Under Newsom’s proposed budget, state and local education funding under Proposition 98 would come to $121.4 billion. If one combines funding from all sources, including federal dollars, then the budget would include $149.1 billion in total funding for all TK (transitional kindergarten)-12 education programs.
These huge budget amounts translate into record high funding per student.
Under Prop. 98, the governor’s budget proposal says, “TK-12 per pupil funding totals $20,427,” which is “a 74.6 percent increase over 2018-19.”
For total education funding, Newsom’s budget proposes “$27,418 per pupil when accounting for all funding sources,” which is “a 60.8 percent increase over 2018-19.”
To justify this record spending, Newsom points to the small uptick in state test scores from 2023-24 to 2024-25. Yet, that’s not the improvement measuring stick that even the governor’s budget document states.
According to the governor’s budget summary, “Over the last four years, the [governor’s] California for All Kids plan has significantly transformed the delivery of public elementary and secondary education in California and improved English language arts and mathematics achievement.”
So, the state’s 2024-25 test scores should be compared not to the year previously, but to the scores in 2018-19 (state testing in 2019-20 was canceled and testing was optional in 2020-21 was optional). What does that comparison show?
On the 2024-25 state English test, 49 percent of California students taking the test met grade-level standards, which was a decline from the 51 percent who scored at grade level in 2018-19.
Also, on the 2024-25 state math test, 37 percent of students taking the test scored met grade-level standards, which was a drop from the 40 percent of students scoring at grade level in 2018-19.
And these scoring declines on California’s state tests were mirrored on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which is often referred to as the nation’s report card.
According to a recent analysis by the Public Policy Institute of California, the percentage of California twelfth graders who scored at the proficient level on the 2024 NAEP exams were “33% and 21% in reading and math, respectively, compared to 36 percent and 24 percent in 2019.”
Further, “Scores were also lower for students in grades 4 and 8.”
The analysis also found that the longer a student stayed in California public schools, the lower their proficiency rates in math: “The new NAEP data show that the share of twelfth graders with satisfactory scores was lower than the share for eighth graders, which in turn was lower than the share in grade 4.”
So why is the return on Newsom’s substantial government investment so abysmal? Answer: it’s not how much one spends that counts, it’s how one spends it.
Unfortunately, Newsom is spending Californians’ tax dollars on programs that return little bang for the buck.
For example, in his budget proposal, Newsom highlights several programs that he calls key accomplishments.
First, he touts his universal pre-K program, which will be fully implemented in 2025-26, “with a total investment of $1.9 billion.”
Yet, a Vanderbilt University study of Tennessee’s supposedly model pre-K program found that students who went through the program had lower test scores, lower attendance, and more discipline problems than students who did not go through the program. The researchers warn other states about expecting too much from pre-K programs.
Newsom also cites the funding he has poured into so-called community schools that, in addition to delivering educational services, offer healthcare, mental health services, social services, and other services to families at the school site. However, a Harvard study of such wraparound services found that there is ls “likely little to no effect” on student test scores from “community and student-family programs.”
In addition, Newsom points to the funding he has channeled into school staffing. His budget proposal states, “Since 2019-20, the number of school staff has grown, despite a decline in enrollment, reducing staff-to-student ratios statewide.” Yet, remember that student test scores have declined since 2019, so adding more adult school employees has not helped improve student performance.
Finally, Newsom wants to give his State Board of Education the responsibility of administering the California Department of Education, thereby neutering the state superintendent of public instruction. But this “reform” just rearranges the deck chairs on the Titanic. Remember, it is the State Board of Education that has dumbed down, scrambled, and politicized math instruction in California, which has led to student learning confusion and lower math scores.
Given the failure of California’s public schools to deliver results for all the tax dollars poured into it, parents should be given an exit ticket out of the system for their children. Luckily, Washington is making such an option available to states.
President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill offers $1,700 in dollar-for-dollar federal tax credits to individual taxpayers for donations to state-approved, federally recognized nonprofits, called scholarship granting organizations, that distribute scholarships to eligible children that can be used for private school tuition, tutoring, books, and other approved expenses.
For California to participate in the program, though, the governor must opt in. Progressive Democrat Colorado Governor Jared Polis has said he will opt in his state. If Newsom wants to improve student learning and outcomes, he should follow Polis’ lead and empower parents to choose the education that best meets the needs of their children.
Lance Izumi is senior director of the Center for Education at the Pacific Research Institute. He is the author of the PRI book The Great Classroom Collapse: Teachers, Students, and Parents Expose the Collapse of Learning in America’s Schools.
