Education Funding

Student Loan Purchase Programs Under the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act of 2008

Education Policy — Wed, 27 May 2009 13:19:00 -0400

In May of 2008, Congress passed the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act (ECASLA) in response to concern that credit market conditions could disrupt federal student loan availability. The law gives the U.S. Department of Education temporary authority to purchase federally backed student loans made by private lenders, effectively providing a secondary market for the loans. Congress opted to leave the new purchase authority largely undefined in statute, giving the Department considerable discretion to design and administer it.

Building a Solid Foundation

Education Policy — Mon, 18 May 2009 00:59:00 -0400

In April, the states and school districts began receiving the first installment of more than $48 billion in federal economic stimulus funds for education and child care appropriated under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA). This unprecedented federal investment in education—from early childhood through college—is a tremendous opportunity for state and local investments to improve our nation's schools. The danger is that states and school districts may squander these funds on ill-conceived projects or use them simply to maintain the status quo.

Summary and Analysis of President Obama’s Education Budget Request

Education Policy — Mon, 11 May 2009 02:04:00 -0400

President Barack Obama submitted his first budget request to Congress on May 7, 2009. This request follows the initial summary budget request he submitted in February that included only aggregate funding levels for federal programs and agencies.

A College Fund for Every Student

Cecille Isidro — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 05:35:00 -0400

Barack Obama wants to give families a refundable $4,000 tax credit for college, if their children complete a required amount of community service. It's a fine, conventional Democratic idea. It could be a lot more powerful, though, if Obama coupled it with an old Republican favorite - depositing his $4,000 credit into private accounts like the so-called 529 plans that so many upper-income families use to save for college.

The Budget Resolution and Education Funding: A Primer

Communications — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:37:00 -0400

Today the New America Foundation's Federal Education Budget Project released "A Primer on the Budget Resolution's Impact on Education Funding," by the project's Research Director Jason Delisle. The primer serves as an insightful guide to this confusing and often partisan process by which federal education funding is determined. Last week the Congressional budget committees adopted the first drafts of the fiscal year 2009 budget resolution, marking the start of the annual Congressional budget process.The proposals head to the full House and Senate for consideration this week.

"Questions are bound to arise about the arcane procedures under which Congress produces and acts upon the resolution. These questions and general confusion over how the budget affects education funding are made worse by political rhetoric and partisan spin," said Michael Dannenberg, Director of the Education Policy Program at New America Foundation. The budget primer aims to shed light on these issues by addressing important budget topics such as:

Can Congress set funding levels for individual programs in the budget resolution?
How is the appropriation process influenced by the budget resolution?
What is the difference between mandatory and discretionary spending in the eyes of the budget resolution?
What special mechanisms exist for enforcing budget rules and funding levels in the budget resolution?

The Primer is linked here on the Federal Education Budget Project website Ed Budget Project.Org. Please direct media inquiries to Erin Drankoski, 202-997-8727, drankoski@newamerica.net.

Federal Education Budget Project/Ed Budget Project.Org Website
The mission of the Federal Education Budget Project is to serve as a non-partisan, authoritative source of easily accessible information on federal education funding for the media, policymakers and staff, state and local officials, non-profit organizations, and the public. Our goal is to help heighten the quality of debate on federal education funding and support the development of fiscally responsible proposals to improve federal support for education. Please visit the Federal Education Budget Project website Ed Budget Project.Org for more information. The Budget Project Website includes funding, demographic, and achievement data for every state and school district in the country. For each district, our website includes data on No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) Title I funding, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) special education funding, average per pupil expenditure, student poverty, and NCLB achievement scores. A "Compare Your District" function allows users to compare school districts within states or across the country. All our raw data and analyses are available for download for independent, subsequent research and analysis by others.

The New America Foundation is a nonprofit, post-partisan public policy institute whose purpose is to bring exceptionally promising new voices and new ideas to the fore of our nation's public discourse. Relying on a venture capital approach, the Foundation invests in outstanding individuals and policy solutions that transcend the conventional political spectrum. Headquartered in our nation's capital, New America also has offices in California and New York. More information is available at www.newamerica.net.

Jason Delisle in CongressDaily PM | 'Senate Budget Would Boost Advance Approps By $4 Billion'

Communications — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:06:00 -0400

Senate Budget Would Boost Advance Approps By $4 Billion (CongressDaily PM, subscription only)

. . . "There's no reason to do it other than to increase spending," said Jason Delisle, an education analyst at the New America Foundation. Backers "want the money by any means necessary, but the trade-off is the debate gets confused and the budget lacks transparency." Advance funding for education grew out of a timing quirk whereby the academic year usually spans parts of two fiscal years. Beginning in FY96, Congress began using advance appropriations to increase education funding for a given school year while technically staying within that fiscal year's discretionary spending cap, according to a New America report.

Since then the gimmick has become wildly popular -- what started out as $1.3 billion in advance education funding in FY96 grew to $17 billion in FY08, the report notes.

The New America report said the use of advance appropriations makes it difficult to compare actual year-over-year education funding totals. It can also cause problems in future years should budgetary circumstances change. . . .

