To prepare for my visit to the Bill Buckmaster Show Wednesday, I listened to Gov. Ducey talking with Buckmaster Tuesday, then listened a second time on the show’s website, taking notes. Here are some of the things Ducey said, along with what lies hidden an inch behind his words.

Buckmaster asked Ducey about the upcoming vote to restore most of the JTED funding. Ducey said he was ready to sign the finished bill because “I’m supportive of JTED.” In fact, Ducey pushed for the $30 million cut to JTED in the last budget, which doesn’t sound very supportive. He explained the cut to Buckmaster by saying he faced a billion dollar deficit and had to make difficult decisions, but added in a classic moment of political doublespeak that he protected K-12 education in the budget. You’re not protecting K-12 education when you make cuts to JTED which would have decimated the program if they weren’t reversed.

As for being “supportive of JTED,” in fact, Ducey proposed $30 million for JTED spread over three years, $10 million a year, for this year’s budget. The money would have been used as matching funds to grants from businesses for programs they thought would help train future employees. By most accounts, his proposal would have effectively ended JTED. It was only when Republicans joined with Democrats and created a veto-proof majority for a bill reinstating JTED funds that Ducey discovered how much he supported the program.

In another statement emphasizing his support for education, Ducey said, “We’re putting $106 million additional into K-12 education.” In fact, half of what Ducey is taking credit for is mandatory funding based on inflation and an increase in student population. That’s stay-even money, not an increase.

Next, Ducey moved on to more of his ritual back patting, praising himself for the money that will flow to schools if voters approve Proposition 123—money that’s 70 percent of what the state owes the schools based on a proposition approved by voters in 2000 along with a current court order. He went all soft and squishy about school leadership as he talked about those wonderful principals and superintendents who will decide how to spend the Prop 123 money. According to Ducey, they should “have the flexibility to use the additional dollars . . . to make the decisions that are best for that school.” Let it go into technology or salaries or classroom supplies or ELL, Ducey said. It’s all fine with him.

But it’s worth remembering that our born-again education governor headed the campaign against Proposition 204 that would have levied a one cent sales tax to add almost a billion dollars to K-12 funding. More accurately, it would have continued a tax that began during Gov. Brewer’s tenure, which she supported. In his anti-Prop 204 days, one of Ducey’s main arguments against the funding was that it would be given to superintendents and principals—he called them “unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats” back then—who could spend it any way they pleased. He wrote, “Anyone who READS Prop 204 will see NO MONEY goes to children’s educations.” His claim was, he  wasn’t against spending the money on education. He was against the money going to the schools without any stipulations about how the money would be spent. Now with Prop 123, he’s all for those same “unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats” having the “flexibility to use the additional dollars . . . to make the decisions that are best for that school.” Why the difference? Prop 204 was funded by a tax, and Prop 123 won’t need any new taxes since most of the money is drawn from the students’ state land trust fund. Ducey wants tax cuts for his wealthy supporters. Any tax increases are supposed to happen at the local level without his fingerprints on them, increases necessary to make up for the state’s spending cuts to cities and counties.

It deserves repeating yet again: Ducey is not a pro-education governor or a pro-child governor. He has it in his power to push for more adequate funding for our schools that goes beyond replacing 70 percent of what was stolen from the students in 2009, but he’s simply not interested.

This article appears in Feb 11-17, 2016.

15 replies on “Decoding Ducey-Speak on Education Funding”

  1. “Ducey proposed $30 million for JTED spread over three years, $10 million a year, for this year’s budget. The money would have been used as matching funds to grants from businesses for programs they thought would help train future employees. By most accounts, his proposal would have effectively ended JTED.”

    That’s funny. Now it seems that government expects businesses that benefit to pay nothing for training their employees?

    And now we watch as Pima County hocks our buildings to build a rental building for Mark Kelly’s Balloon Adventures???

    But didn’t you guys coin the phrase crony capitalism? I guess that was when you were not empowered and holding the purse strings.

  4. Regardless of the political doubletalk, smoke, mirrors and emotionally-charged hot button misdirection, Arizonans need to watch very carefully what the governor has planned for Arizona’s “public” land. After his backroom buddies start hauling away timber, minerals and other natural resources it will be too late.

