No, I don't agree.

A public good exist. The Texas constitution demands we provide education.

And, locally especially, there is merit that an educated youth benefits us all.

So, I agree that taking money from tax payers in county x and send it to county y schools is a socialism.

I see this where I live in Alamo Heights ISD. We have some of the highest property assessments and tax rates in Bexar County, and we have parents paying through the nose to send their kids to schools like TMI and St. Marys Hall.

dBoy99 said:

---

Most small towns only have 1 elementary, 1 MS, & 1 HS. If they have a private school it's likely a Catholic school that is PK thru 6.

So how do vouchers hurt rural schools?

---

They are afraid it will take money from them. How does it help them?

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/CN/htm/CN.7.htm

I guess if people really want to change the system, they can amend the constitution.

Quote:

---

All that run in a system with roughly the same administrative setup.

---

That's another point where I think you are way off. When I was growing up, I had never hear of such a thing as an "assistant principal" (one man could handle 400 students), a curriculum coordinator, or counselors other than the high school counselor whose main job was to make sure that you took the required classes to graduate, and who might give you some advice on what to take to prepare for college. Nowadays, our public education system is drowning in administrators. That needs to be fixed.

twk said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

twk said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

harge57 said:

---

Antoninus said:

---

simple question.

Let's completely do away with public schooling.

Do you want 10 million people in this state exercising the franchise, with no education whatsoever. Unable to read. Unable to write. Unable to even remotely understand the issues.

Do you want those people selecting the members of the legislator and executive branch?

if you answered "no," then even you acknowledge that education is, at least in part, a "public ghod."

---

That is what is coming out of the public schools today.

---

No it's not. Not even close. Every college and university in the state is filled with public school graduates. The number of failing schools is a fraction of the total, but voucher proponents like to latch on to those few schools like they are the rule, when they are very much the exception.

---

Rightly so. As a voucher program would allow kids doomed to those few school to leave and go to better schools. It's ridiculous that you want to basically impose on them a life sentence of poverty because they live closer to a crappy school.

---

If vouchers were limited to kids trapped in attendance zones of failing schools, or means tested for lower income (lower middle class and poor), then that might happen. But, if we do across the board vouchers, available to everyone, we are just going to see most of that money eaten up by private school tuition inflation.

---

First of all, that statement implies that you don't understand inflation. There is no such thing as "food inflation" or "tuition inflation". Inflation is an undue expansion of the money supply that usually increases ALL prices. It's NOT merely "prices going up".

Secondly, current private schools do not try to compete against "free" public schools. They, by definition, are getting undercut and therefore would go out of business. So they focus on rich clientele that can afford to pay taxes AND pay a tuition on top. They are competing with each other, not public schools.

But after a voucher system, that would change. Afterwards, the demand for inexpensive private education would go WAY up, and new private schools would pop up to fill the demand. They would need to compete just like grocery stores and auto dealers. Depending on if taxpayers can keep the surplus, schools will either charge the voucher amount or less. Just like what occurs everywhere else in the market.

---

Your assessment of your own economic knowledge, and that of others, is unique, shall we say.

Expanding the money supply drives inflation throughout the economy. But one can talk about increases in a sector as inflation; that is a matter of English, not economics. Stop being so pedantic. It just derails the thread.

---

Wrong. Inflation is the CAUSE, not the EFFECT. The term has been *******ized over the decades by economic illiterates and propagandists. The term inflation was devised to explain "undue expansion of the money supply" because that is a complicated concept and because that entire phrase is a pain in the ass to say over and over. Everybody understands "rising prices" and that is easy to say. If they meant to coin a term for "rising prices", then they would have used "escalation" or "increasation" or something. Not "inflation", which implies the similarity between pumping money into the economy and pumping air into a balloon.

Quote:

---

The idea that well heeled parents are going to be price conscious and shop for the cheapest option is laughable. Not everything is a widget.

---

LOL.. .so people don't care about prices in your world? Supply and Demand are just a myth? Talk about "unique" understanding of economics.

aTmAg said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

twk said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

harge57 said:

---

Antoninus said:

---

simple question.

Let's completely do away with public schooling.

