logo
Education advocates push for adequate K-12 funding

Education advocates push for adequate K-12 funding

Yahoo12-06-2025
A rally goer rolls out a scroll with the names of every school district that has gone to referendum since the last state budget. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.
Education advocates are making a push for more investment in public schools from the state as the Republican-led Joint Finance Committee plans to take up portions of the budget related to K-12 schools during its Thursday meeting.
The issue has been a top concern for Wisconsinites who came out to budget listening sessions and was one of Gov. Tony Evers' priorities in his budget proposal. Evers proposed that the state spend an additional $3.1 billion on K-12 education. Evers and Republican leaders were negotiating on the spending for education as well as taxes and other parts of the budget until last week when negotiations reached an impasse.
Evers has said that Republicans were unwilling to compromise on his funding priorities, including making 'meaningful investments for K-12 schools, to continue Child Care Counts to help lower the cost of child care for working families and to prevent further campus closures and layoffs at our UW System.' He said he was willing to support their tax proposal, which Republicans have said included income and retiree tax cuts.
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) said on WISN 12's UpFront that Evers 'lied' about Republicans walking away from the negotiating table.
'We're willing to do it, just not as much as he wanted… When you read that statement, it makes it sound like we were at zero,' Vos said. 'We were not at zero on any of those topics. We tried to find a way to invest in child care that actually went to the parents, and to make sure that we weren't just having to go to a business. We tried to find a way to look at education so that money would actually go back to school districts across the state. It just wasn't enough for what he wanted.'
Public education advocates said school districts are in dire need of a significant investment of state dollars, especially for special education. After lobbying for the last week, many are concerned that when Republicans finally announce their proposal it won't be enough.
State Superintendent Jill Underly told the Wisconsin Examiner in an interview Wednesday afternoon that she is anticipating that Republicans will put forth more short-term solutions, but she said schools and students can't continue functioning in that way.
Underly compared the situation of education funding in Wisconsin to a road trip.
'The gas tank is nearly empty, and you're trying to coast… you're turning the air conditioning off… going at a lower speed limit, just to save a little fuel and the state budget every two years. I kind of look at them as like these exits to gas stations,' Underly said. 'We keep passing up these opportunities to refuel. Schools are running on fumes, and we see the stress that is having an our system — the number of referendums, the anxiety around whether or not we're going to have the referendum or not in our communities. Wisconsin public schools have been underfunded for decades.'
The one thing lawmakers must do, Underly said, is increase the special education reimbursement rate to a minimum of 60%, back to the levels of the 1990s.
'It used to be 60% but they haven't been keeping up their promise to public schools,' Underly said. 'They need to raise the special education reimbursement rate. Anything less than 60% is once again failing to meet urgent needs.'
The Wisconsin Public Education Network is encouraging advocates to show up at the committee meeting Thursday and continue pushing lawmakers and Evers to invest. Executive Director Heather DuBois Bourenane told the Examiner that she is concerned lawmakers are planning on 'low balling' special education funding, even as she said she has never seen the education community so united in its insistence on one need.
'We're familiar with the way they work in that caucus and in the Joint Finance Committee,' DuBois Bourenane said. 'The pattern of the past has been to go around the state and listen to the concerns that are raised or at least get the appearance of listening, and then reject those concerns and demands and put forward a budget that fails in almost every way to prioritize the priority needs for our communities.'
While it's unclear what Republicans will ultimately do, budget papers prepared by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau includes three options when it comes to special education reimbursement rate: the first is to raise the rate to 60% sum sufficient — as Evers has proposed; the second is to leave the rate at 31.5% sum certain by investing an additional $35.8 million and the third is to raise the rate to an estimated 35% by providing an additional $68.6 million in 2023-24 and $86.2 million in 2024-25.
The paper also includes options for investing more in the high cost of special education, which provides additional aid to reimburse 90% of the cost of educating students whose special education costs exceed $30,000 in a single year.
The School Administrators Alliance (SAA) sent an update to its members on Monday, pointing out what was in the budget papers and saying the committee 'appears poised to focus spending on High-Cost Special Education Aid and the School Levy Tax Credit, rather than significantly raising the primary special education categorical aid.'
SAA Executive Director Dee Pettack said in the email that if that's the route lawmakers take, it would 'result in minimal new, spendable resources for classrooms and students.'
Public school funding was one of the top priorities mentioned by Wisconsinites at the four budget hearings held by the budget committee across the state in March.
'I just think it's time to say enough is enough,' DuBois Bourenane said. 'We're really urging people to do whatever they can before our lawmakers vote on this budget, to say that we are really going to accept nothing less than a budget that stops this cycle of insufficient state support for priority needs and demand better.'
Pettack and leaders of the Wisconsin Association of School Boards, Southeast Wisconsin School Alliance and the Wisconsin Rural Schools Alliance also issued a joint letter Tuesday urging the committee to 'meet this moment with the urgency it requires,' adding that the budget provides the opportunity to allocate resources that will help students achieve.
The letter detailed the situation that a low special education reimbursement has placed districts in as they struggle to fund the mandated services and must fill in the gaps with funds from their general budgets.
'The lack of an adequate state reimbursement for mandated special education programs and services negatively affects all other academic programs, including career and technical education, reading interventionists, teachers and counselors, STEM, dual enrollment, music, art and more,' the organizations stated. 'While small increases in special education reimbursement have been achieved in recent state budgets, costs for special education programming and services have grown much faster than those increases, leaving public schools in a stagnant situation.'
'Should we fail in this task, we are not only hurting Wisconsin's youth today but also our chances to compete in tomorrow's economy,' the leaders wrote.
If the proposal from Republicans isn't adequate, Underly said Evers doesn't have to sign the budget. Republican lawmakers have expressed confidence that they will put a budget on Evers' desk that he will sign.
'There's that, and then we keep negotiating. We keep things as they are right now. We keep moving forward,' Underly said. 'But our schools and our kids, they can't continue to wait for this… These are short term fixes, I think, that they keep talking about, and we can't continue down this path. We need to fix it so that we're setting ourselves up for success. Everything else is just really short sighted.'
WPEN and others want Evers to use his veto power should the proposal not be sufficient. DuBois Bourenane said dozens of organizations have signed on to a letter calling on Evers to reject any budget that doesn't meet the state's needs and priorities.
'What we want them to do is negotiate in good faith and reject any budget that doesn't meet the needs of our kids, and just keep going back to the drawing board until you reach a bipartisan agreement that actually does meet those needs,' DuBois Bourenane said. 'Gov. Evers has the power to break this cycle. He has the power of his veto pen. He has the power of his negotiating authority, and we expect him to use it right and people have got his back.'
The budget deadline is June 30. If it is not completed by then, the state continues to operate under the 2023-25 budget.
'Nobody wants [the process] to be drawn out any longer than it is,' DuBois Bourenane said. 'Those are valid concerns. But the fact is we are in a really critical tension point right now, and if any people care even a little bit about this, now is the time that they should be speaking out.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

