THE 100% SMOKESCREEN AWARD:  TIM MOONEY, PATRICK BYRNE AND GEORGE F. WILL

Arizona Republican political operative Tim Mooney thought it.  Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne funded it. Washington Post pundit George Will named it: “The 65 percent solution.”  We could improve education vastly “if schools were required to spend 65% of their operating budget ‘in the classroom.’”  Mooney estimated that on average only 61% of budgets stayed in the classroom and that only four states met the 65% criterion.

Of course, “in the classroom” is not the most specific, easy to pin down term.  Mooney claimed he used categories from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).  But a look at the NCES categories would show quickly that they provide administrative convenience more than anything else.  In Mooney’s scheme, money spent for band uniforms counts as in the classroom.  Money spent for librarians does not.  Money spent for coaches’ salaries counts as in the classroom.  Money spent for counselors does not.  Money spent for “instruction supplies” counts as in the classroom.  Money spent on teacher professional development does not.

The proposal cleverly disguises a major erroneous assumption: that schools are adequately funded.  All we need to do is shuffle the money around a bit and never mind all those adequacy suits that districts have been bringing against states (and winning).

Not a bad gambit, but there was no research evidence that the scheme would work.  Indeed, a study of nine states by Standard & Poor’s found no relationship between the percent of money spent “in classroom instruction” and achievement.  In Minnesota, which already had about an equal number of districts above and below the 65% level, S&P found no percentage to be a threshold—some low spending districts scored high, some high spending districts scored low. 

The real purpose of the 65% solution, though, never was to improve education but to elect Republicans.  The 65% solution is 100% politics. 

As Mooney explained in the “Political Benefits” section of a memo, “Republicans will have a viable answer to ‘in the classroom improvement of education’ without the need to call for a tax increase, offsetting budget cuts in other popular programs, or gimmick accounting and deficit spending.” 

Mooney found other benefits flowing from his scheme:

1. Splitting of the Education Union.”  The proposal “naturally pits administrators and teachers at odds with one another with monies flowing from the former to the latter…”  Mooney’s intimate knowledge of education apparently includes information that only one union exists for both teachers and administrators.
   
   
2. “Direct Fix for Public Education.”  “While voucher and charter proposals have great merit, large segments of the voting public—especially suburban, affluent women voters—view these ideas as an abandonment of public education.”  Because the 65% solution helps fix public education—by definition—it would work better than chardonnay and brie to soften up these well-off women for charter and voucher schemes later on.  It would also give Republicans greater credibility when addressing education issues (not that that would have helped much in the 2006 elections).
   
   
3. “Establishes the Debate on Taxes and Government Spending.”  Once voters see how much waste there is in education spending, they’ll want to analyze waste in other government agencies.
   
   
4. “Allows the Use of Unlimited Non-Personal Money for Political Positioning Advantages.”  This presumes that the proposal would be enacted by a public referendum such as Mooney had proposed for Arizona.  A public initiative could by-pass spending limits imposed on candidates, parties and PACs.
   
   
5. “It Wins!”  Mooney foresaw the 65% percent solution becoming a litmus test for candidates similar to those for tax limits, term limits, and the definition of marriage.  Back it or die.

A number of states debated the proposal but only two enacted it.  Texas Governor Rick Perry put the 65% solution into effect through an executive order.  So far, only one state legislature, Georgia’s, has been dumb enough to pass it into law—signed by Governor Sonny Perdue.  Georgia’s recent record on education is not exactly exemplary, providing the nation with the only state superintendent, Linda Schrenko, who spent $9000.00 of taxpayer money for a face lift and who currently is serving an 8-year prison term for fraud and money laundering involving $600,000 in federal election funds.