Do you want 10 million people in this state exercising the franchise, with no education whatsoever. Unable to read. Unable to write. Unable to even remotely understand the issues.

Do you want those people selecting the members of the legislator and executive branch?

if you answered "no," then even you acknowledge that education is, at least in part, a "public ghod."

---

That is what is coming out of the public schools today.

---

No it's not. Not even close. Every college and university in the state is filled with public school graduates. The number of failing schools is a fraction of the total, but voucher proponents like to latch on to those few schools like they are the rule, when they are very much the exception.

---

Rightly so. As a voucher program would allow kids doomed to those few school to leave and go to better schools. It's ridiculous that you want to basically impose on them a life sentence of poverty because they live closer to a crappy school.

---

If vouchers were limited to kids trapped in attendance zones of failing schools, or means tested for lower income (lower middle class and poor), then that might happen. But, if we do across the board vouchers, available to everyone, we are just going to see most of that money eaten up by private school tuition inflation.

---

First of all, that statement implies that you don't understand inflation. There is no such thing as "food inflation" or "tuition inflation". Inflation is an undue expansion of the money supply that usually increases ALL prices. It's NOT merely "prices going up".

Secondly, current private schools do not try to compete against "free" public schools. They, by definition, are getting undercut and therefore would go out of business. So they focus on rich clientele that can afford to pay taxes AND pay a tuition on top. They are competing with each other, not public schools.

But after a voucher system, that would change. Afterwards, the demand for inexpensive private education would go WAY up, and new private schools would pop up to fill the demand. They would need to compete just like grocery stores and auto dealers. Depending on if taxpayers can keep the surplus, schools will either charge the voucher amount or less. Just like what occurs everywhere else in the market.

---

Just like what easy subsidized loans has done for the cost of college tuition

---

Which is why pure privatization is the best of all worlds. Vouchers are merely an improvement over our current public system (which is a low bar).

---

Nope. Its a system that reduces accountability to the tax payer and therefore will be ripe with fraud.

what would stop the left from sending inner-city, problem kids to high-performing districts? seems like it'd be similar to how border countries are sending all of their criminals to the US rn.

• Rep. Travis Clardy(37%) (HD11 R-Nacogdoches) -> Abbot/Cruz/Patrick endorse Joanne Shofner(63%)
• Rep. Ernest Bailes(39%) (HD18 R-Shepherd) -> Abbott/Cruz/Patrick endorse Janis Holt(53%)
• Rep. Hugh Shine(40%) (HD55 R-Temple) -> Abbott/Cruz endorse Hillary Hickland(53%)
• Rep. Glenn Rogers(37%) (HD60 R-Graford) -> Abbott/Cruz/Patrick endorse Mike Olcott(63%)
• Rep. Reggie Smith(47%) (HD62 R-Sherman) Cruz/Miller endorse Shelley Luther(53%)
• Rep. Steve Allison(40%) (HD121 R-San Antonio) -> Abbott/Cruz endorse Marc LaHood(54%)
• Rep. Keith Bell(75%) (HD4 R-Forney) Paxton endorses Joshua Feuerstein(25%)
• Rep. Jay Dean(72%) (HD7 R-Longview) Miller endorses Joe McDaniel(23%)
• Rep. Stan Lambert(52%) (HD71 R-Abilene) Abbott/Cruz/Patrick endorse Liz Case(48%)
• Rep. Drew Darby(57%) (HD72 R-San Angelo) -> Abbott/Patrick endorse Stormy Bradley(43%)
• Rep. Ken King(78%) (HD88 R-Canadian) Paxton/Miller endorse Karen Post(22%)
• Rep. Charlie Geren(60%) (HD99 R-Fort Worth) Paxton endorses Jack Reynolds(40%)
• RUNOFF Rep. GaryVanDeaver(46%) (HD1 R-New Boston) -> Abbott/Miller endorse Chris Spencer(43%)
• RUNOFF Rep. Justin Holland(38.8%) (HD33 R-Rockwall) Paxton/Miller endorse Katrina Pierson(39.4%)
• RUNOFF Rep. John Kuempel(45%) (HD44 R-Seguin) Abbott/Cruz/Patrick endorse Alan Schoolcraft(48%)
• RUNOFF Rep. DeWayne Burns(41%) (HD58 R-Cleburne) -> Abbott/Cruz/Patrick endorse Helen Kerwin(49%)
  