  5. It bears repeating that it’s not just that it’s only 70% of what’s owed, it’s money that is coming from the wrong source. The legislature should keep its dirty mitts off of the state land trust. Vote NO on Prop 123.

  6. Last I checked businesses pay property tax, business income tax, collect sales tax and payroll tax for the state. It seems to me that the businesses ARE contributing to the system that educates our students. If we continue to cut education for things like JTED, we will all suffer and we will end up with poorly educated populace and no auto mechanics, plumbers or other trades people. Then we’ll have to employ the “undocumented” who have these skills, and listen to the teabaggers scream “they are stealing our jobs, boo hoo”. When the whole thing will be our own fault.

  7. Mr Safier,

    You make it seem like Mr. Ducey was against the tax solely and mainly because it was ‘without any stipulations’. This is not correct, his main arguments were that the tax was permanent (it was) and it was extremely regressive (it was).

    You can point out the hypocrisy but don’t good leaders grow and evolve (see HRC and gay marriage).

  8. Doublespeak, deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts and misleading talk is the only answer to Governor Ducey and most politician’s statements. In polite words and casting no foul remarks directed at today’s political class they deliberately construct their words and actions to disguise the actual meanings and consequences. I have come to expect that and yet even when exposed and documented our fellow citizens who vote refrain from any punishment by withholding their votes or electing different people. There is truth to that saying or the phrase “You get what you pay for.” If the government … promises lower taxes don’t expect them to deliver more and better services. Price is what you pay, value is what you get. Want Governor Ducey and crowd to deliver better education, better be prepared to wait a long time. Talk is cheap, and they sure like to babble as in uttering meaning less promises with no intention of being honest.

  9. Gov Ducey is merely continuing a twenty year tradition of tax cuts. Being a data driven engineer, I seek data when someone pronounces “They’re taking our jobs” or “Throwing money at education won’t make it better”. So here’s some data:
    -We’ve had over twenty years of tax cuts, reducing State revenues by $4 Billion, much of which is born by education.
    -Per student funding in AZ has dropped from 19th among the States in 1960 to 50th today.
    -20 years of tax cuts has not stimulated the economy as promised. In fact State business leaders have recently said, “we don’t need more tax cuts we need to fund education”
    -States that spend more (Massachusetts for example at $13,000/student) do better on national ratings (Mass is rated B+). Arizona spends $7500 and is rated D+.

    Ducey not withstanding, we need to elect people who are less obsessed with lowering taxes and more concerned about following our constitution.

  10. The spin from the governor’s press release on the JTED funding restoration is to put it diplomatically, “an interesting perspective,”. To put it in reality, “it’s what comes out of the rear of a front facing bull.” The spin on the inflation settlement is similar. Stop any tax cuts. Stop giving away revenue and then claiming we have no money. The budget balance WILL hit one billion dollars this year while starving K-12, community colleges and universities. Enhanced education IS economic development. Tax cuts don’t do it. Spin doesn’t do it. “Image” doesn’t do it.

  11. And what will Mr Ducey and his loyal minions in the lege do if his shell game fails? What is Plan B?

  12. The voters of Arizona have already approved, by initiative, the funding of the Arizona schools by billions of dollars more than the State Government has provided. The Arizona Supreme Court has already found, by a 5-0 ruling, that the State must correct this under-funding.

    Prop 123 reverses the voter initiative that approved this funding of the schools and sells off 3.5 billions of dollars of State Trust lands. This will permanently cost the schools $100 million in revenue every single year in the future at a time when the State government has hundreds of millions in surpluses that they plan to give away in tax breaks to their wealthy donors.

    That’s why I created a petition to AEA, The Arizona Education Association and The Arizona State Senate, which says:

    “Prop 123 asks voters to approve the States defunding of Education in favor of tax breaks for the rich. Stop Prop 123 from making law that defunds education in both the short and long term and violates the law already passed by the voters and upheld by the Supreme Court. ”

    Please sign this petition to stop Prop 12. Click here to add your name:

    http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/stop-prop…

  13. Sorry but wealth creates jobs. AZ needs jobs. Vote yes on 123. Help put an illegal to work.

Comments are closed.