Analysis of Budget Battle Implications for Education Funding Released by New America

Communications — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 09:50:00 -0400

The New America Foundation released a paper today providing a detailed analysis of the current budget battle and its implications for education funding. The report finds that education funding has not been a driver of recent increases in federal spending and proposed increases are relatively minor compared to the overall budget.

“One can sincerely argue against education funding increases because of concerns about program effectiveness, efficiency, or value; but to suggest that education spending is the main culprit for busting the federal budget is misguided, if not disingenuous,” said Michael Dannenberg, New America’s Director of Education Policy.

The report, Budget Showdown 2007: The Facts Behind Education Funding, by Heather Rieman, a Policy Analyst at the New America Foundation, provides new research on recent trends in federal education spending and how those trends fit within the larger federal budget. The paper details the conflict behind the first budget cycle since 2000 during which different political parties control the Executive Branch and both chambers of Congress and identifies three possible scenarios of the current showdown may play out over the coming weeks.

If a Presidential veto threat does not derail proposed education appropriations legislation, Congress will increase spending on students, teachers, and schools cumulatively this fall by between $7 billion and $8 billion for the following school year. It represents the most significant change to federal education funding in the last decade. Most of the proposed increase is on the discretionary side of the budget and without offset. But $3 billion worth of the total increase is on the mandatory side of the budget and offset by cuts in federal subsidies to student loan providers.

Rieman dispels some of the common misperceptions about federal spending and the education budget. For example, the paper finds that in recent years, discretionary spending has grown faster than mandatory spending, contrary to the common belief that runaway entitlement spending is crowding out other spending priorities. Separate from spending on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, spending on defense and international matters has driven the growth in discretionary spending. Further, the paper shows that education spending has contributed very little to federal spending growth (only 5.5% of the last five year’s increase), nor has its place in the federal budget expanded since 2001.

Budget Showdown 2007: The Facts Behind Education Funding

Education Policy — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 02:12:00 -0400

The White House and Congress are approaching a major budget debate that could markedly influence federal education funding. This is the first budget cycle since 2000 during which different political parties control the Executive Branch and both chambers of Congress. The federal budget and appropriations process is rarely without acrimony, but this year’s battle may be especially rancorous.

The Federal Education Budget Project finds that although Congress plans a significant increase in federal spending on schools, teachers, and students -- the most significant this decade when considering discretionary and mandatory sources -- education funding has not been a driver of recent increases in federal spending and the contemplated increase is relatively minor with respect to the overall budget. Opponents of proposed increases in education spending argue that the overall federal budget is growing faster than is prudent, and this argument is likely to be a key component of this year’s budget debate. One could argue against proposed increased spending on education because of concerns about program effectiveness, efficiency, or value, but any attempt to single out education spending as the main driver of a federal budget that some believe has become too large would be misguided.

Summary

If a Presidential veto threat does not derail proposed education appropriations legislation, Congress will increase spending on students, teachers, and schools cumulatively this fall by between $7 billion and $8 billion for the following school year. It represents the most significant change to federal education funding in the last decade. Most of the proposed increase is on the discretionary side of the budget and without offset. But $3 billion worth of the total increase is on the mandatory side of the budget and offset by cuts in federal subsidies to student loan providers.
From fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2006, discretionary spending grew at a faster rate than mandatory spending. The increase has been driven primarily by defense and other “war on terror” spending. Between fiscal years 2001 and 2006, spending on defense, international affairs, and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was responsible for 69 percent ($231.3 billion) of the total increase in discretionary spending. In contrast, domestic discretionary spending on matters such as health, transportation, and education was responsible for only 31 percent ($101.6 billion) of the increase. Spending on Department of Education programs was responsible for only 5.5 percent of the increase in overall federal discretionary spending between fiscal years 2001 and 2006.
The budget battle between Congress and the White House could end in a number of ways that will affect education funding. Three possible scenarios for how the budget showdown might play out are presented—one that could result in a government shutdown, one that shifts funding to supplemental appropriations bills, and a third that considers a deal involving federal education funding and the No Child Left Behind Act reauthorization.

We're Still Failing Our Students

Cecille Isidro — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:59:00 -0400

On Monday, the ACLU of Southern California and Public Advocates Inc. released an upbeat progress report on the results of the settlement of Williams vs. California, a class-action suit brought on behalf of the state’s most-neglected students. In the lowest-performing schools, there are more textbooks, adequate facilities and teachers with proper credentials. However, the report, like the settlement, failed to address the bigger issue: achieving "teacher equity" across the state.

Michael Dannenberg Quoted on No Child Left Behind in National Journal

Communications — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 06:04:00 -0400

And Democrats who voted for the [No Child Left Behind] law five years ago in the glow of post-September 11 bipartisanship are unlikely to do so again now that Bush has failed to deliver the hefty budget increases for education that they expected would accompany it. For the president to persuade a Democratic Congress to reauthorize No Child Left Behind without dismantling it, the bottom line may very well be the bottom line.

"The reason he's still relevant is money," said Michael Dannenberg, director of the New America Foundation's Education Policy Program. "If there were a lot of money put on the table with a Democratically controlled Congress, that would help grease the skids with the base on the left. Of course, it would antagonize the base on the right."

And Bush cannot alienate his base, where goodwill is in short supply after the immigration debacle...

For the complete article, please visit the National Journal web site (subscription required).