• Rep. John Raney (HD14 R-College Station) -> Abbott/Patrick endorse Paul Dyson(64%)
• Rep. Andrew Murr (HD53 R-Junction) Cruz/Miller endorse Wes Virdell(61%)
• Rep. Four Price (HD87 R-Amarillo) -> Abbott/Cruz/Patrick endorse Caroline Fairly(60%)
• RUNOFF Rep. Kyle Kacal (HD12 R-College Station) -> Abbott endorses Trey Wharton(35%), Patrick/Miller endorse Ben Bius(33%)
• RUNOFF Rep. Ed Thompson (HD29 R-Pearland) -> Abbott endorses Alex Kamkar(44%) [Jeffrey Barry(48%)]

Of the 21 Reps voting against school vouchers:
6 Anti-voucher Incumbents lost
6 Anti-voucher Incumbents won
4 Anti-voucher incumbents are in runoffs
3 Pro-voucher endorsed candidates won where Incumbent didn't run
2 race with no incumbent in a runoff between pro-voucher candidates

EDIT: to fix statistics and sort list by group and HD with percentage votes

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

All that run in a system with roughly the same administrative setup.

---

That's another point where I think you are way off. When I was growing up, I had never hear of such a thing as an "assistant principal" (one man could handle 400 students), a curriculum coordinator, or counselors other than the high school counselor whose main job was to make sure that you took the required classes to graduate, and who might give you some advice on what to take to prepare for college. Nowadays, our public education system is drowning in administrators. That needs to be fixed.

---

Again, you are talking about adding some people to the administration and calling it a "major change". That's no major change to the system at all, that is making minor adjustments to the current system.

Agthatbuilds said:

---

It's not like they actually should get a check.

Whatever $ amount assigned to a school per pupil should follow that kid to whatever school they attend, not automatically be claimed by whatever school they'd be enrolled in without choice.

Either way, you the individual tax payer, will be supplementing the same way

---

That isn't how Abbott wants it to work. Parents will call it home school. Meth head loser parent with 3 kids gets $30k to "home school" her kids.

How much experience do you have with private schools?

Why does the anti-school-voucher crowd always have to be so deceptive and resort to fear mongering?

suburban cowboy said:

---

what would stop the left from sending inner-city, problem kids to high-performing districts? seems like it'd be similar to how border countries are sending all of their criminals to the US rn.

---

transportation costs mainly

Im Gipper said:

---

Why does the anti-school-voucher crowd always have to be so deceptive and resort to fear mongering?

---

It's the same arguments you hear from the left about why free markets can't be trusted.

cevans_40 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

twk said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

harge57 said:

---

Antoninus said:

---

simple question.

Let's completely do away with public schooling.

Do you want 10 million people in this state exercising the franchise, with no education whatsoever. Unable to read. Unable to write. Unable to even remotely understand the issues.

Do you want those people selecting the members of the legislator and executive branch?

if you answered "no," then even you acknowledge that education is, at least in part, a "public ghod."

---

That is what is coming out of the public schools today.

---

No it's not. Not even close. Every college and university in the state is filled with public school graduates. The number of failing schools is a fraction of the total, but voucher proponents like to latch on to those few schools like they are the rule, when they are very much the exception.

---

Rightly so. As a voucher program would allow kids doomed to those few school to leave and go to better schools. It's ridiculous that you want to basically impose on them a life sentence of poverty because they live closer to a crappy school.

---

If vouchers were limited to kids trapped in attendance zones of failing schools, or means tested for lower income (lower middle class and poor), then that might happen. But, if we do across the board vouchers, available to everyone, we are just going to see most of that money eaten up by private school tuition inflation.

---

First of all, that statement implies that you don't understand inflation. There is no such thing as "food inflation" or "tuition inflation". Inflation is an undue expansion of the money supply that usually increases ALL prices. It's NOT merely "prices going up".

