Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Supremes to Blagojevich: Nope
Next Post: It’s all one thing
Posted in:
* From a recent Illinois Republican Party press release about Sen. Andy Manar’s education funding reform bill…
Sen. Manar’s plan does in fact link Chicago to downstate - at downstate Illinois’ expense. 56% of downstate schools would lose money under Manar’s plan in order to fund a $352 million bailout of CPS.
Replacing a broken funding formula with another broken funding formula is not reform, it is simply bad public policy. […]
Downstate taxpayers should not be forced to bailout Chicago, and Downstate school children deserve more than to be used as political pawns. It’s time for a clean, fully-funded education bill to be voted on in both chambers.
* That’s the same state party which has contributed over a quarter million dollars to Rep. Avery Bourne’s campaign. Bernie has more…
Well, as of last week, Bourne is now a chief co-sponsor of Manar’s bill.
“School funding reform has been one of my priorities since my first day in office,” said Bourne, who was appointed to her 95th House District seat in February.
“Bipartisanship is desperately needed right now,” she added via email. “School funding reform should be a good place to start. We have the most inequitable way of funding schools in the nation. Also, as a state, we contribute the least to our schools. In downstate districts, like mine, our students are suffering the consequences of our outdated formula.”
She said Manar’s Senate Bill 231 is not perfect, but “if our goal is to give every student across Illinois the same opportunity for a quality education, then this is a good place to start.”
Turns out, Bourne’s district, which is half of Manar’s Senate district, does pretty well with the Manar plan. Her schools win. She is facing a contested election. The bill’s main sponsor co-represents the people of her district. Her Democratic opponent supports the bill. And becoming a hyphenated co-sponsor means she shows some independence from a governor who ain’t exactly popular in her district. It’s a complete no-brainer.
And it’s a sign of the divisive times that this is even a little newsworthy.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:19 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Supremes to Blagojevich: Nope
Next Post: It’s all one thing
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
At least Bourne can read a spreadsheet.
Comment by Norseman Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:23 am
Politically smart. Transparent..but still smart. Other Downstaters might consider it as well. Whoever wins should be on this bill.
Comment by Corporate Thug Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:27 am
Hey Bruce … Drip, Drip, Drip
Comment by PublicServant Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:33 am
Bourne back Chicago bailout!
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:33 am
Feel the Bourne?
Comment by Emmanuel Can't Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:45 am
My opinion of Rep. Bourne just went up a little book. Feels like something from the Leslie Munger playbook. Smart move.
Comment by SAP Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:47 am
If it passes and is vetoed by the guv will she vote to override?
Comment by Gordon Gecko Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:54 am
= Whoever wins should be on this bill.=
What a joke. Vulture economics, except this is for kids. It is NOT ok to stomp on one kids future to bolster that of another.
Find a better way.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:57 am
Now that looks like a Grand Bargain
Comment by Annonin' Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:04 am
== It is NOT ok to stomp on one kids future to bolster that of another.==
Agreed. Which is exactly why it’s so important to pass this legislation.
Comment by Jimmy Baseball Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:24 am
If you are using a formula to fund schools you are not going to find a formula where there aren’t winners and losers. Why even have a formula if your goal is to prevent anyone from losing?
Why don’t you just give everyone what they got this year (or pick a different year). Then develop a new formula that takes into consideration poverty, local resources and whatever else you want to consider. Create a separate pot of money for this purpose. Nobody loses and those that need it get more money.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:29 am
JS Mill & Jimmy -
You’re not wrong. But try filing a revenue bill and passing it. And good luck with that.
Comment by Corporate Thug Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:41 am
Hopefully this is a first sign that she is willing to vote to represent her district.
Comment by Way South of I-80 Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:46 am
@JSMILL
=Vulture economics, except this is for kids.=
Surrre it is, JS. Kids will be getting paychecks from the state for these extra dollars, right? The unions and admins wouldn’t THINK of asking for more than the rate of inflation, including step increases, when the new money hits the schools, correct?
