• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Spreading the Education Spending Fallacy

    Last week, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman tried to sell the merits of second “stimulus” by claiming education spending is being slashed, to the detriment of American students. He contends that education has suffered because of skepticism about the merits of government spending. Krugman writes:

    There’s no mystery about what’s going on: education is mainly the responsibility of state and local governments, which are in dire fiscal straits. Adequate federal aid could have made a big difference. But while some aid has been provided, it has made up only a fraction of the shortfall. In part, that’s because back in February centrist senators insisted on stripping much of that aid from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, aka the stimulus bill… As a result, education is on the chopping block. And laid-off teachers are only part of the story. Even more important is the way that we’re shutting off opportunities.

    Krugman’s solution is to pass another large federal spending package:

    First of all, Congress needs to undo the sins of February, and approve another big round of aid to state governments. We don’t have to call it a stimulus, but it would be a very effective way to create or save thousands of jobs. And it would, at the same time, be an investment in our future.

    Aside from the erroneous notion that government can create wealth, Krugman’s call for more fiscal recklessness is premised on the notion that increased spending will improve education. However, years of rising spending has had little impact on academic achievement.

    From 1984 to 2004, per pupil spending increased by 49 percent (after adjusting for inflation). And since 1985, federal elementary and secondary educa­tion spending has increased by 138 percent. Yet, reading achievement has remained relatively flat, and graduation rates have stagnated around 73 percent.

    edspend3

    In addition to the misinformation in the Times op-ed about education spending, Krugman also implies that students do not have enough access to financial aid for college:

    In America, with its weak social safety net and limited student aid, students are far more likely than their counterparts in, say, France to hold part-time jobs while still attending classes.

    But here too, government spending is the culprit. Neal McCluskey over at The Cato Institute explains:

    Indeed, it’s the vicious cost-escalation cycle that has made loans increasingly important: students and parents complain that higher education is too expensive, vote-seeking politicians increase grant and loan aid, colleges raise tuition to gather the new money, students and parents complain again, and around we go.

    Taxpayers bear the biggest burden of these expenditures, and reap little to none of the educational rewards. Over the last ten years, students’ real, after-aid educational costs — tuition, fees, room and board — increased approximately 24 percent at private four-year colleges, and 35 percent at public institutions. Federal aid furnished by taxpayers, meanwhile, increased much faster, rising 77 percent in the last decade, from $48.7 billion to $86.3 billion.

    Education spending in America is at an all-time high. Taxpayers now pay close to $10,000 per student per year – or, over the course of their time in public school, more than $120,000 for a child entering first grade today. Yet pundits such as Krugman would rather advocate throwing more dollars into an education system that fails millions of children each year than promote substantive ideas for reform. If Krugman’s interests truly lie in improving American education, using his coveted NYT space to promote ideas that work – such as school choice – would go a long way in reaching that goal.

    Posted in Education [slideshow_deploy]

    7 Responses to Spreading the Education Spending Fallacy

    1. Freedom of Speech TX says:

      My solution is for Paul Krugman to use his vast influence and have the ga-zillionaires that inhabit NYC and Hollywood fund a 2d Stimulus.

      They can even have all the credit and prove how mean we are.

    2. Susan: Alabama says:

      What Krugman doesn't quite get (not that our public dialogue understands) is that the reason children sail or fail through their academic life has nothing to do with the schools they attend and everything to do with what goes on in their homes. Until we begin focusing on the fundamental reason that education statistics haven't moved is that we are pouring money into buckets to catch water leaking in from the roof. We would get more bang for our bucks if we got on a ladder and fixed the roof. Families need supports, encouragement and substantive help so they can effectively teach their kids the skills children need to succeed in school.

    3. samuel says:

      AS ALL SMART PEOPLE KNOW , THE GREAT TEACHERS UNIONS, IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE SCHOOL SYSTEM. TEACHERS AND PROFESSORS ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT ARE LIFERS. ADMINISTRATION IS HUGH. EDUCATION IS GOVERNMENT! THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE.

      GOVERNMENT CANNOT RUN IT'S WHITE HOUSE! GET UNIONS AND GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM.

    4. Pingback: Education funding fallicy

    5. Nicolai Alatzas says:

      Nicholas D. Kristof recently reported, “The United States incarcerates people at nearly five times the world average.” Now consider the fact that 85% of the prisoners in federal prisons are there for drug-related crimes, and tell me we don’t have our priorities mixed up.

      Kristof also noted, “California spends $216,000 annually on each inmate in the juvenile justice system. In contrast, it spends only $8,000 on each child attending the troubled Oakland public school system, according to the Urban Strategies Council.” Nothing like investing in the future, eh?

    6. Jess, Massachusetts says:

      Samuel: If the government, meaning federal, state, and local government together, did not take part in America's education system, only those children whose families would be able to send them to private schools would have access to an education. In short, if government had not intervened in your education, your spelling and grammar would be in an even more egregious state than it is now. What is lacking is accountability, transparency, and a curriculum that is aligned to standards, tests, and skills needed for life. The end of regressive tax policies and reinvestment in jobs and communities would give parents, families, and graduating students more opportunities to succeed. The great downfall of teacher's unions is that they have planned their obsolescence in preserving incompetence. More rigorous evaluation standards coupled with true professional development and mentoring might help in addition to incentives and disincentives for teachers, schools, and districts to promote positive student outcomes.

    7. Pingback: Board of Ed budget...14 million in rainy fund! - Southern Maryland Community Forums

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×