Secondly, current private schools do not try to compete against "free" public schools. They, by definition, are getting undercut and therefore would go out of business. So they focus on rich clientele that can afford to pay taxes AND pay a tuition on top. They are competing with each other, not public schools.

But after a voucher system, that would change. Afterwards, the demand for inexpensive private education would go WAY up, and new private schools would pop up to fill the demand. They would need to compete just like grocery stores and auto dealers. Depending on if taxpayers can keep the surplus, schools will either charge the voucher amount or less. Just like what occurs everywhere else in the market.

---

Just like what easy subsidized loans has done for the cost of college tuition

---

Which is why pure privatization is the best of all worlds. Vouchers are merely an improvement over our current public system (which is a low bar).

---

Nope. Its a system that reduces accountability to the tax payer and therefore will be ripe with fraud.

---

Are you kidding? It INCREASES accountability. Is your grocery store fraudulent? No? How can that be? They don't have a "grocery store board" nor get money from the state?!? It's because people being able to shop elsewhere provides immediate and concrete consequences.

The things that are corrupt and fraudulent are the things that heavily involve government. Bernie Madoff defrauded people for decades thanks to the SEC. The original Ponzi lasted only a year thanks to the free market.

I don't understand how people don't realize that more freedom is always better, no matter how much it costs.

With that being said, public schools now need to be unshackled from the standardize testing focus and those parents need to be able to decide what measures they will use to measure the instruction that their children are receiving, just like private school parents.

One impact. Most rural districts are property-poor. So they receive recapture dollars (Robin Hood). Property-rich districts (typically urban, unless oil money) collect excess property taxes (excess defined by the state on how much that ISD can keep....$6160 per kid since 2019) and send to state which sends to rural. So fewer kids in urban public schools since a % now take a voucher to private or home-school = less "excess" tax revenue for urban ISD which = less state robin hood revenue = less money to the rural, property poor, districts.

I know there are a lot of variables here and arguments, but this is ONE broad explanation (theoretical) of an impact on rural.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I don't understand how people don't realize that more freedom is always better, no matter how much it costs.

With that being said, public schools now need to be unshackled from the standardize testing focus and those parents need to be able to decide what measures they will use to measure the instruction that their children are receiving, just like private school parents.

---

What freedom is that? Is it currently illegal to home school or send your kid to a private school? Please send me this law so I can petition with you against such an injustice.

MaxPower said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I don't understand how people don't realize that more freedom is always better, no matter how much it costs.

With that being said, public schools now need to be unshackled from the standardize testing focus and those parents need to be able to decide what measures they will use to measure the instruction that their children are receiving, just like private school parents.

---

What freedom is that? Is it currently illegal to home school or send your kid to a private school? Please send me this law so I can petition with you against such an injustice.

---

Voucher's allow for more people to make choices that are right for their families and kids. That's what I would call "more freedom".

aTmAg said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

twk said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

harge57 said:

---

Antoninus said:

---

simple question.

Let's completely do away with public schooling.

Do you want 10 million people in this state exercising the franchise, with no education whatsoever. Unable to read. Unable to write. Unable to even remotely understand the issues.

Do you want those people selecting the members of the legislator and executive branch?

if you answered "no," then even you acknowledge that education is, at least in part, a "public ghod."

---

That is what is coming out of the public schools today.

---

No it's not. Not even close. Every college and university in the state is filled with public school graduates. The number of failing schools is a fraction of the total, but voucher proponents like to latch on to those few schools like they are the rule, when they are very much the exception.

---

Rightly so. As a voucher program would allow kids doomed to those few school to leave and go to better schools. It's ridiculous that you want to basically impose on them a life sentence of poverty because they live closer to a crappy school.

---

If vouchers were limited to kids trapped in attendance zones of failing schools, or means tested for lower income (lower middle class and poor), then that might happen. But, if we do across the board vouchers, available to everyone, we are just going to see most of that money eaten up by private school tuition inflation.

---

First of all, that statement implies that you don't understand inflation. There is no such thing as "food inflation" or "tuition inflation". Inflation is an undue expansion of the money supply that usually increases ALL prices. It's NOT merely "prices going up".

