{"id":9178,"date":"2009-06-22T19:51:09","date_gmt":"2009-06-22T19:51:09","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2009-06-22T19:51:09","modified_gmt":"2009-06-22T19:51:09","slug":"mimi-walters-doesnt-understand-state-education-funding-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/2009\/06\/22\/mimi-walters-doesnt-understand-state-education-funding-policy\/","title":{"rendered":"Mimi Walters Doesn&#8217;t Understand State Education Funding Policy"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Here&#8217;s an article showing kind of a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sacbee.com\/politics\/story\/1963911.html?mi_rss=State%2520Politics\">silly trumped-up sanctimony<\/a> on behalf of the Yacht Party.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>California voters said no, but Democratic lawmakers are pushing to do it anyhow.<\/p>\n<p>The issue involves billions of dollars and a ballot measure so important to schools that the California Teachers Association spent more than $7 million in a failed attempt to pass Proposition 1B.<\/p>\n<p>One month after the initiative died, Democrats are proposing to pay schools the same $7.9 billion that was the heart of the measure and to begin payments the same year, 2011-2012.<\/p>\n<p>The funding commitment is part of a massive budget-balancing plan crafted by a joint legislative conference committee and scheduled to be voted upon this week by the Senate and Assembly.<\/p>\n<p>Sen. Mimi Walters, R-Laguna Niguel, said the proposal to commit $7.9 billion to schools directly contradicts the people&#8217;s will.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The voters have spoken and we need to listen,&#8221; Walters said. &#8220;Unfortunately, the majority party in Sacramento isn&#8217;t listening.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Would that the Republicans always listen precisely to what the voters want &#8211; say, when they put 63% majorities into both houses of the Leigslature, for example. &nbsp;The Republican Governor has asked for a $4.5 billion reserve at a time of economic crisis, when voters &#8220;rejected&#8221; a rainy-day fund in Prop. 1A. &nbsp;You can argue the economics of a reserve fund that large on the basis that the economy still has some rough patches, but you can just as easily argue that the Governor is somehow upending the voter&#8217;s will.<\/p>\n<p>The SacBee does offer the contextual reality of the Democrats&#8217; effort here. &nbsp;Before the May 19 special election, the California Federation of Teachers and associated groups sued the state for that $7.9 billion, which they feel is owed to them. &nbsp;The dispute comes over how mandatory Prop. 98 funding gets calculated, and the CFT feels they have a solid argument that they actually deserved more money under the law than the state provided. &nbsp;You can say that you don&#8217;t like mandates in funding generally, but the courts will eventually decide this dispute regardless of what the legislature does. &nbsp;And Democrats can see the possibility &#8211; some would say probability &#8211; of CFT being able to win that lawsuit and receive payment immediately, rather than two years out (although &#8220;immediately&#8221; would probably not happen for a year or so, until the case worked its way through the courts).<\/p>\n<p>Prop. 1B was essentially an attempted out-of-court settlement. &nbsp;That having failed, the participants are going to court. &nbsp;Incidentally, every subsequent budget cut adds to the money owed to schools under Prop. 98, which has ballooned to around $11 billion. &nbsp;So the options are: either set up a future payment schedule, hope the courts rule in a way that would break with precedent, or dismantle Prop. 98 (which wouldn&#8217;t get the state off the hook for funds owed). &nbsp;So when Mimi Walters argues that &#8220;the people have spoken,&#8221; she&#8217;s saying that they&#8217;ve spoken on cutting school funding to dead-last in the nation, all the while not answering the still-thorny problem of a current lawsuit.<\/p>\n<p>Someone should tell her constituents that.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Here&#8217;s an article showing kind of a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sacbee.com\/politics\/story\/1963911.html?mi_rss=State%2520Politics\">silly trumped-up sanctimony<\/a> on behalf of the Yacht Party.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>California voters said no, but Democratic lawmakers are pushing to do it anyhow.<\/p>\n<p>The issue involves billions of dollars and a ballot measure so important to schools that the California Teachers Association spent more than $7 million in a failed attempt to pass Proposition 1B.<\/p>\n<p>One month after the initiative died, Democrats are proposing to pay schools the same $7.9 billion that was the heart of the measure and to begin payments the same year, 2011-2012.<\/p>\n<p>The funding commitment is part of a massive budget-balancing plan crafted by a joint legislative conference committee and scheduled to be voted upon this week by the Senate and Assembly.<\/p>\n<p>Sen. Mimi Walters, R-Laguna Niguel, said the proposal to commit $7.9 billion to schools directly contradicts the people&#8217;s will.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The voters have spoken and we need to listen,&#8221; Walters said. &#8220;Unfortunately, the majority party in Sacramento isn&#8217;t listening.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Would that the Republicans always listen precisely to what the voters want &#8211; say, when they put 63% majorities into both houses of the Leigslature, for example. &nbsp;The Republican Governor has asked for a $4.5 billion reserve at a time of economic crisis, when voters &#8220;rejected&#8221; a rainy-day fund in Prop. 1A. &nbsp;You can argue the economics of a reserve fund that large on the basis that the economy still has some rough patches, but you can just as easily argue that the Governor is somehow upending the voter&#8217;s will.<\/p>\n<p>The SacBee does offer the contextual reality of the Democrats&#8217; effort here. &nbsp;Before the May 19 special election, the California Federation of Teachers and associated groups sued the state for that $7.9 billion, which they feel is owed to them. &nbsp;The dispute comes over how mandatory Prop. 98 funding gets calculated, and the CFT feels they have a solid argument that they actually deserved more money under the law than the state provided. &nbsp;You can say that you don&#8217;t like mandates in funding generally, but the courts will eventually decide this dispute regardless of what the legislature does. &nbsp;And Democrats can see the possibility &#8211; some would say probability &#8211; of CFT being able to win that lawsuit and receive payment immediately, rather than two years out (although &#8220;immediately&#8221; would probably not happen for a year or so, until the case worked its way through the courts).<\/p>\n<p>Prop. 1B was essentially an attempted out-of-court settlement. &nbsp;That having failed, the participants are going to court. &nbsp;Incidentally, every subsequent budget cut adds to the money owed to schools under Prop. 98, which has ballooned to around $11 billion. &nbsp;So the options are: either set up a future payment schedule, hope the courts rule in a way that would break with precedent, or dismantle Prop. 98 (which wouldn&#8217;t get the state off the hook for funds owed). &nbsp;So when Mimi Walters argues that &#8220;the people have spoken,&#8221; she&#8217;s saying that they&#8217;ve spoken on cutting school funding to dead-last in the nation, all the while not answering the still-thorny problem of a current lawsuit.<\/p>\n<p>Someone should tell her constituents that.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":54,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[21],"tags":[221,4961,4739,255,4583],"class_list":["post-9178","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-21","tag-221","tag-4961","tag-4739","tag-255","tag-4583"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6Pvhz-2o2","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9178","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/54"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9178"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9178\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9178"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9178"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9178"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}