Governor's Budget would Reduce Opportunity for Students from Preschool to University

The table below lists key budget cuts in education from the Governor's proposal released last week. (Click on it for a larger version.)

New Census Poverty Data Reveal Deep Disparities throughout Washington

According to new data from the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly 730,000 Washingtonians lived in poverty in 2008. In total, 11.3 percent of the state’s population had incomes at or below the federal poverty line last year. The overall poverty rate in 2008 remained statistically unchanged from the previous year, signaling that the data does not capture the full impact of the recession. Data for 2009, when the economic crisis worsened dramatically, is likely to show a disturbing increase in the number of Washingtonians living in poverty.

Poverty among Minority Communities in Washington

Poverty rates varied significantly across communities in Washington, with certain minority groups and counties experiencing higher rates compared to the general population. For example, last year members of Native American, African American, and Hispanic households were more than twice as likely to be impoverished compared to the population as a whole. The graph below shows that the poverty rate among Native American households stood at 26.1 percent. Similarly, African American and Hispanic communities experienced poverty rates of 22.9 and 23.5 percent, respectively. At the same time, Asian (9.2 percent) and White (9.9 percent) households were significantly less likely to be in poverty compared with the general population.



Poverty by County

Poverty rates in 2008 also varied significantly among Washington’s 19 largest counties – those with populations above 65,000. Compared to the statewide average, sparsely-populated counties tended to see higher poverty rates. The graph below shows that the poverty rate was highest in Franklin County (20.5 percent), followed by the counties of Yakima (18.3 percent), Grant (15.7 percent), Whatcom (14.7 percent), and Spokane (13.7 percent).



Conversely, residents in the counties of Snohomish (7.9 percent), Island (8.0 percent), King (9.1 percent), and Clark (9.6 percent) were significantly less likely to live in poverty compared with the statewide general population.

The poverty rate was not significantly different from the state average in Benton, Chelan, Clallam, Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Kitsap, Lewis, Pierce, Skagit, and Thurston counties.

2009 Data Likely to Be Much Worse

Today’s 2008 data does not capture the full impact of the current recession. While the unemployment rate in Washington averaged 5.3 percent in 2008, that number jumped to 9.2 percent by August 2009. Overall, 66,000 jobs have been lost in Washington since the start of 2009. Nationwide, the recession has taken a greater toll on communities of color. In the U.S., the unemployment rate among white workers was 8.9 percent in August; but among African American and Hispanic workers, the rates was 15.1 and 13.0 percent, respectively.

Toxic Twins Part 4: TABOR Did Nothing for Colorado's Economy

Supporters of initiatives like I-1033 argue that rigid public spending limits can be a boon for state economies. In Colorado, however, TABOR had no positive impact on the state’s economy. In fact, after enacting TABOR, employment growth in Colorado slowed relative to other states in the region. Worse, following the last recession employment recovered much more slowly in Colorado compared to neighboring states.

The table below shows that employment in Colorado grew at an annual rate of only 0.2 percent between 2001 and 2006. At the same time, the median annual growth rate among the remaining seven states in the mountain region was 9.3 percent.

For more information on how TABOR adversely impacted core public services in Colorado, see our recent report, Toxic Twins: I-1033 Mirrors Colorado’s Corrosive TABOR, coauthored with the Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute.

Editor's note: This is the final post in series about TABOR's adverse effects on essential public services in Colorado. Previous posts in the series detail the sharp declines in education funding, health care services, and transportation infrastructure that ocurred in Colorado under TABOR.

Toxic Twins Part 3: Colorado’s Transportation Infrastructure Deteriorated Under TABOR

I-1033 will lead to severe deterioration in public structures that are vital to Washington’s future prosperity, much like what happened with Colorado’s TABOR amendment. Our latest report, coauthored with the Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute, details TABOR’s disastrous impact on education, health care, communities, and transportation. This post highlights some of our findings on the serious erosion in Colorado’s transportation infrastructure as a result of budget shortfalls created by TABOR.

Under TABOR, Colorado was unable to make adequate investments in roads, bridges, and other forms of transportation infrastructure. In 2007, the state ranked 48th among all 50 states in spending as a share of personal income on highways. The result:

• About 40 percent of the state’s roads were rated poor in 2006.
  


• Over 100 bridges in Colorado have been found to be structurally deficient.
  


