When elected officials develop a budget, they sometimes make an analogy to a family creating its budget. Unfortunately, elected officials often refer to only one part of the analogy — cutting spending.
Actually, the analogy includes three components: quality, raising revenue, cutting spending.
Generally, the first step when a family plans a budget is to decide on the quality level of future purchases. For example, if a family wants to buy an expensive, high-quality sofa, they understand that they will need to raise revenue and/or cut spending elsewhere.
While elected officials tend to focus on cutting spending, families do sometimes choose to raise revenue. A non-working member may get a job, or a working member may get a second job or a better paying job.
In the context of the McCleary decision, it is important to recognize that we currently have a good school system. However, a truly high-quality system that serves the needs of all students (e.g., students with challenges resulting from poverty) will be more expensive. Effective decisions about funding education will only happen if our elected officials include all three parts of this “family budget” analogy in their thinking.
