8 Questions for Stan Collender

Early this month, at the AESA conference in Tampa, Florida, I heard Stan Collender speak. Stan made the US budget seem interesting and relevant to all of us in education. It was scary.

Stan has been called “the one-stop shopping center for budget-process analysis,” and amazingly, he follows the federal budget as a hobby. While he writes for The National Journal, and is often used as an expert by practically every large news organization, Stan is Managing Director at the DC office of Qorvis, one of the leading PR firms in the nation, www.qorvis.com.

My conclusions from listening to Stan’s presentation and talking with him on the phone:

• Don’t look for any new education initiatives to be funded in this coming election year.

• Expect that there will be no agreement on any education bills that need reauthorization this year.

• Look for moderate decreases in federal funding for education over the following year or two, no matter who wins the election or how much they say that education matters.

• Find ways to motivate parents to talk to and visit the local offices of their senators and representatives; it’s the best hope for education funding to improve our education system.

Stan, you gave a great talk at the AESA conference, why educators should care about the federal budget, and how it is likely that funding is going to be reduced. Can we start out by you giving us 4 reasons why the federal government is likely to decrease the amount they spend for education over the next three years?

Deficit: the deficit is rising, there aren’t too many places to look for saving; education is always an area that gets looked at for savings.

Other needs being perceived as higher priority: military, Iraq, Afghanistan, veteran’s health, energy. When you have troops being fired at, that takes about the highest priority.

Inertia: it is possible that in the 2008 elections that there will be a big enough Democratic win that Republicans can’t filibuster, but it is likely not enough to be big enough to stop filibusters. It is more likely that Republicans will have enough to filibuster, which will continue the lack of movement we are seeing today.

Economic slowdown: related to the deficit. If there is an economic slowdown, and congress needs a stimulus package, money for education does not provide immediate stimulus, like a tax cut, or a job bill.

Are there any countervailing arguments that the federal government might increase funding?

The big one is a Democratic takeover in 2008. There may be push from a Democratic White House for more dollars. But, Democrats can push back on an increase for education because they can get away with it more than Republicans can.

Currently the federal government is spending about 9% of total K12 education expenditures, a total of about $38 billion. Historically, it’s been somewhat between 4 and 6 percent. What do you think this 9% will be reduced to?

A flat percentage doesn’t relate to the need, and it doesn’t say where the money is going.

Why is education such a political football? Everyone has been educated. No one wants to see the US fall down on education. Business is a big proponent of education. But relative to everything else it is easiest to cut; education is 1/5 of everything in the budget after entitlements and military.

I’ve heard the president say that the budget deficit will be eliminated by 2011, why can’t we just continue doing what we are doing until then?

The deficit will not be eliminated by 2012 and President Bush won’t care because he won’t be in office anyhow. He won’t be around to see it. Even if he is right, the national debt is the real problem, it reached $9 trillion for the first time; interest payments are hitting records, and that puts pressure on all other spending, particularly education.

That statement about the budget being eliminated is just wrong. It is already going up. The statement is based on assumptions that are not true; none of the assumptions are based on us having a presence in Iraq. That’s about $250 billion a year to fight the war. And the president is saying there is likely to be a permanent presence in Iraq, that’s going to be around $10 billion a year.

One more example, this assumes that there is no fix to the AMT tax (Alternative Minimum Tax). After this year, it will be fixed, because 30 million Americans will be affected and they are going to demand that it be fixed. That’s another $50-60 billion a year.

Those are just two of many examples.

All politicians say they value education, but you’ve made the case that, despite all trends pointing to US education lagging other nations, they will be reducing, not increasing spending. Are they lying?

Value education relative to what? In a perfect world with unlimited resources they would be spending a whole lot more than they are now. But this is an imperfect world and always will be.

Educators and companies in education are not making the type of money that financial, pharmaceutical, defense, and telecom companies are, so they don’t have the resources to influence politicians the same way. What can they do, and how effective can they be in advocating for education?

It’s not the educators; it’s the parents. Parents are the best grass roots in the world; every district has kids in school. Get the parents out. They cannot match the lobbying dollars, they need to use their votes. The problem is that they do not take advantage of what they’ve got. Organize at PTA meetings. No one has to come to DC, they just can go to town meetings, or the local offices of their representatives.

They don’t even need to organize, if tomorrow 10 parents show up at congressional local office that would have a substantial impact. If a congressman knows constituents are watching how he votes on education, he will be watching ed too.

What organizations do you see making the greatest impact on increasing, or at least holding the line on decreases, for federal support of education?

The ed community in DC is a strong lobbying presence; ASEA, SIIA, to whatever, they have the ability to get to members of congress, they have to get to the congress people.

Are there particular areas, either geographically or by type of aid, that you think will be likely less hit than others, or even likely to increase?

One group that tends to suffer are career colleges. They are not as appreciated. Also, there will be changes in student loans.