• Congestion on Interstate 70 has been estimated to cost Colorado’s economy about $839 million each year.
  

To learn about TABOR’s adverse effects on other core public services – such as health care and education -- click here to view the entire report.

Editor’s note: This is the third post in a series about the sharp declines in core public services that occurred in Colorado as a result of the TABOR amendment. The next and final post in this series will discuss economic growth in Colorado during the period in which TABOR was active (1992-2005).

Toxic Twins Part 2: TABOR Caused Sharp Declines in Health Care Funding

Our latest report, co-authored with the Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute, details TABOR’s impact on education, communities, health, and transportation infrastructure. This post highlights some of our findings regarding TABOR’s disastrous effects on public health programs in Colorado.

In Colorado, TABOR greatly compromised a critical part of the public safety net – health care services. From 1992 to 2005, TABOR-induced shortfalls forced deep cuts in health care services throughout Colorado. The result:

• Between 1992 and 2004, the share of lower income children with no health insurance doubled from 16 to 32 percent, making Colorado the worst in the nation by this measure.
  


• In 2002, the state could no longer afford basic vaccines and had to suspend the requirement that all students be vaccinated against common diseases such as tetanus, diphtheria, and whooping cough.
  


• In 2003, budget restrictions forced the state to temporarily stop the enrollment of children in the children’s health program and suspend the prenatal program.

TABOR had numerous adverse effects on health care and other public services in Colorado. For more detail, please click here to view the entire report.

Editor’s note: This post is the second in a series about the sharp declines in Colorado’s core public services that occurred as a result of the TABOR amendment. There will be two future posts: The next post will cover TABOR’s effects on transportation infrastructure; the final post will discuss economic growth in Colorado during the period in which TABOR was active.

Toxic Twins: I-1033 Mirrors Colorado's Corrosive TABOR

To understand how Tim Eyman’s I-1033 would undermine public investments and our economic recovery in Washington, look no further than Colorado. Our new report, co-authored with the Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute finds that Colorado's TABOR amendment greatly undermined that state's capacity to maintain core public services such as education and health care. Initiative 1033, which will appear on the ballot in Washington State this November, possesses the same fundamental characteristics as TABOR and would have a similar impact on Washington.

Editor's note: This post is the first in a series about TABOR's impact on services and public priorities in Colorado. Future posts in this series will detail TABOR's impact on other crucial services -- including health care and transportation infrastructure. The final post in this series will discuss economic growth in Colorado while TABOR was in effect.

To view the full report click here.

TABOR's Impact on Education and Opportunity

Under TABOR, funding on K-12 and higher education declined substantially, leading to harmful budget cuts throughout the education system. As a result:

• The state fell from 35th to 49th in the nation in spending on K-12 education as a share of personal income.


• Average teacher’s salaries fell from 30th to 50th in the nation compared to pay in other occupations.


• Higher education spending per resident student declined by 31 percent after adjusting for inflation, from $5,188 to $3,564.

The shortfalls created by TABOR adversely impacted Colorado’s education system in numerous other ways. For more information on how TABOR led to steep declines in education funding throughout Colorado, view the entire report by clicking here.

BPC Report Shows I-1033 Undermines Public Priorities

A new paper by the Budget & Policy Center finds Initiative 1033 would impose strict spending limits on state and local governments resulting in sharp reductions in public investments in education, community development, health care, and economic security. By restricting resources, I-1033 would dramatically weaken the state's ability to fund important public priorities and would diminish the quality of life for all Washingtonians.

I-1033 would:

• Sharply limit public investments over time



• Lock in the current budget cuts and increase the deficit



• Exacerbate the effects of economic downturns



• Be fiscally irresponsible

To read the entire paper, click here.

The Final Budget Cuts, Part Two: Education and Opportunity

Broadly available education and opportunity is fundamental to the future of our state. Education opens doors to better job opportunities, higher wages, and greater job security. Success in today’s competitive, knowledge-based economy will require more than a basic education. Our children need schools that provide sophisticated, high-quality learning environments so they can graduate with the skills and knowledge to succeed in the global marketplace.

This year's budget process resulted in significant budget cuts in education, as shown in the table below (click on it to see a larger version).