Secondly, current private schools do not try to compete against "free" public schools. They, by definition, are getting undercut and therefore would go out of business. So they focus on rich clientele that can afford to pay taxes AND pay a tuition on top. They are competing with each other, not public schools.

But after a voucher system, that would change. Afterwards, the demand for inexpensive private education would go WAY up, and new private schools would pop up to fill the demand. They would need to compete just like grocery stores and auto dealers. Depending on if taxpayers can keep the surplus, schools will either charge the voucher amount or less. Just like what occurs everywhere else in the market.

---

Just like what easy subsidized loans has done for the cost of college tuition

---

Which is why pure privatization is the best of all worlds. Vouchers are merely an improvement over our current public system (which is a low bar).

---

Nope. Its a system that reduces accountability to the tax payer and therefore will be ripe with fraud.

---

Are you kidding? It INCREASES accountability. Is your grocery store fraudulent? No? How can that be? They don't have a "grocery store board" nor get money from the state?!? It's because people being able to shop elsewhere provides immediate and concrete consequences.


The things that are corrupt and fraudulent are the things that heavily involve government. Bernie Madoff defrauded people for decades thanks to the SEC. The original Ponzi lasted only a year thanks to the free market.

---

Ever heard of the FDA? USDA?

This system gives parents a check to spend money at whatever school they choose and provides little to no oversight or quality control of that education. You are depending on parents to self-report their crimes. Its fine with me as the day this passes, I will open a school that graduates/passes everyone and is nothing more than a babysitting service all the while I won't have to worry about any standardized tests. I will have plenty of demand for my service and plenty of government funds to keep my doors open.

And Texas is Constitutionally responsible to "establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools" That was the Texas vision and written into law. February 15, 1876

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I don't understand how people don't realize that more freedom is always better, no matter how much it costs.

With that being said, public schools now need to be unshackled from the standardize testing focus and those parents need to be able to decide what measures they will use to measure the instruction that their children are receiving, just like private school parents.

---

Without a standardized system, what determines if a school is succeeding or failing?

And you would go out of business really quick. Not sure what the issue is here. The market corrects for bad businesses that do not provide a viable product.

.Not sure I agree. Maybe in a VERY general perspective, but the public ed systems (at least some of the mid-larger ones) include amazing STEM academies, TAG schools, CTE campuses, performing arts magnets, law magnets etc. That's an evolution to the positive. Many of these public schools are some of the top in the country. Aside from campuses, the special ed programming and GT / advanced learning pathways are also very innovative and successful.

Phatbob said:

---

And you would go out of business really quick. Not sure what the issue is here. The market corrects for bad businesses that do not provide a viable product.

---

You are sadly mistaken. I would probably have to turn people away.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I don't understand how people don't realize that more freedom is always better, no matter how much it costs.

With that being said, public schools now need to be unshackled from the standardize testing focus and those parents need to be able to decide what measures they will use to measure the instruction that their children are receiving, just like private school parents.

---

What freedom is that? Is it currently illegal to home school or send your kid to a private school? Please send me this law so I can petition with you against such an injustice.

---

Voucher's allow for more people to make choices that are right for their families and kids. That's what I would call "more freedom".

---

So can I use my voucher to send little Muhammed to the Allahu Akbar Pyrotechnic Charter School?

Burdizzo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I don't understand how people don't realize that more freedom is always better, no matter how much it costs.

With that being said, public schools now need to be unshackled from the standardize testing focus and those parents need to be able to decide what measures they will use to measure the instruction that their children are receiving, just like private school parents.

---

What freedom is that? Is it currently illegal to home school or send your kid to a private school? Please send me this law so I can petition with you against such an injustice.

---

Voucher's allow for more people to make choices that are right for their families and kids. That's what I would call "more freedom".

---

So can I use my voucher to send little Muhammed to the Allahu Akbar Pyrotechnic Charter School?

---

Absolutely. Minnesota is going to be lit

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Looking forward to how you keep rural schools funded when one of your primary mechanisms is still Robin Hood.

