Op-Ed:
Saxton Seeks
Education Actions
Delayed, Thus Denied

Oregonians demand dollar-based action-NOW.

Salem-News.com

(SALEM) - I am always amazed at the demeaning depths of strong political pressures that sometimes drive conscientious competent professionals. Money cannot be the single-motivation here --not for a competent corporation counsel. Must be commitment-and-concern; unfortunately, to corporate interests, despite high State office now sought; as Saxton’s ATR-PLEDGE must clearly communicate to all. There’s no way whatsoever for dollar-damage and desperate program impacts to be set right without more funds-found. There’s no way whatsoever for “ten percent” to be snatched away from what’s left in agency and program operations monies. No “efficiency expert” --even that whole group once employed at Enron corporation-- can even pretend to support something better by slashing again what remains, barely supporting it. Responsible, rational funding by our elected representatives -- at “the heart of the matter” before “transactional lobbying”-- must be restored, strengthened, extended and protected. There’s no way whatsoever towards Oregon’s future, for both parents and children --and all other deserving citizens-- until and unless corporate “campaign contributions” are replaced by reasonable, rational tax-burden/sharing --as most responsible business leaders now realize only too well. The more reality is revealed,the more it’s clear: Saxton’s campaign offers only “look-see” in the Legislature. Plans never produce results until detailed and driven. Statements on education and hints at handling other key issues --small departures from overwhelming Saxton silence-- now show reluctance to reveal what’s behind the campaign curtain. Details are universally “yet to come” and remain cannily un-stated and irresponsibly retained while voters seeth and seek solid satisfactions from ongoing actions elsewhere. That Saxton-stand is clearly contrived to delay by further obfuscation and deeper chaotic-input what MUST be done NOW and rapidly --but cannot be accomplished without radical reform re the corporate rake-offs now firmly in place. Which is clearly verboten since it verifies and vilifies the ongoing power-structure relying on “campaign contributions” and “transactional lobbying” for continuing success at any cost or consequence. There is no lack-of-fact nor of responsible, in-depth, authoritative and exceptionally well-documented BIPARTISAN studies easily available --and right on public record ! -- for each one of these major issues. Example: CHALKBOARD Project and STAND FOR CHILDREN, both projecting principles and proper approach with details for depth and application by the Legislature, IMMEDIATELY. (On your computer: www.chalkboardproject.org; www.stand.org.) Strong public policy proceeds from rational understandings of reality. Here’s Oregon’s overall educational-standing now, simply summarized to provide practical evaluation (next) for the Saxton generalities so far revealed: 1. Oregon schools educate 552,339 students (Fall 2005). 2. The Legislature allocated $5.24 billion, less per-student than in 1991 (inflation-adjusted.) Oregon’s Constitution requires sufficient funds to meet educational goals set forth in the Quality Educational Model, lawfully required. The Legislature has failed to fund at QEM level ever since the QEM was initiated. 3. Nearly ONE-QUARTER of Oregon students DO NOT graduate from high school, even though Oregonian are at or just above the national average. Only 1-in-3 high schoolers are rated college-ready; only 60 percent take the SAT; only 12 percent the ACT. Many national and international studies now show high school graduation not enough for worldwide competitive levels, with college preparation for rapid job transition now demanded. 4. Oregon educates many more low-income students and English-Language Learners than the national average. Since 1992 Latino enrollment increased by 183 percent, while white enrollment decreased by 10.3 percent. 5. Special education enrollees increased 29.8 percent since 1992-93, more than in many other states. Special-needs education costs are up 67 percent in the last decade; most programs are Congressionally-mandated but far underfunded. For 30 years Congress has promised 40-percent funding but never achieved more than 18 percent. 6. Oregon’s educational spending has fallen from 15th nationally in 1900-91 to 29th in 2000-04 --faster than any other state except Florida. 7. As percentage of personal income, educational spending in Oregon has steadily declined --from 4.6 percent in 1990, down to 4.0 percent currently, with national average at 4.3 percent. Education costs such as health care and retirement have grown faster nationally than inflation, multiplying the apparently small-percentage drop in Oregon by true impact on school budgets. 8. Oregon ranked 13th in teacher pay nationally in 03-04, with average teacher pay was $49,169; 14th for beginners, at $33,396. The workforce is well-seasoned, well-educated, averaging 14 years of experience; 51 percent hold Master’s degree or higher, more than in any other Western state. 9. Oregon education manages and spends efficiently, despite the unavoidable fact that education must always be labor-intensive, as a community institution dedicated to legal demands: 69 percent to teaching and learning --teachers, assistants, special education, librarians, counselors, extra-curricular activities, testing. 18 percent to essential operations -buses, food, school maintenance, other unavoidable items. 4 percent to business operations --human resources,, research and evaluation, technology. 7 percent to principal’s office --support staff, supplies, equipment. 3 percent to central office-- superintendent, assistants, supplies, equipment. Our next Op Ed will analyze openly-generalized statements on educational impacts Saxton is using statewide; here they are: SAXTON EDUCATION PROPOSALS: • Create a rainy day fund. • Retain new teachers through higher pay and mentoring. • Reward teachers for performance, not seniority. • Pool purchasing power of multiple school districts. • Invest more in higher education. • Reduce school districts' health care costs. (“Education takes key campaign role”; David Steves; The REGISTER-GUARD, Eugene; 9/6/2006) NOBODY can disagree with these goals, but they are not revenue-generating detailed operational plans for rapid Legislative action. BUT open-generalities never produced a single dollar to drive the changes now demanded; muscle-mouthed promises won’t get it done. ONLY tax revenues can make that a working fact. (I speak from professional experience working in the Oregon Department of Education for some exciting, satisfying years.)