Blackwell's 65-Cent Gimmick

Akron Beacon-Journal Editorial, Sept. 13 2005.

Why 65 cents? Another Blackwellian manueverEmbracing gimmicky solutions is fast becoming the centerpiece of J. Kenneth Blackwell's campaign for Ohio governor. Last week, the secretary of state certified a spending-limits issue for the fall ballot in 2006. Blackwell hopes to ride that one through next year's Republican primary and into the governor's office. Just before that announcement, Blackwell announced another cause. He joined ranks with a national group called First Class Education to trumpet support for another ballot issue next year, one that would require school districts to spend a certain amount of every dollar in the classroom. The so-called 65-cent solution would redirect $1.2 billion a year, Blackwell said, to where it is needed most. Blackwell hopes the legislature will put the issue on the ballot. If not, another signature drive. This is quite a stretch, even for Blackwell's agile mind. Having pushed an issue that would clamp an arbitrary lid on annual spending increases at every level of government (including school districts), Blackwell now finds it imperative to spend $1.2 billion to improve academic performance. The ideas smack of the same arbitrariness and superficiality that marked the campaign for term limits in the early 1990s, when voters bought a one-size-fits-all solution that proved to be a disaster. What is the magic of eight years or 65 cents? Such numbers sound good. Ohio spends about 57 cents in the classroom, according to the National Center for Educational Statistics, a federal agency. Can another 9 cents be that difficult? It all depends on how one defines what is spent inside the classroom and what is spent outside. The Blackwell proposal contemplates cutting back on administrative expenses, a tempting target given the state's 600-plus school districts. But the ``outside the classroom'' list includes items such as transportation, food services, building operations and student support (nurses, therapists, counselors). The danger (as with spending limits) lies in forcing elected officials to make policy decisions in a fiscal straightjacket. Rural districts spend more on transportation. What good is a well-funded classroom if nobody can get there? What good if a child who needs counseling is left inside, disturbing other students who want to learn? Blackwell has launched another idea that sounds good, and nothing more.