In K-12 education, the largest cuts were to two voter-approved initiatives (I-728 and I-732). I-728 called for funding to school districts for specific quality improvements such as class size reduction, extended learning, early learning, or professional development. I-732 called for a cost of living adjustment for education professionals. This cut will diminish the state's ability to attract and retain high quality teachers, a proven factor in improving student performance in school. A number of other education reform efforts were also suspended, eliminated, or reduced.

Higher education will also suffer under the new budget. Despite federal stimulus efforts, community and technical colleges will have $226 million less in state support during a time when the need for workforce training is growing dramatically. In addition, the university system will receive $384 million less in state support. Tuition will rise and services will be cut as a result.

These cuts will harm the long-term economic competitiveness of our state as well as the availability of quality education for all of Washington's students.

* Note: Federal stimulus funds not directly affecting the near-general fund balance are not included.

The State Budget and Federal Recovery Funds

This post contains corrected numbers.

Deep cuts in state budgets during a recession can have a significant harmful impact on the economy. In recognition of this fact, the federal government passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), which includes significant fiscal aid to Washington State.

The recently enacted state budget relies heavily on ARRA funding to partially offset the effects of cuts in health care, education, public safety, and economic security.*

Health care**
The largest component of federal stimulus funding is an increase in federal funding for Medicaid, the primary source of public health insurance for lower income families. The increased federal contribution allows lawmakers to cut state spending on health care without reducing total funding for the program. Washington State is expected to receive $1.8 billion in Medicaid funding from ARRA.

However, the state budget does not take full advantage of ARRA funding for Medicaid because it cuts too deeply. Examples of cuts that cause a loss of federal money include:

• A $33 million cut in reimbursements for providers of Medicaid and SCHIP managed care services will result in a loss of $44 million in federal money, more than doubling the total size of the cut.
• A $38 million cut in nursing home rates results in a loss of $56 million in federal funds.
  
• An $18 million cut in reimbursements for pediatric services results in a $25 million loss in federal funds.

Education
Another component of ARRA is the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund, which provides flexible funding for education and other programs. In education, this fund is being used to partially offset devastating cuts in three areas:

• $176 million for levy equalization, which assists property-poor school districts that have difficulty raising sufficient property taxes to fund local schools.
• $562 million for a voter-approved (I-728) initiative that provides funding to school districts for quality improvements such as class size reduction, extended learning, early learning, or professional development.
• $81 million for higher education institutions.

Public Safety
The remainder of the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund ($182 million) is appropriated to the Department of Corrections to offset cuts in public safety and rehabilitation programs.

Economic Security
ARRA also expands federal support for the state’s WorkFirst program, which provides temporary assistance to families with very low incomes. During the recession, the need for WorkFirst has grown significantly. TANF contingency funds ($193 million) is intended to help pay for the increased need. Another $12 million is made available to assist in the state’s child support collection program.

* ARRA also included significant fiscal relief that does not directly impact the near-general fund budget.
** Separately from ARRA, Washington State will benefit from the reauthorization of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which enhances federal support of state efforts to insure lower income children.

Series on the State Budget Crisis: Part Three, States Raise Taxes

States are struggling to balance their budgets during the current economic recession. As we discussed in yesterday's post, many have opted to cut spending as a result. But given the sheer size of state budget shortfalls, cuts alone will not be enough to solve the problem without long term harm to essential public services.

According to a new report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, instead of a cuts-only approach, states are increasingly employing a combination of budget solutions that involves drawing down reserve funds, maximizing the use of federal dollars, and raising taxes.

As the map below shows, so far in 2009 sixteen states have raised new revenue through tax measures. Another 17 are giving serious consideration to doing so. These initiatives are in addition to revenue actions taken in states in late 2007 and 2008 as the recession’s effects began to be felt.


In addition, the report finds that states that raised taxes during the 2001 recession were just as fast to rebound from the recession as states that did not, even though they were typically climbing out of a deeper hole.

Series on the State Budget Crisis: Part Two, Cuts to Vital Programs

As we mentioned in yesterday's post, almost every state in the nation is facing budget deficits because of the weakened economy. The federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act includes roughly $140 billion in fiscal relief for state governments. But the recovery act funding will only be enough to fill about 40 percent of the $350 billion to $370 billion shortfall that states will face in the next two-and-a-half years.

According to a new report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, at least 36 states have addressed their shortfalls by cutting spending. As the report notes, cuts in state budgets worsen the recession by reducing overall economic activity. Reductions in state spending translate into fewer state jobs, canceled contracts with vendors, lower payments to businesses and nonprofits that provide services, and cuts in benefit payments to individuals.

