Perspective on state’s education debate

I don’t usually write because I need to hear from you more than you need to hear from me, and when I have something to say my hope is that you haven’t tired of me, and that you’ll give my words due consideration. I write today to provide another perspective on the house vs. senate education debate. I wish that things had been handled differently, but they haven’t. I’ll say this with all due respect, but anyone who thinks that one house of the legislature is going to tell the other one “your input is not welcome” is dead wrong. If that shoe fits, kick it off! There are fortyeight people, backed up by a staff, paid by our tax dollars – whose job it is to make the best decision possible on legislation, especially when that legislation involves spending $800 million of someone else’s money!

Our house of representatives has 101 smart people in it. We send legislation from the senate to them and duty commands that they do their due diligence before they pass our measures. Sometimes, changes aren’t required, but sometimes they are, and if all one house is for the other is a rubber stamp then we need to shut one of them down and save some money. We are SUPOOSED to deliberate! Our laws are so numerous that I often feel like the risk is higher of passing a bad one than it is of NOT passing a good one.

You’ve heard me say from day one that my goal is to get as many of us involved in OUR government. I say this even still, and most of you are not paid to participate. Incidentally, participation does not always equal agreement. Well, after the abundance of anti-senate commentaries, it seems as though there’s a well-connected contingent who would rather the senate NOT participate. What nonsense.

Every dollar the senate allocated for public education (more than 500 million of them-in one bill, that is) goes directly to the teacher OR is tied directly to the child. There is no “Oklahoma Student Fund,” which is a discretionary fund for the superintendents. No thank you, we’ve seen that before. You’ve heard that the senate plan doesn’t spend money in rural schools. It does, it just does it primarily in the form of teacher salaries.

The best way to help rural schools by helping rural teachers – with a raise.

I’ve received a slew of e-mails referencing “critical education funding.” Those words mean different things to different people. To millions of us, “critical education funding” means a teacher salary increase. It does NOT mean ANOTHER assistant principal, ANOTHER assistant superintendent, ANOTHER program administrator, or ANOTHER director – all of whom will be paid MORE than the teacher who has six different preparations in a seven-period day.

The Senate plan includes $4,000 pay raise for starting teachers with a raise every five years culminating in an $8,000 pay raise for teachers who’ve spent 20 or more years of their lives educating Oklahoma’s children. This proposal makes perfect sense! I flew professionally for two decades, and I can assure you that in almost all cases the company REALLY wants to keep the 20-year pilot on staff. Why would education be different? Furthermore, the senate plan includes a $3,000 stipend for support staff, most of whom are woefully underpaid and without whom you don’t have school. I’ll close with saying that I hope the media, which has been eager to bash the senate plan, will be equally as eager to listen to what the senate has to say, and to present that plan accurately.

Ultimately, what do YOU say? After all, we work for you, and it’s YOUR money. God bless you, God bless Oklahoma, and God bless America.

Warren Hamilton (R-McCurtain) is a District 7 state senator for Oklahoma.