---

nothing will change how good rural school are funded.

if they are good schools and people like them, why would there be a mass exodus of kids leaving?

and anyone whose school is supported by robin hood should be a little embarrassed.
. . .

---

Maybe it's my search skills, but I couldn't find a list of school districts receiving recapture funds through Robinhood - although maybe the state doesn't publish that since it could be construed as a shame list.

Here's the list of the 150+ school districts that were subject to recapture in 2021-22 and the amounts "recaptured" from them:

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.txsc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/2022-Total-Recapture-per-District-by-Amount.pdf

AISD at just under $800 million.
HISD at just over $300 million.
Highland Park ISD and Eanes ISD - both with only one high school - over $100 million each.

My kids will be off to college and out of private school in a couple of years, so the state needs to get on the ball.

Burdizzo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I don't understand how people don't realize that more freedom is always better, no matter how much it costs.

With that being said, public schools now need to be unshackled from the standardize testing focus and those parents need to be able to decide what measures they will use to measure the instruction that their children are receiving, just like private school parents.

---

What freedom is that? Is it currently illegal to home school or send your kid to a private school? Please send me this law so I can petition with you against such an injustice.

---

Voucher's allow for more people to make choices that are right for their families and kids. That's what I would call "more freedom".

---

So can I use my voucher to send little Muhammed to the Allahu Akbar Pyrotechnic Charter School?

---

Yep.

cevans_40 said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

And you would go out of business really quick. Not sure what the issue is here. The market corrects for bad businesses that do not provide a viable product.

---

You are sadly mistaken. I would probably have to turn people away.

---

That's... what...? No, you can't just say you'd put crap out as an educational option and assume that people who, by the very nature of the market would be driven by people looking to educate their kids, would be just buy your services. That makes absolutely no sense.

It's like saying you could crap on a plate and have to turn people away from your restaurant.

Burdizzo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I don't understand how people don't realize that more freedom is always better, no matter how much it costs.

With that being said, public schools now need to be unshackled from the standardize testing focus and those parents need to be able to decide what measures they will use to measure the instruction that their children are receiving, just like private school parents.

---

Without a standardized system, what determines if a school is succeeding or failing?

---

How do you know if a private school is failing or succeeding?

I frequently ask which admins they would cut. Our district has about 2% of labor cost (total labor cost is 80% of budget) going to central admin. People would be VERY suprised at how many of these added roles in the last 30 years are a direct result, and requirement (either enumerated or just required by workload addition) of both state and federal layers of requirements, data collecting, reporting etc. Special ed, anything to do with federal funds, etc. Reduce the state and federal requirements and regulation and some of those jobs can go away.

Faustus said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Looking forward to how you keep rural schools funded when one of your primary mechanisms is still Robin Hood.

---

nothing will change how good rural school are funded.

if they are good schools and people like them, why would there be a mass exodus of kids leaving?

and anyone whose school is supported by robin hood should be a little embarrassed.
. . .

---

Maybe it's my search skills, but I couldn't find a list of school districts receiving recapture funds through Robinhood - although maybe the state doesn't publish that since it could be construed as a shame list.

Here's the list of the 150+ school districts that were subject to recapture in 2021-22 and the amounts "recaptured" from them:

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.txsc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/2022-Total-Recapture-per-District-by-Amount.pdf

AISD at just under $800 million.
HISD at just over $300 million.
Highland Park ISD and Eanes ISD - both with only one high school - over $100 million each.

My kids will be off to college and out of private school in a couple of years, so the state needs to get on the ball.

---

Here you go

https://www.txsc.org/texas-school-finance-faqs/

oldag941 said:

---

I frequently ask which admins they would cut. Our district has about 2% of labor cost (total labor cost is 80% of budget) going to central admin. People would be VERY suprised at how many of these added roles in the last 30 years are a direct result, and requirement (either enumerated or just required by workload addition) of both state and federal layers of requirements, data collecting, reporting etc. Special ed, anything to do with federal funds, etc. Reduce the state and federal requirements and regulation and some of those jobs can go away.

---

Central Admin can be bloated but I don't think it's anywhere the level that many on here say it is. There are a lot of federal and state laws that must be followed and monitored.