Court Throws Out Oklahoma 65% Initiative

An initiative to put a 65% Deception measure on the Oklahoma ballot has been thrown out by the state's Supreme Court because the petitions people were persuaded to sign were, well, deceptive.

The court on June 12, 2007 invalidated an initiative petition that sought to require 65% of each school's operating budget be spent in the "classroom" as arbitrarily and narrowly defined by the proposal.

Referring to the brief descriptions of the measure and its effects at the top of signature pages used to qualify the initiative for the ballot, the court ruling said, "…A potential signatory, looking only at the gist, did not have sufficient information to make an informed decision about the true nature of the proposed legislation."

The Associated Press reported, "The so-called '65 percent solution,' part of a national campaign spearheaded by Internet entrepreneur Patrick Byrne, was promoted by Tulsa businessman Bob Sullivan last year in his unsuccessful campaign for the Republican gubernatorial nomination.

"Sullivan was honorary chairman of the organization that circulated and filed the initiative petition, First Class Education. He said at the time that only 58 cents of every education dollar want to the classroom in Oklahoma and that raising it to 65 cents would mean $270 million more for school classrooms."

While its backers submitted enough signed petitions to have the measure certified, it was challenged on several grounds by the state school boards association and that blocked it from getting on the 2006 ballot.

The Supreme Court decision said of the initiative:

"It defines 'classroom instructional expenditures' in mind-numbing detail taken directly from the statute, but fails to define 'operational expenditures' or disclose provisions for stepped or phased-in compliance, the additional authority given to the superintendent of public instruction to approve the school district budgets and waive noncompliance, and the possibility of legislative sanctions for noncomplying school districts," the decision states. "

According to the AP report, the high court said the omissions meant that the gist failed to alert voters of the effect the proposal might have on the balance of power between local school boards and the state.

'65 Percent' Scheme In the News

This collection of news and opinions from around the country is updated regularly, so check back often.

***

Supreme Court Strikes Down '65% Solution' School Initiative

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) -- The Oklahoma Supreme Court Tuesday invalidated an initiative petition to require 65% of school operational funds be spent in the classroom, ruling that brief written descriptions at the top of each signature page did not adequately describe the ballot measure.

KOTV.com/Associated Press article
June 12, 2007

No simple solutions to education finance

The so-called "65 percent solution" is an arbitrary approach that has been championed by political activists in the West, most notably in Texas, Arizona and Colorado. Even for a single district (as opposed to a supervisory union) such as Rutland City, it creates a false sense of how schools function in the 21st century by requiring that a certain percentage of spending go directly to "classroom instruction." This would not include needed, often mandated, support services such as nurses, school counselors, librarians, professional development, building maintenance, utilities, transportation and food service. Given the needs of our students, especially in a society that has far fewer traditional supports for children and families than in the past, these support services are essentials, not extras.

Rutland Herald commentary by Mary E. Moran
Jan. 18, 2007

Ousted senator, teacher launch school-funding initiative

MONTPELIER — Schools in Vermont would be required to spend 65 cents of every education dollar on classroom-based needs under a proposal outlined Thursday by an outgoing, one-term Republican state senator from Rutland.

Called the "65 Cent Solution" by its supporters, the campaign unveiled by Sen. Wendy Wilton and Rutland County social studies teacher Curtis Hier is identical to efforts already under way in nearly a dozen other states.

Rutland Herald article by Darren M. Allen
Dec. 1, 2006

Colorado voters did right by schools

Colorado voters this year were particularly deft in separating the good from the bad when it came to educating children.

...Amendment 39, known as the "65 percent solution," was soundly rejected by voters who obviously spent some time considering the measure. It would have required districts to spend 65 percent of their operating budgets on classroom expenses, including teacher salaries, books and supplies.

At first blush, it may have looked like a reasonable way to channel more money into classrooms without raising taxes. But when voters took a closer look, 62 percent of them said "no" to the insanity of locking an unproven funding formula into the state constitution. Voters also said "no" to its less-threatening companion measure, Referendum J.

The Denver Post editorial
Nov. 13, 2006

Oregon Republicans get new class of donations

Want to put more money into classrooms in Oregonwithout raising taxes?

Many Republican legislative candidates like the idea, and they've latched onto an 11th-hour political ad campaign that calls for directing at least 65 percent of school funds into the classroom.

Statesman Journal article by Steve Law
Nov. 6, 2006

Bailey Victim's Mother Stands Against Amendment 39

BAILEY, Colo. The mother of a girl who was shot and killed at Platte Canyon High School is taking a stand on Amendment 39, a proposal to require school districts to spend 65 percent of their budgets on teachers, books and classroom instruction.

Ellen Keyes is lobbying against it because she said it could negatively impact a district's security budget.

cbs4denver.com story by Suzanne McCarroll
Nov. 2, 2006

'Dum' stands out in this year's referendums

...Meanwhile, our state [Colorado] ballot is choked with a passel of proposed referendums and constitutional amendments, many of which range in intent and effect from mean-spirited to outright ludicrous.

