State’s per-pupil education spending is up Contrary to claims, per-pupil spending outpaces inflation
No matter how you slice the pie chart, education spending in Washington is up. This runs contrary to claims made by sponsors of Initiative 884 (the billion-dollar education tax increase) that per-pupil spending has fallen behind inflation. In fact, per-pupil spending has increased at nearly double the rate of inflation since 1994.
In real dollars, per-pupil spending from the state’s general fund
increased by 30.4% between 1994 and 2003, from $5,701.63 to $7,436.15. Adjusted
for inflation, this is a 12.7% spending increase.
Click image to enlarge chart.
A more accurate look at per-pupil education spending includes all sources of school funding, not just the general fund. Factoring in local property tax levies, federal grants, capital (construction) funds, transportation funds, and other public school expenditures, the state’s per-pupil spending has increased by 34.8% since 1994, from $7,000.99 to $9,438.14 in 2003. This is an inflation-adjusted increase of 16.5%.
Click image to enlarge chart.
In calculating a lower per-pupil spending rate based on inflation, the League of Education Voters (sponsor of I-884) uses the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which is limited to the high-cost Seattle/Tacoma/Bremerton area. State budget writers base their calculations on a more standard inflation measure called the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD), which is also used by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
According to the state’s Office of Financial Management: “The IPD is used for determining inflation for state budgeting purposes because it is considered more representative of the general mix of goods and services purchased by the state than other indicators available. The other primary inflation index, the Consumer Price Index (CPI), may not adequately allow for the effects of technology and quality changes.”
While the state’s education spending is hitting record highs, school
performance and student achievement are down. The problem must be addressed,
but simply pouring more dollars into our public schools will not help.
State Education Spending, 1994 2003
Year
Total Spending
Enrollment
State $
per-pupil
All $ per-pupil
All $
per-pupil (Inflation adjusted)
1994-1995
$6,295,317,236
899,203
$5,701.63
$7,000.99
$7,000.99
1995-1996
$6,677,300,788
917,652
$5,845.46
$7,276.50
$7,166.21
1996-1997
$6,912,444,608
936,395
$5,953.46
$7,381.98
$7,309.03
1997-1998
$7,341,428,319
949,349
$6,168.95
$7,733.12
$7,461.06
1998-1999
$7,612,163,284
959,541
$6,292.15
$7,933.13
$7,547.07
1999-2000
$7,947,426,562
961,449
$6,586.36
$8,266.09
$7,633.88
2000-2001
$8,337,327,852
964,037
$6,945.36
$8,648.35
$7,807.20
2001-2002
$8,700,470,520
969,838
$7,224.85
$8,971.05
$7,988.83
2002-2003
$9,179,901,852
972,639
$7,436.15
$9,438.14
$8,103.65
Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
Prepared by: Hans Zeigerand Marsha Richards | 360-956-3482
At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:
"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"