4/26/09

Dayton Daily News Editorial

The hype and fury about Gov. Ted Strickland’s education reforms are overblown. Schools are not going to be much different, at least in the next two years.

The governor and lawmakers have just 60 days to agree on a two-year budget. Some of the big changes the governor wants probably will make it past the Democratic House of Representatives and the Republican Senate.

But even the governor’s Democratic allies – who made significant changes to how the governor proposed divvying up money in the near term- aren’t proposing to increase support for very many districts any time soon.

Meanwhile, the biggest policy changes would be phased in over 10 years. The state doesn’t have the money to pay for new, bold plans now, and, actually, schools would be cut in the upcoming budget if Washington were not giving Ohio stimulus money. Republicans are critical of the governor for creating a budget that relies on the federal dollars, but many also still support taking the money. Those views can’t be reconciled; if the state accepts the money and spends it (the feds won’t allow it to be saved), that inevitably creates a problem in 2011, when those funds run out.

That said, Republicans are absolutely correct that Gov. Strickland should not get credit for identifying sustained funding for the reforms he wants. They are also right that doing so likely would require a tax increase.

That hot question has been put off for another day by the governor, who will be running for re-election next year.

Gov. Strickland’s plan is ambitious. It pushes Ohio to think of itself as competing against the best education systems around the world. It requires more of students (moving away from proficiency tests and instead requiring all students to take the harder ACT exam). It asks more of teachers (who would teach more days a year). It requires more professional development. It sets new requirements about the kinds and numbers of professionals who would be in every school.

Gov. Strickland insists these ideas can be implemented – and paid for – if future leaders are committed enough to the goals. That’s easy for him to say; after all, he’s not going to be in office for the next decade.

Arguably the biggest change Gov. Strickland wants relates to how the state decides what to spend on schools. He would create a panel of about 25 experts to examine research and other states’ practices and then assign price tags to the expenses that make for excellent and effective schools.

In essence, the panel would decide the cost of educating children and then leave it to the legislature to figure out how to pay the tab.

Compared with Ohio’s historical approach – determining how much cash is available and then giving out that amount – the new process would set a higher bar.

But where would lawmakers find the money to pay for what unquestionably would be new demands? Would the panel recognize that the state’s responsibilities go beyond just funding schools?

Those are the multibillion-dollar questions.

If by 2011, say, the economy is recovering, money won’t be as tight, but Republicans and undoubtedly some Democrats are worried about creating expectations that can’t be met without raising taxes.

The critics, though, have no alternative to the governor’s plan.

Gov. Strickland is right to acknowledge that, in many communities, homeowners are tapped out when it comes to increasing their property taxes. He’s also right that Ohio should aim to standardize academic opportunities, ensuring that children from city, suburban and rural schools all have genuinely similar education options.

But a big battle lies ahead. Even if the governor gets much of what he wants, Ohio hasn’t settled on how to pay for goals that are as laudable as they are expensive.