...Amendment 39 and Referendum J would require that school districts spend 65 percent of their funds “on classroom instruction,” a one-size-fits-all solution to a budgeting question better handled by individual districts. No again.

Canyon Courier opinion by Doug Bell
Nov. 2, 2006

DPS: Amend. 39 could cut funding

If Amendment 39 passes, Denver Public Schools administrators say they would probably have to turn down federal grants that fund instructional support for disabled students and student work-study programs.

Should the measure pass, the district's spending would violate the state constitution.

...Called by proponents "the 65 percent solution," Amendment 39 would require the state's 178 school districts to devote 65 percent of operating costs to classroom instruction.

Denver Post article by Karen Rouse and Allison Sherry
Oct. 31, 2006

New Study Finds Schools Spending Initiative 100 Percent Phony

A study released today by the Oregon Center for Public Policy (OCPP) calls a school spending initiative that has been promoted by at least five candidates for the Oregon House of Representatives "100 percent phony" because it would not improve student performance...

...The so-called “65 percent solution,” initiative petition 24 for the 2008 general election, requires that each Oregon school district spend at least 65 percent of its operating budget on classroom “instruction” expenditures.

Salem-News article
Oct. 31, 2006

'65 percent solution' solves zero problems

Imagine if the solution to every problem in a business could be wrapped up in a single slogan that would get great results every time. Of course, that’s a fantasy for business or any other area requiring active, hands-on management.

It’s a particularly reckless fantasy for public schools, where a sloganeered solution is working its way into campaign speeches of Iowa candidates for governor and the legislature. That slogan is "the 65 percent solution."

Quad-Cities Times editorial
Oct. 31, 2006

The 65 percent deception: poor math for Oregon schools

The 65 percent solution that is being trumpeted by some candidates across the country as a fix for issues faced by public education is 100 percent wrong. It offers the appealing promise that we can get something for nothing.

The 65 percent solution is actually the brainchild of Arizona political strategist Tim Mooney and is being bankrolled by Patrick Byrne, the CEO of Overstock.com.

Sandy Post guest column by Rick Metsger
Oct. 24, 2006

65 percent 'solution' would limit local control, reduce public education services

Colorado voters are being again asked to support an out-of-state initiated amendment to the Colorado State Constitution and this one really sounds good: "School districts would be required to spend 65 percent of their funds on classroom instruction." The implication is that school districts are misspending 36 percent or more of public funds.

...Thus, it becomes clear the First Class Education Initiative proposed as a constitutional amendment promises enhanced public education, but it rests on arbitrary and absurd definitions of "classroom instruction" and it just is a stalking horse for promoting privatization of education with vouchers and independent charters.

The Coloradoan opinion by M.L. Johnson
Oct. 14, 2006

PFAW Weighs in Against '65 Percent'

A position paper of the People for the American Way Foundation describes the 65% Deception scheme as "one of those bogus 'reforms' that would harm our schools and students."

"The complex problems facing our schools require more than bumper-sticker solutions," according to PFAW.

PFAW states, "What is being promoted as the 65 percent solution - and what we call the 65 percent deception - is a seemingly simple requirement that school districts spend at least 65 percent of their total budget on "classroom" expenses. While that might sound good, the devil is in the details…'

Among other details, PFAW explains, "65% is a number that comes from nowhere. Research shows no relationship between student performance and any percentage of spending on 'classroom expenses.'"

"This is all about cynical and destructive politics," says PFAW. "Organizations and individuals who have an ideological commitment to publicly funded school vouchers and other privatization schemes are putting lots of money into political campaigns that would impose the 65 percent deception on school districts around the country."

Read the entire position paper here at the PFAW Web site.

A Policy Maker's Guide to "The 65% Solution" Proposals

Gerald W. Bracey

Independent Researcher

Executive Summary

Through executive orders, legislative initiatives, referenda or constitutional amendments a number of states have proposed measures to require school districts to spend at least 65 percent of their operational budgets on "in class instruction."  The current national average for such expenditures, using accounting categories from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), is 61.4 percent and increasing the proportion to 65 percent would shift $13 billion currently spent outside of the classroom without the need to raise new money. Two states, Texas and Georgia, have enacted the proposal and 18 other states and the District of Columbia are considering it.

The proposal suffers logical and definitional confusions. More importantly, it was developed in hopes of producing political gains, not in hopes of stimulating pedagogical improvements. The benefits listed by the proposal's developers are political, not educational. In addition, the existing empirical data do not support the contention that the proposed shift would improve school performance.

It is therefore recommended that:

1. Schools and school districts decide what outcomes they would consider improved performance, examine the research literature to determine what practices have been empirically linked to changes in those outcomes, and reallocate funds to attain the improvements;
2. Allocation of new funds or reallocation of existing funds occur at the school level, with district oversight; and
3. The 65% Solution should be ignored as it is no solution at all.
   