Importantly, cuts in state spending also particularly hurt the most vulnerable residents in the state. The report outlines five areas in which states have made cuts. Washington State has made cuts in all of these areas.

• Public health programs: At least 19 states have implemented cuts that will affect low-income children’s or families’ eligibility for health insurance or reduce their access to health care services.


• Programs for the elderly and disabled: At least 21 states plus the District of Columbia are cutting medical, rehabilitative, home care, or other services needed by low-income people who are elderly or have disabilities, or significantly increasing the cost of these services.


• K-12 education: At least 22 states are cutting K-12 and early education.


• Colleges and universities: At least 30 states have implemented cuts to public colleges and universities, resulting in cuts in faculty and staff and tuition increases of 4 percent to 15 percent.


• State workforces: At least 39 states and the District of Columbia have made cuts affecting their state workforces. At least 27 states and the District of Columbia have instituted hiring freezes, 10 have announced lay-offs, 15 have reduced state worker wages, and several have delayed scheduled pay increases (including cost of living adjustments).

Click on the chart to see a state-by-state view of cuts in these budget areas.


Tomorrow we will post on states that have raised taxes to help close budget deficits during the current recession.

Series on the State Budget Crisis: Part One, The Big Picture

Most states, including Washington State, are facing deep fiscal troubles. A new series of reports from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities analyzes the effects of the state fiscal crisis and how states are responding. Today’s schmudget post looks at the overall state deficit picture, tomorrow’s will look at budget cuts states are undertaking, and Friday’s will look at states that are considering tax increases.

Washington is not alone among states that are in deep fiscal trouble. According to a new report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, at least 47 states are dealing with significant budget shortfalls. Combined budget gaps for the remainder of this fiscal year and state fiscal years 2010 and 2011 are estimated to total more than $350 billion, the report says.

As the graph below shows, in fiscal year 2009, total state budget shortfalls amount to $106 billion. The estimated budget deficits going forward show the problem is expected to get worse. The CBPP estimates that FY 2010 deficits will amount to $145 billion and FY 2011 deficits will be $180 billion.


According to this article in the TNT, Washington State Governor Gregoire told the paper's editorial board that she anticipates state revenue forecasts will be down in June and September as revenue collections continue to fall.

Here in Washington, as in many other states, the problem of inadequate revenue to meet the needs of normal growth in state spending is not going away. An honest conversation about how to move forward and preserve important progress that has been made through state investments in health care, education, communities, and economic security must continue.

Tomorrow we will look at the deep cuts in state investments that have occurred throughout the country.

Spokesman-Review Editorial Debunks Myths on Taxes and Spending

The legislative session officially ended yesterday. State lawmakers settled on an all-cuts budget that will cut $4 billion out of state investments in education, health care, community infrastructure, and economic security.

Using data from the Budget & Policy Center, Gary Crooks from the Spokesman-Review’s editorial board wrote a nice piece pointing out some of the core problems with our state’s fiscal structure. He also called for action, stating:

They better get started, because the amounts raised by the current taxes clearly do not match the needs of the state. And as Dr. Phil might ask lawmakers, “How’s that workin’ for ya?”

Seattle Times Op-ed on State Budget Decisions

The legislative session will be wrapping up in the next two weeks and state lawmakers still have important decisions left to make on the budget. Our Executive Director Remy Trupin published an op-ed yesterday on the Seattle Times web site calling for a more inclusive approach to state budget decisions.

In the article, he writes:

"The quality of life we enjoy in Washington is directly related to the investments we have made over decades in our public systems. Our hope for the future relies on the choices state lawmakers are making today. The economic crisis at hand is very serious and will require thoughtful consideration, tough decisions and leadership. But choosing between cutting one essential investment and another is harmful at best and devastating to our economic growth at worst.

Instead we must consider all the options available to us, including finding new revenue. It's essential to protect the gains we have made in our public system and keep them functioning well, now and into the future."

To read the full op-ed, click here.

Accessing Federal Stimulus Money for Unemployment Insurance

Like many states in the nation, Washington is facing the problem of growing unemployment. Over the next year, the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council has projected that the state unemployment rate will rise to ten percent, the highest level since 1983.

