California

"Schools rejoiced in November when Proposition 30 passed, putting a stop to massive budget cuts to public schools. But some districts, particularly in higher-income communities, are wondering whether they celebrated prematurely, now that Gov. Jerry Brown has unveiled a funding formula that would give the most money to schools serving the neediest children. Under the governor's plan, to be phased in through 2020, students who are English learners or who qualify for free or reduced-price lunches would bring districts 35 percent more in per-pupil funding than other students. Schools where low-income and non-English-speaking students represent more than half the population would get even more funding on top of the extra 35 percent."

"[T]he system would direct additional resources to the schools and students that need them most. Under the proposal, all school districts and charter schools would receive a base grant for each student they enroll. School districts and charters with students who face greater challenges -- children in foster care, students living in poverty and students still learning English -- would receive additional funds to support these students."

"Providing extra funds for districts with more disadvantaged students is of course a fine thing to do in theory, but don't forget: If one group is to get more of the pie, another group has to get less. So Brown's plan could harm other districts that, although not quite as impoverished, are far from affluent. Such schools are struggling financially, and under Brown's proposal, they would fall even further behind."

"The state offered a one-time chunk of money to counties to purchase fresh fruits and vegetables for low-income seniors instead of using a voucher system that has not worked well in the past."

"Gov. Jerry Brown will give more than $2 billion extra to K-12 districts next school year and again ask lawmakers to direct more funding to impoverished students and English learners in his budget plan today, according to education sources familiar with the proposal."

"It is no surprise that this disparity in senior and childhood poverty exists. We have made a national commitment to provide income and health security for seniors through Social Security and Medicare. For children, on the other hand, we have only a combined federal-state commitment to health insurance, but children have no social compact to protect them against the whims of the economy that lead to severe declines in their family incomes. And the one sure way of alleviating the effects of poverty funding education is left primarily to states and localities, and is continually under threat. In essence, we've built a social safety net for seniors, but left a gaping hole for our kids to fall through."