As Republican Rep. Bruce Dammeier of Puyallup put it in testimony, House Bill 2533, would “shine a bright light” on the state’s paramount duty under the Constitution to amply fund “basic education.”
A recent state Supreme Court ruling underscored that duty, finding Washington is not living up to its duty. Dammeier said his bill would help bring transparency – though not necessarily more money – to the budgeting process. “It does not guarantee any additional dollars but it does guarantee that we would hold ourselves accountable.’’
Whatever its merits, education advocates came down on both sides of the bill, although most testimony was in favor The Washington PTA, the State School Directors’ Association, Public School Employees, and even the Washington Education Association voiced support. And individual members of school boards added their support.
On the other side, Frank Ordway of the League of Education Voters spoke against it. Ordway said early learning is an area that would be rendered “separate” under the bill. Even so, Ordway said he supports most of what Dammeier is trying to do with the bill.
Ordway said structural reforms to the state tax system are needed to boost funding for education. Taking a similar tack was Jen Estroff of the Children’s Alliance. Estroff said the group opposes it because the state should be looking at a child’s needs as a whole, including healthcare and education.
House Republicans, who put out their own version of a budget last year while saying schools should be funded first, in the end proposed to spend only about $10 million more than House Democrats eventually did in the two-year budget that passed the House last May. And that is in a budget that put about $13 billion into schools.
But Dammeier said the bill was not just a gimmick. He said it could “de-politicize” education budgets and make the budgeting more transparent.
The prospects for House Bill 2533 are uncertain, but Rep. Kathy Haigh, D-Shelton, is first co-sponsor, and she chairs the House Education Appropriations and Oversight Committee that heard the bill.
Haigh said in an email after the hearing she is unsure what is the next step for HB 2533. She had not yet talked with other Democrats “to see whether they want to move the bill forward or not.” She also identified what she called “interesting dynamics around this issue,” noting that writing a separate budget like the transportation or capital construction budgets would be most appropriate.
“But if we are going to do that then we should have an identified funding source so we could also try to connect the dollars in a direct way to the outcomes we set for our students,” Haigh said. “We need a ‘gas tax’ for education if we are to indeed set the funding for schools apart from the general fund.”
That said, Haigh expects in-house discussions to take up those concerns.
Video of the committee’s hearing is here.
UPDATE on original 3:58 p.m. post: Rep. Dammeier just called me. He says he has not been told yet if his bill gets a hearing before Friday’s bill cutoff for the House budget subcommittees.
“I would hope we get it to the [House] floor. I think it is an issue that is really timely and appropriate for the Legislature to debate,” Dammeier said. “When the Supreme Court says you are failing in your paramount duty you should pay attention. In the same vein, if the Legislature is not willing to consider modifying how we process the budget after that [court] ruling, what does that say?”
Asked about Haigh’s mention of a dedicated fund source, Dammeier said he willing to negotiate on the bill. But that idea would add “a great deal of complexity” and that his bill as written is simple but profound and ready to vote on as is.