House panel approves subpoenas of DOJ for Epstein files
House panel approves subpoenas of DOJ for Epstein files

The Hill

time14 minutes ago

  • The Hill

House panel approves subpoenas of DOJ for Epstein files

A House Oversight subcommittee on Wednesday approved several subpoenas, including one directing the Department of Justice to turn over materials relating to the Epstein files. The federal law enforcement subcommittee also approved a motion to subpoena several high-profile Democratic officials, including former President Clinton, for their testimony. The panel approved the Epstein motion, offered by Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.), in an 8-2 vote, with Republican Reps. Nancy Mace (S.C.), Scott Perry (Pa.), and Brian Jack (Ga.) joining Democrats in favor. 'Today, Oversight Democrats fought for transparency and accountability on the Epstein files and won. House Republicans didn't make it easy, but the motion was finally passed to force the Department of Justice to release the Epstein files,' Rep. Robert Garcia, ranking member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said in a statement. 'Let's be clear: this is a huge win for the American people. The public deserves to know who was complicit in Epstein's heinous crimes, including people with immense power in our government. Today's vote was just the first step toward accountability, and we will continue pushing for the truth.' An amendment to Lee's motion from Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) to include the release of all communications between President Biden or Biden Administration officials and the Department of Justice related to Jeffrey Epstein was adopted by voice vote. And an amendment from Mace to redacting the names of victims and any personally identifiable information of victims, as well as any possible material depicting child abuse, was also adopted by voice vote. The committee also approved by voice vote a motion from Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) to 'expand the full committee's investigation' into the Epstein matter by also issuing subpoenas to a number of high profile former Democratic officials: Former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former Attorney General Eric Holder, former Attorney General Merrick Garland, former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Meuller. Perry's motion also called to subpoena three former GOP officials: Attorney General Bill Barr and former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who served under Trump; and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush. The motions for subpoenas come after the full Oversight committee on Tuesday approved a subpoena for Epstein's ex-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, who is in prison for aiding Epstein in child sex trafficking. House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) officially issued that subpoena on Wednesday. The flurry of subpoenas come as House GOP leaders moved to send members home for August recess a day early after disputes about the Epstein matter — and an unwillingness to face Democratic votes trying to squeeze Republicans on the Epstein issue in the House Rules Committee — stymied the House. But Democrats are seeing success in getting Republican support for their Epstein-related amendments in the Oversight panel.