As the economy falters, the need for a robust state Unemployment Insurance (UI) program grows. In recognition of this need, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act includes provisions (a.k.a. the UI Modernization Act) to update and improve state UI programs. Here in Washington, the new federal dollars could bring in over $150 million, money that would provide a direct boost to the state economy.

States have to meet certain criteria in their UI policies in order to draw down the extra federal money. Currently, Washington is eligible for one-third of its total allotment. In order to access the rest of the money – nearly $100 million - Washington must make two meaningful improvements to our state policies.

The Legislature is already moving to adopt one reform – allowing unemployment benefits for workers who must leave their job in order to follow a spouse who has obtained new employment. There are two options being considered in the Legislature for the other policy change that would allow us to receive the remaining federal funding. They are:

- Expanding eligibility for people who can only work part-time hours
- Extending benefits to all UI recipients who participate in worker training programs

Part-time
Washington currently allows eligibility for some unemployed workers who are seeking part-time work, but the state’s policies are too restrictive to meet the federal criteria. As it stands, Washington only allows benefits for workers seeking part-time work if they were previously employed for 17 hours or less per week. Laid-off workers that were previously employed for more than 17 hours per week must be available to work full-time hours or lose their UI eligibility.

In order to qualify under the federal criteria, Washington would need to change its part-time eligibility rules to include workers who seek employment of 20 hours per week or more. This change is expected to particularly benefit lower income and women workers.

Worker Training
The extension of UI benefits while recipients are in worker training programs is important because it enables people to develop skills in areas of employment with high demand and it can set them on a path for higher wages in the future. The state has already committed to some policy changes regarding extended benefits for UI recipients in worker training programs. As of September 2009, eligibility will not only include those who work in declining occupations, but also honorably discharged military veterans, people who have been injured and can no longer do their previous work, and lower income workers.

But in order to meet the federal criteria, our program will have to be even more inclusive and easier for UI recipients to navigate. The changes would mean many more unemployed workers would have access to twice the number of weeks of benefits – up to a year as long as they remain in a training program.

Budget Cuts Hurt Working Families

With unemployment expected to rise to record levels, opportunities to achieve economic security through employment are diminishing. Families who are struggling during these difficult times need state investments in health, education, and economic security more than ever. The proposed budget cuts in the Governor's and Legislature's budgets will come as a double-hit to working families who may no longer have market-based resources to rely on. Two examples are health care and education:

• Health Care - Job loss is often accompanied by loss of health insurance. And during recessions, employers may eliminate coverage in order to save costs. Losing health insurance could have a devastating impact on the health and finances of working families. The proposed state budget cuts would remove access to affordable health insurance for many Washingtonians. For example, Basic Health, a state-funded health insurance program that provides coverage to lower income families is facing cuts that would eliminate coverage for 40,000 people.

• Education -Rising unemployment often increases the demand for workforce training and higher education. These programs have long term benefits for workers and the economy. Even one year of higher education can increase an individual’s lifetime salary and help workers meet the needs of employers when the economy recovers. But the proposed deep cuts to funding for community colleges and public universities will reverse this trend by reducing access to higher education for students and workers in the state.
  

Maintaining Our Priorities
Deep budget cuts are not the only solution to our state's fiscal problems. Washington lawmakers should consider raising revenue to avoid dismantling our important public infrastructures and use the Working Families Tax Rebate to offset the disproportionate impact a regressive tax increase would have on lower income families.

False Choices on GA-U

The proposed budget cuts in state funding for public schools are indeed "unnecessarily deep." That's a quote from today's Seattle Times editorial. Unfortunately, the rest of the editorial argues in favor of school funding at the expense of the General Assistance-Unemployable program, which provides medical care and a bare standard of living for adults with disabilities who, as the Times acknowledges, have no other options.

Like our support for public education, our state's GA-U program reflects our priorities and values. The Seattle Times says that we currently invest in the program because Washington is "a humane state." But we can't consider ourselves humane if we provide economic security to our most vulnerable during good times and leave them with no support when times are bad.

There is a better option than pitting the elimination of state funding for school districts against core supports for people in need. These are both important public priorities. It's long past time we had a real public conversation about how to pay for them both.

Education and Opportunity in the Senate Budget

Every child, teenager, and adult deserves access to a high quality education that opens doors to new opportunities and prosperity. In recent years the state has made significant investments in ensuring an equitable education system in our state. These investments can be seen in early childhood education, elementary and high schools, and in our institutions of higher learning.