And of course the new money will be going to expanding educational services through more contact hours, more tutoring, expanding schools hours so that all “homework” can be done in schools where a professional is available to help them out if they get stuck….
Be honest, JS, This isn’t about “the kids”. This is about enriching the folks that make their paychecks from the dollars spent to educate the kids…
Comment by Illinois Bob Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:55 am
=Why don’t you just give everyone what they got this year (or pick a different year). Then develop a new formula that takes into consideration poverty, local resources and whatever else you want to consider. Create a separate pot of money for this purpose. Nobody loses and those that need it get more money. =
That almost and exact description of what the soon to be filed EBM bill wants to do.
=Which is exactly why it’s so important to pass this legislation=
So, you are ok with the literal bankrupting of many districts that have been cutting expenses for the last seven years?
If that is the case you are a fool. You have been bamboozled by politicians and have no understanding of what a civic responsibility is. I pity you.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 23, 16 @ 12:03 pm
===
So, you are ok with the literal bankrupting of many districts that have been cutting expenses for the last seven years?
===
As opposed to the current system which is actually “bankrupting many districts that have been cutting expenses for the last seven years.”
Comment by Under Influenced Monday, May 23, 16 @ 12:29 pm
Last week Skoog got blasted for basically saying the same thing as Bourne. He is going to vote his district and oppose Manar’s school funding reform bill.
This week Bourne is praised and her decision is called a no-brainer because she’s voting her district and supporting Manar’s school funding reform bill.
What is the difference between the two?
Comment by AlabamaShake Monday, May 23, 16 @ 12:37 pm
==So, you are ok with the literal bankrupting of many districts that have been cutting expenses for the last seven years?==
Many school districts are already on the verge of bankruptcy if this bill fails to pass. My school district has closed half of the grade schools in the last decade because they are out of money. I’m not going to stoop to calling you names because I’m an adult, but this is a significant issue that needs to be addressed that you are willfully ignoring.
Comment by Jimmy Baseball Monday, May 23, 16 @ 12:38 pm
===What is the difference between the two? ===
Skoog threw Chicago under the bus.
Duh.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, May 23, 16 @ 12:38 pm
= that needs to be addressed that you are willfully ignoring.=
No, exactly the opposite.
If your district has closed “half the elementary schools” my guess (admittedly I do not know the specifics, but I have been in this business long enough to understand a few things) is that your enrollment has dramatically decreased.
Decreasing enrollment has a 2:1 impact on GSA. You lose 2% of your GSA for every 1% in reduced ADA. Tough to deal with because you cannot always reduce expenditures at the same rate depending on how reductions are spread out.
But that does not mean it is ok to savage the finances of other struggling school. Sorry, that just isn’t right. If you think that is ok, there is a real problem. And reducing the state share of the New Trier’s of the world won’t change their trajectory or generate enough revenue to fund the others that need it.
This requires a serious infusion of funds.
=As opposed to the current system which is actually “bankrupting many districts that have been cutting expenses for the last seven years.”=
It wouldn’t be if the GSA and MCAT’s were fully funded. But there have been a lot of people jumping on the finding formula bandwagon in the last year.
The current formula is not great. I am not advocating for it, but I think it could be made workable until a better solution is developed. To do that it has to be FULLY funded, including MCAT’s. Most, 95% or more, get in better condition if that happens and can survive long enough for a permanent solution to be enacted.
But taking money from hundreds of schools that are already struggling simply creates a bigger crisis and further weakens Illinois education. It does not help one bit.
People really need to get that through their heads. It is akin to someone that is drowning then pulls the people in the life raft in the water so they can drown a little too.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 23, 16 @ 1:05 pm
No doubt in my mind she had permission to say this. What will she do on the override?
Comment by PENSIONS ARE OFF LIMITS Monday, May 23, 16 @ 7:21 pm
Vote accordingly. Vote your district.
If your schools gain funding, you are voting yes. If the kids in your district will permanently lose education funding, then you are voting no.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:38 pm
The Bourne Ultimatum.
Comment by Nick Name Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 8:52 am