More Government Spending Does Not Buy Results In Education Or Poverty Reduction

/

Here in New York, we love to feel good about ourselves for our compassion for the less well off. Yes, we pay higher taxes than they do in other places, but for that we get a much higher level of social services to lift up the poor and the downtrodden. Or at least, that’s the narrative.

I first covered this subject back in the very early days of this blog, on November 13, 2012, in a post titled “Why New York City Is A High Tax Jurisdiction.” That post pointed out that in fact the differential in public spending (and therefore taxes) between New York City and other jurisdictions could be found almost entirely in three things, none of which provided any measurable improvements in life quality to the poor and the downtrodden. The three areas were (1) overspending on public pensions, brought about by early retirement ages that enable New York City workers to have 25 to 40 years of post-retirement leisure at taxpayer expense, (2) overspending on K-12 education, brought about by paying about double the number of workers as other jurisdictions use to do the same work, and (3) overspending on Medicaid, brought about by adding every possible bell and whistle to the program without improving health outcomes in any measurable way.

For example, I had this to say about New York City spending on K-12 education:

According to census bureau figures cited here, New York City school spending was about $19,000 per student in 2009.  That's about double the nationwide average of $10,615 per student cited here for 2010.  What do we get for double the cost per student?  Worse test scores than the national average. . . .   With over a million school children, the extra $8000 per student is an $8 billion budget item.

Somehow, in seven plus intervening years, almost no one seems to be paying attention to how New York just throws money away to achieve worse results than those achieved elsewhere for half the money. But over the weekend, the New York Post made an exception, publishing an op-ed by a guy named Ryan Fazio titled “NY and CA spend billions more in taxes than TX and FL — and get worse results.” Fazio updates many of the statistics that I had collected for the 2012 post.

Let’s focus on spending for K-12 education and for anti-poverty programs. Fazio provides the following chart of K-12 education spending and results for four states: New York, California, Texas and Florida:

K-12 education spending.jpg

New York’s spending is wildly out of line even compared to California. Meanwhile, the test results are barely distinguishable from state to state. (These results are from what is called the National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, sometimes called “the nation’s report card.”) Indeed, lowest-spending Florida beat New York, if only slightly, in three of four categories — 4th grade math, 8th grade reading, and 8th grade math — while spending far less than half the amount per student. Meanwhile, low spending Florida actually is a national leader in test results for minority students:

Minority students in Florida, meanwhile, tested among the highest in the nation across the board, with black students overall scoring 240 out of 500 on a simple average of the four tests (compared to 234 nationally) and Hispanic students scoring 250 (compared to 240 nationally). . . . In New York, minority students scored just above or around the national average (236 for blacks, 237 for Hispanics). . . .

In the anti-poverty department, Fazio has the following annual spending figures for the four states for 2017: New York approximately $21,000 per poor person (PPP), California $19,000 PPP, Florida $9,000 PPP, and Texas $8,000 PPP. Fazio then says that “The official poverty rate, which measures only market income, remains slightly higher in absolute terms in Texas and Florida than New York and California.” But, given the vast spending differential, the comparison looks hugely unfavorable for New York compared to Florida:

In short, we spend vastly more, and get exactly nothing to show for it.

To get an inside look at the official New York mentality, check out this piece from the Daily News for January 24, headline “Teachers unions protest state education funding shortfalls at NYC schools.” The subject is the big push being promoted by the New York teachers’ union to counter what they call the “shortfall” in state funding of New York City schools:

The city and state teachers unions visited two city schools Friday morning to highlight what they called chronic holes in school budgets resulting from annual shortfalls in state education spending. . . . This year’s initial budget proposal was no different, with New York falling more than a billion short of what the state’s Board of Regents called for, despite a suggested increase of more than $800 million from last year’s total. But union officials said the yearly funding squeeze has left schools like I.S. 81 in the Bronx unable to fund important initiatives like small-group instruction. “We hear every year that there is a budget gap, but the state can’t close it on the backs of the New York City’s middle-class families and students through more underfunding of our education system," said Andy Pallotta, the president of the state teachers union. “Fully funding our students’ futures can’t wait any longer.”

With New York’s wild over-spending on K-12 education, how could they possibly be protesting “shortfalls”? Got me. The Daily News piece contains no mention whatsoever that other states spend on average less than half of what New York City spends on K-12 education, nor that Florida spends well less than half and actually achieves superior results both overall and for minority students. Really, it’s best that New Yorkers be left ignorant about such issues.