WSJ: DOJ told Trump his name was in Epstein files
WSJ: DOJ told Trump his name was in Epstein files

The Hill

time14 minutes ago

  • The Hill

WSJ: DOJ told Trump his name was in Epstein files

Attorney General Pam Bondi informed President Trump in May that his name appeared multiple times in files related to the late financier and sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein, according to a new bombshell report in the Wall Street Journal. Bondi and her deputy told the president that Justice Department officials reviewed what she described as a 'truckload' of documents on Epstein and discovered the president's name appeared multiple times, according to the report, which cited senior administration officials. Bondi also told Trump that many other high-profile individuals were named in the files — which alone is not a sign of wrongdoing. One official familiar with the documents told the Journal that the files contain hundreds of names. Trump was told at the meeting that the DOJ did not intend to release any more files on Epstein because the material included child pornography and personal information of Epstein's alleged victims, the Journal reported. DOJ officials also saw the documents as containing unverified hearsay about Trump and others, Bondi told Trump. Officials told the Journal that the information was disclosed during a routine briefing at the White House, and that the Epstein files were not the focus of the meeting. A source confirmed to The Hill's sister network NewsNation that Bondi informed Trump during a May briefing that his name was mentioned in the files. Bondi said publicly in February that Epstein's alleged client list was 'sitting on my desk right now to review.' On July 7, the Department of Justice released a memo concluding there was no 'client list' and said officials did not plan to disclose additional files. The memo set off a torrent of criticism from the president's own base of supporters — who had long called for the release of documents on Epstein — and from Democrats, who seized the opportunity to add to the president's negative coverage. Trump has expressed his frustration at the public's continued focus on the Epstein story and has encouraged his party to move on to other priorities. But the story has divided the Republican party to such an extent that Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) canceled votes in the House on Thursday and sent the chamber home a day early to avoid holding a vote on calling for the release of documents. Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche referred back to the July memo in response to the Journal's reporting. 'The DOJ and FBI reviewed the Epstein Files and reached the conclusion set out in the July 6 memo. Nothing in the files warranted further investigation or prosecution, and we have filed a motion in court to unseal the underlying grand jury transcripts. As part of our routine briefing, we made the President aware of the findings,' they said in a joint statement. 'The memo released on July 6th is consistent with the thorough review conducted by the FBI and DOJ. The criminal leakers and Fake News media tries tirelessly to undermine President Trump with smears and lies, and this story is no different,' FBI Director Kash Patel said in a statement. Trump and Epstein had acknowledged running in similar circles but reportedly had a falling out years ago. 'The fact is that The President kicked him out of his club for being a creep. This is nothing more than a continuation of the fake news stories concocted by the Democrats and the liberal media, just like the Obama Russiagate scandal, which President Trump was right about,' White House communications director Steven Cheung said in a statement responding to the Journal's reporting.

Warren: Colbert ‘may have been canceled in order to curry favor' with Trump
Warren: Colbert ‘may have been canceled in order to curry favor' with Trump

The Hill

time14 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Warren: Colbert ‘may have been canceled in order to curry favor' with Trump

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said in a Wednesday opinion piece for Variety that comedian Stephen Colbert's show may have been canceled by CBS 'to curry favor' with President Trump. CBS announced the cancelation on Friday, days after Colbert, a frequent critic of Trump, had criticized a merger between Skydance and Paramount, CBS's parent company. The approval of federal regulatory agencies is necessary for the merger to go through. While CBS said the cancelation was strictly a financial issue and there have been reports that Colbert's show was losing money, a number of observers and Colbert himself have raised the possibility of politics. 'In the coming weeks, months, and years, all of us must show Trump that we see his march toward authoritarianism and we will not be silenced. Democrats need to embrace the fight against corruption as a top priority. Republicans need to grow a spine and get behind common-sense anti-corruption measures,' Warren said in her piece. 'All Americans need to speak up. Because yes, it's a shame that CBS canceled 'The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,' but it is a threat to all of us that the top late-night show in the country may have been canceled in order to curry favor with a wannabe king,' she added. Colbert tore into his own network and its parent company, Paramount Global, due to a decision to end 'The Late Show,' an action CBS said last week is financially required but is resulting in widespread criticism. The late-night host accused his network of leaking financial figures to the press, alleging 'The Late Show' was losing upward of $40 million each year as a reason for getting rid of the 'Late Show' franchise. Colbert stated that $40 million 'is a big number.' 'I could see us losing $24 million,' he added. 'But where could Paramount possibly have spent the other $16 million … oh wait.' Colbert was referencing a settlement Paramount agreed to pay Trump earlier this month to subdue a lawsuit the president filed targeting CBS over a '60 Minutes' interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024. 'Instead of fighting Trump on his 'meritless' lawsuit, Paramount settled, handing $16 million to Trump's presidential library. This looks like bribery in plain sight, and that's exactly what Stephen Colbert said on his show: '[T]his kind of complicated financial settlement with a sitting government official has a technical name in legal circles: it's 'big, fat bribe.'' Warren said in her Variety article. 'Three days later, Paramount-owned CBS canceled Colbert's show. And Trump didn't waste a moment before celebrating the news,' she added.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store