(The full  policy brief is available at the Great Lakes Center Web site  (PDF, 25 pages ).

Resources
 

Recommended Reading on 65% Scheme: 'Fuzzy Math'

The 65% Deception being promoted by the so-called First Class Education (FCE) outfit failed to gain a foothold in the 2006 elections as voters in Colorado, the only state where the proposal was on a statewide ballot, soundly rejected the idea. This was due in part to the fact that the scheme has been widely discredited.

One of the better essays that expose the 65% scheme for what it really is was written by Alexander Wohl, former Communications Director for the U.S. Department of Education and speechwriter for former U.S. Secretary of Education Richard Riley.

Writing for The American Prospect, Wohl says:

As FCE suggests, "classroom education is the only activity that can possibly increase test scores and dynamically impact our students." Who could argue with that goal? Actually, anyone who cares about public schools, it turns out. That's because FCE's definition of "classroom instruction" is limiting and dangerous.

The essay, Fuzzy Math -- For one proposed education reform, 65 percent doesn't add up, on The American Prospect Web site is recommended reading for those interested in the 65% Deception.

Researcher Says Plan Suffers from Multiple 'Confusions'

Education researcher Gerald Bracey has served up a scathing review of the 65% Deception, concluding that the proposal "suffers from logical and definitional confusions."

In a policy paper funded by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice, Bracey goes on to write, "More importantly, it was developed in hopes of producing political gains, not in hopes of stimulating pedagogical improvements. The benefits listed by the proposal's developers are political, not educational."

That conclusion is borne out by an internal memo written by Tim Mooney (PDF, 417KB, 3 pages ), architect of the 65% scheme and director of First Class Education, the outfit formed to push it. In this memo, Mooney outlines the 65% strategy and explains why it's a boon to Republican office seekers.

You can read the executive summary of Gerald Bracey's report here. The complete policy brief is available at the Great Lakes Center Web site (PDF, 25 pages ).
PFAW Weighs in Against '65 Percent'

A position paper of the People for the American Way Foundation describes the 65% Deception scheme as "one of those bogus 'reforms' that would harm our schools and students." People for the American also has developed "toolkits" to assist citizens who wish to help defeat 65% Deception proposals. The toolkits include "an analysis of the policy implications of the 65% Deception, information on the right-wing effort behind it, and the facts, figures and messaging points" to help defeat the measures. Toolkits specifically designed for Colorado, Oklahoma, and Ohio can be accessed here at the PFAW Web site.

S&P Finds 65% Target Has No Effect on Student Achievement

Standard & Poor's, the highly regarded credit ratings service, crunched the numbers and found there is no correlation  between the "65 Percent Deception" funding formula and student achievement.

NEA Affiliates Battle Funding Scheme

Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Florida, and Missouri are among the states where NEA state affiliates are already faced with the so-called "65% Solution" scheme in one form or another. Each of these affiliates has more information about it on their own Web sites.

Texas State Teachers Association

Information on the 65% Solution 

"The 65% mandate sounds too good to be true, because it is. This proposal lays the ground work for the argument that the schools wouldn't need additional funding if they just used existing funds more efficiently."

Colorado Education Association

Don't be fooled: PHONY FUNDING! 

"The proposal is a gimmick promoted by long time, anti-public education individuals and groups, trying to make people think they"re improving K-12 funding. They are simply rearranging the education budget without expanding it -- reslicing the K-12 funding pie without making the pie larger."

Arizona Education Association

The 65 Cent Deception 

"Wealthy, out-of-state interests are circulating petitions to put a measure on the ballot that would force school districts to eliminate many jobs for education support professionals and other professionals who are not classroom teachers. Why? By drawing public attention away from the real problems of under funded schools in Arizona and focusing on an unrealistic goal of forcing every school district to spend 65% of its funds on "classroom" expenditures, promoters of this initiative hope to gain a political advantage and damage the teaching profession."

Florida Education Association

FIRST CLASS EDUCATION - 65% SOLUTION 

"This proposal is a scam from anti-tax elements who claim that there is plenty of money being spent on public education; it just isn"t being spent wisely. If passed, the 65% mandate could negate calls for more funding for schools."

Missouri-NEA

Lawmakers attempt to deceive taxpayers with 65 percent solution

"This no-classroom-left-behind approach of a one-size-fits-all, top-down mandate sounds very familiar to anyone working in public education today after the passage of the federal No Child Left Behind act," Otto Fajen, MNEA legislative director, says. "This proposal, which does not increase school funding by a dime, goes in the wrong direction by distracting attention from the larger problem of overall inadequacy of funding. Worse, the proposal could actually require districts to arbitrarily change allocation of funds from vital expenditures that support learning, such as hiring librarians, counselors and nurses, so that each district can meet this new state mandate."