Tools
Wednesday, Feb 9, 2005 - Posted by Rich Miller
For decades, Illinois governors have had to deal with the perception that they’re not providing adequate funds for public education. It never helped that the usually independent State Board of Education would always ask for a lot more money than the governor and the General Assembly were willing or able to provide.
Not this year. With the governor facing a $2 billion budget deficit, he won’t have the added worry about high-ball requests from the education establishment.
The independent state agency that oversees funding for Illinois schools won’t say how much money is needed for education for next year until Gov. Rod Blagojevich announces how much cash is available - a reversal that is fueling critics who say the board is nothing more than an arm of the governor’s office.
In the past, the state board of education has outlined before the governor’s annual budget address how much money the state should give schools. Often, its recommendation called for far more than state officials ended up providing.
But this year, the board will instead present “priorities” to the governor’s office. It will not send over specific dollar amounts until Feb. 17 - one day after Blagojevich makes his proposed 2006 budget public. […]
New board members said they haven’t had enough time since being appointed to produce a detailed budget proposal but will do it earlier in future years.
Yet, some members also said this process makes more sense.
“In the past, the board would put out some number that, frankly, was probably a little bit unrealistic. It would only serve to antagonize the governor’s office,” the board’s new chairman, Jesse Ruiz, said Tuesday. “We don’t want to go down that road.”
The board did agree Tuesday on some general priorities.
It said the top goal should be raising the foundation level of funding that the state guarantees for each student, now set at $4,964. But members did not suggest a specific amount.
- Drew Hibbard - Wednesday, Feb 9, 05 @ 12:39 pm:
It seems to me that the ISBE asking for more money isn’t meant to be antagonistic toward the Governor’s office, it’s just a simple negotiation strategy. If they ask for more than they really need, the budget will probably end up giving them less than they ask for, but right around what they need. Them not offering a clear figure on what funding they want might serve to open them up to cuts too, becuase the lawmakers might perceive them as having more than they really need.
Or maybe I’m just reading into it way too much.
- Greg - Wednesday, Feb 9, 05 @ 12:57 pm:
Thanks for the ammo. Good point.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Feb 9, 05 @ 1:02 pm:
Antagonism or no, the point is (was) that the ISBE is independent, no?
This is no longer the case. Although — and I’m not sure where I saw it posted — I did find it amusing that none of the “Soviet-style” rules have been shortened or changed.
BTW — what’s up with Blago’s speechwriters? Does he have a stable of speechwriters? Just a single writer?
Any writer who’d write a transition like: “Speaking of air, what about airports?” needs to go directly to a library, sit down, and read — read speeches, read books, read whatever — but dear god, just read and learn some rhetorical rhythm. RB is really doing himself a disservice by delivering speeches that sound like something out of a fourth-grade textbook.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Feb 9, 05 @ 1:48 pm:
Speaking of airports, what about airguns? Or guns in general? As in, whoever wrote that transition line should be kept away from guns in case he or she is tempted to shoot himself for writing quite possibly the worst line in any speech. Ever.
As for the ISBE: it’s going to be interesting to see their budget numbers. I’m not ready to completely buy that the ISBE is just a tool of the Governor’s Office yet; but I’m certainly suspicious.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Feb 9, 05 @ 2:35 pm:
Come on people, ISBE is not just an arm of the Governor. ISBE is now an arm of the IEA and the IFT too!
Yeah teacher unions. Nothing prevents progress in education like power-grabbing protectionistic “labor” organizations.