotteries-really-
benefit-public-schools/2012/03/30/gIQAbTUNlS_blog.html?utm_term=.b1c7d1162f6e.
vi
Ballot Pedia, “Public Employee Salary,” Available at:
https://ballotpedia.org/Public_employee_salary/.
vii
Archived Information, “Report: Increases in Spending on Corrections Far Outpace Education,”
Available at: https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/report-increases-spending-corrections-far-
outpace-education.
 Hill 11

viii
CNN Money, “Education vs Prison Costs,” Available at:
http://money.cnn.com/infographic/economy/education-vs-prison-costs/.
ix
Danielle DeCourcey, “The U.S. Values Prisons More Than Education,” Available at:
http://www.attn.com/stories/11025/us-spends-more-money-incarceration-than-education.
x Danielle DeCourcey, “The U.S. Values Prisons More Than Education,” Available at:

http://www.attn.com/stories/11025/us-spends-more-money-incarceration-than-education.
xi Christopher Ingraham, “The states that spend more money on prisoners than college students,”

Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/07/the-states-that-spend-

more-money-on-prisoners-than-college-students/?utm_term=.6b3477f11f04.