Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.
•••
It's hard to say any one constituency in Minnesota was a "loser" in the distribution of a nearly $18 billion surplus. But one can always make a scorecard, and pundits and politicians are busy doing so. We've seen few arguments that any one institution or one program was underfunded this year, although one can make the case that only half of the special education funding need was met by the 10% increase in K-12 budget. It's an example of an unfunded mandate by the federal government that has required schools to pay for special education when it was the federal government's responsibility.
Still, providing 50% of special education funding from the state should reduce the cost for all schools on special education wherever they are located.
That is an example that can be extended to many programs that saw an increase in funding. And because greater Minnesota has a bigger aging population, more difficulty providing day care and generally lower wages, it benefits across the board on everything from local government aid, new public safety aid and human service funding.
The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce has criticized the 38% growth of state spending and $10 billion in new taxes over four years, but that money goes somewhere, and it mostly goes back to the people in a lot of different ways, just not in big tax rebates.
The investments in child care are estimated to reduce childhood poverty by 33%. But it turns out rural counties have just as much, or more in some cases, childhood poverty than metro areas. Childhood poverty rates in Hennepin (13%) and Ramsey (20%) counties are dwarfed by childhood poverty in Cass (23%) and Hubbard (25%) counties.
Greater Minnesota schools are also more often challenged by funding than metro-area schools as they lose student numbers and population available to fund those schools at a greater rate than in growing metro areas.