In the area of Education and Opportunity, the Senate budget:

Early learning

• State pre-school program slots (Early Childhood and Assistance Program) are reduced by 2 percent where programs are co-located with Head Start, potentially achieving a no-net reduction in pre-school slots statewide by taking advantage of new federal Head Start funding.
• Other initiatives that improve the quality of care are eliminated including referral for child care, a wage ladder for child care workers, and supports for families, parents and caregivers.

K-12 education

• A 93 percent cut to the voter-approved program that funds school district class size reduction, extended learning, early learning, and professional development.
• A 75 percent cut in the funds that are used to help equalize school funding across wealthier and poorer districts.
• A reduction in instructional staff for students in grades k-4
• A suspension in voter-approved cost of living adjustment for education professionals.

Higher education and workforce development

• Community and technical colleges see a 9% reduction in funding which would require tuition increases of 10% without other revenue
• Public universities see a 19% reduction in funding which would require tuition increases of 14% without other revenue

Discussing the Budget on TVW

I went on the TVW show "The Impact" yesterday to discuss the state budget. My dance partner on the show was Jason Mercier from the Washington Policy Center. This is the type of reasonable discussion we should be having about the state budget.

Enjoy.

"A Shared Vision" Part One: Education and Opportunity

Broadly available education and opportunity is fundamental to the future of our state. Education opens doors to better job opportunities, higher wages, and greater job security. Success in today’s competitive, knowledge-based economy will require more than a basic education. Our children need schools that provide sophisticated, high-quality learning environments so they can graduate with the skills and knowledge to succeed in the global marketplace.

Education begins early and continues throughout adulthood. The Budget & Policy Center has identified four research-based goals within this value area so we can begin to measure our progress towards creating a just and equitable state.

- Invest in Early Learning
- Provide a High-Quality Education to All Students
- Prepare All Adults for Meaningful Careers
- Cultivate Opportunities for Higher Education

The state has a constitutional mandate to provide a basic education to all students. Most of the funds in the 2007-09 budget that were allocated to Education and Opportunity went towards the goal of providing a high-quality education to all students. The state’s public universities received the next highest amount, followed by workforce training, and then early childhood education. (see graph)


Research continues to show the importance of early childhood education to student success in later grades. A study from the Washington Learns committee (which was co-chaired by Governor Gregoire) found less than half of kids entering kindergarten in the state are adequately prepared for school. Parents generally pay for preschool and child care, which can equal up to 30 percent of a median family income. State and federal programs are designed to assist lower income families with these costs, but in 2006 funding was insufficient in Washington and 42 percent of eligible families went without services.

A high quality K-12 education system depends on good teachers, well-run schools, and challenging course work. Washington has close to 2,000 National Board certified teachers, a credential which requires educators to show a mastery of their subject matter, work closely with parents, and stay abreast of professional theory. The state provides incentives for teachers to achieve the certification and even more if they choose to teach in an under-resourced school.

The state is also working to improve instruction in math and science. Last school year, only half of seventh graders passed the math section of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) and in 2006, forty-five percent of students who went directly from a state high school to a community or technical college were required to take remedial math classes. In 2008, the State Board of Education approved a plan to increase the math and science requirements for high school graduation to address these concerns.

Completion of one year of post-high school education and a credential can lead to a significant boost in earnings. A recent survey of Washington businesses found that the highest vacancy rates were for jobs that required more than a high school diploma, but less than a baccalaureate degree. One barrier to continuing education for workers is financial limitations. In 2006-07, the state extended “Opportunity Grants” to 843 lower income workers, most of whom were parents. The program was a success – 73 percent of the grantees completed a full year of school and the program was expanded statewide.

Likewise, affordability can be a significant barrier to lower income students who are interested in higher education. In 2007, Washington enacted a new College Bound Scholarship that notifies students in 7th grade from lower income families that the state will pay the full cost of tuition at any public college or university in the state if they pledge to graduate from high school.

Recent state investments in high quality teachers and improving access to worker training programs have resulted in meaningful progress in education and opportunity in our state. We still face challenges in expanding access to early childhood education and ensuring our students are fully prepared to meet the workforce needs of the new economy. These are investments that will have a lasting impact on the future of our state. We cannot allow the fiscal crisis we now face to derail those efforts.