2005 Senate Bill 246: Mandate minimum annual school aid funding increase

Legislation watch

Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next

Introduced by Sen. Bob Emerson (D) on February 23, 2005, to prohibit the state from appropriating less money for public schools, colleges and universities than was appropriated in the previous year, plus 5 percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is less. Current funding would be immediately adjusted by applying this retroactively to the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 budget levels. In addition, schools' payroll contributions to the MPSERS teacher pension fund would be capped at 12.99 percent (the current rate is 14.87 percent and rising), meaning state taxpayers would make up potential shortfalls. Also, the state per-pupil operations funding grants to local school districts could be no less than they would be if 90 percent of a district's eligible pupils attended its schools, even if more than 10 percent have departed for public schools of choice in another district.
- Referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee on February 23, 2005.
- Motion by Sen. Mark Schauer (D) on June 21, 2005, to discharge the committee from further consideration of the bill. This was defeated through parliamentary maneuvers, with Democrats supporting the discharge and Republicans opposing it. The actual roll call here is on a Hammerstrom motion to postpone the Schauer motion "for the day," (meaning until the majority decides to take it up again, if ever). The motion passed 21 to 16 in the Senate on June 21, 2005.
  Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

Most Recent Comments

Add Comment

1) Questions: by Anonymous Citizen on July 6, 2005
>Are you serious about education? How about doing something different, instead of the same insanity year after year?<

Mike H, kindly expand on some things:

>Really open up charter schools and see what happens.<

What do you mean by this? What, exactly do you think would happen if the failed experiment with Michigan charter schools were greatly “opened up?”

>Support home schooling<

How would you do this differently? Doesn’t the state already support home schooling by permitting it? What positive (and negative, if any) results would you predict if home schooling were significantly expanded in Michigan?

>Let teachers teach instead of loading them down with administrative paperwork.<

Just what “administrative paperwork” would you dispense with, anyway? How do you expect teachers to be accountable for doing their jobs? Would you expand the standardized testing regimen further, and let it go at that? Would you be willing to accept a teacher’s evaluation of your kid without documentation of what the kid was taught and what his test and work results were? Should teachers not be engaged in developing the curricula for their schools? Etc.?

Details will help you appear reasonable rather than reactionary. But more important, perhaps they will provide some points really worth considering.
Reply

Line

2) Einstein's Theory by Mike Hignite on July 6, 2005
Continuing to do what you have always done and expecting different results is the essence of insanity. - Einstein

You stated that school funding has increased 41% versuse inflation at 27% since Proposal A. Has that additional investment bought you better education?

You propose a 22% increase in state income taxes, rather than a 1.5 million dollar budget cut. Increased taxes has never benefited Michigan citizens in the past. Why now?

Are you serious about education? How about doing something different, instead of the same insanity year after year?
Really open up charter schools and see what happens.
Support home schooling
Let teachers teach instead of loading them down with administrative paperwork.

If you aren't serious about education, you can at least fund your shortfall easily by dropping these two unneeded and ineffective programs:
Farmland Open Spaces Preservation 7.5 million
MEDC 26.5 million

Reply

Line

3) Cake and Eat It, too? by Mike Hignite on July 6, 2005
You voted for an income tax reduction and are now complaining that it was a mistake and that you need to raise taxes to fund schools?

So which time were you right?
Reply

Line

View Full Conversation