This morning, the Washington State Supreme Court, in a landmark order that will turn heads and shoulders across the Evergreen State, ordered the state to begin paying a $100,000 fine for each day that it fails to adopt a plan for fully complying with Article IX, Section 1 of the state Constitution (“It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.”)
The Court also suggested that the Legislature go back into special session to work on the problem of school funding without delay, noting that legislators figured out how to raise billions of additional dollars for highway construction on a bipartisan basis only a few weeks ago. From the Court’s order, published today:
Given the gravity of the State’s ongoing violation of its constitutional obligation to amply provide for public education, and in light of the need for expeditious action, the time has come for the court to impose sanctions. A monetary sanction is appropriate to emphasize the cost to the children, indeed to all of the people of this state, for every day the State fails to adopt a plan for ‘full compliance with article IX, section 1.
At the same time, this sanction is less intrusive than other available options, including directing the means the State must use to come into compliance with the court’s order. Now, therefore, it is hereby
ORDERED:
Effective immediately, the State of Washington is assessed a remedial penalty of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per day until it adopts a complete plan for complying with article lX, section 1 by the 2018 school year.
The penalty shall be payable daily to be held in a segregated account for the benefit of basic education. Recognizing that legislative action complying with the court’s order can only occur in session, but further recognizing that the court has no authority to convene a special session, the court encourages the governor to aid in resolving this matter by calling a special session. Should the legislature hold a special session and during that session fully comply with the court’s order, the court. will vacate any penalties accruing during the session. Otherwise, penalties will continue to accrue until the State achieves compliance.
As it has since the constitutionality of Washington’s school funding system was first litigated in Seattle School District, the court assumes and expects that the other branches of government will comply in good faith with orders of the court issued pursuant to the court’s constitutional duties. Seattle Sch. Dist. 1 90 Wn.2d at 506’07. Our country has a proud tradition of having the executive branch aid in enforcing court orders vindicating constitutional rights.
$100,000 a day adds up to about $3 million a month.
We are about five months away from the 2016 regular session. Were the Legislature not to act until then, it would incur $15 million in court-imposed penalties.
The Legislature of this state has a long and grand history of dithering, procrastinating, and excuse-making. But the time for making excuses is over. The Supreme Court is fed up and tired of the Legislature’s inability to meet its own goals for complying with Article IX, Section 1 of the state Constitution. The Court’s unanimous decision to impose sanctions is warranted and appropriate.
It’s time for the Legislature to get back to work. Washington needs tax reform. It needs its schools fully funded. It is our paramount duty to provide for the education of our youth. We’re not meeting that obligation, and our kids are being robbed as a consequence. This situation must be remedied as quickly as possible.
Half-measures are not enough; the Legislature can and must do better.
When we get a response from Governor Inslee, Superintendent Dorn, and legislative leaders to this decision, we will post it.
Looming over all of this is Tim Eyman’s I‑1366, which threatens to wipe out $8 billion in sales tax revenue over six years unless the Legislature votes to approve a constitutional amendment permanently locking in our state’s regressive tax system. I‑1366 has been certified for the ballot, but is being challenged in court on scope grounds. The first hearing in the case will take place tomorrow morning, against the backdrop of this Supreme Court order in McCleary.
UPDATE: Governor Inslee’s response is as follows.
“Today’s order from the Supreme Court acknowledges that significant progress has been made toward meeting the state’s obligation to adequately fund basic education.”
“But everyone understood that even with those historic investments in education, our work would not be done.”
“The court today made it clear that bolder and more aggressive action is needed to support Washington’s students and their teachers. The detailed plan the court demands in order to fulfill our constitutional obligation will be more complex and expensive than the significant steps we’ve already taken.”
“I will talk today with Attorney General Ferguson, legislative leaders and others to fully analyze today’s court order.”
The governor did not discuss plans for a special session.
The Washington Education Association’s Kim Mead had this to say:
“WEA is pleased with the Court’s strong order to require the legislature to comply with the constitution, reminding them that it imposes only one paramount duty on the state: ample provision for education of all children. It’s clear the court agrees that our kids can’t wait for the legislature to act on its own.”
“I encourage the Governor and legislative leaders to provide the funding our kids need to succeed, now, not years from now. Further, the court made it clear that the legislature fell far short on the issues of class sizes and educator compensation. Those were our two highest priorities during the previous legislative session. Now, perhaps, the state will step up to its duty to our students and educators.
“WEA stands ready to assist legislative leaders to assist legislators in completing a plan.”
We will post more reaction as we get it.
“Washington is assessed a remedial penalty of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per day until it adopts a complete plan … The penalty shall be payable daily to be held in a segregated account for the benefit of basic education.”
==> That works out to less than $0.10 per K‑12 student per day, $3 per month, or $36 per year. It would be cheaper to pay the fine, directed to K‑12 funding, than to fix the problem. That, plus the black eye.
Pat, the sanctions aren’t meant to solve the problem, only to send a message to the Legislature that the Court means business.
It was clear this legislative session was still, business as usual, with a token nod to the McLeary decision. At stake is that this legislature now must do what they would not do. Cut state services by 2.3 to 2.7 billion dollars to adequately fund education. These cuts are coming, and will hurt, and when it is done, it will not be business as usual in Olympia.
It’s not possible to cut other state services to fund education, Chad, unless you want to set all our prisoners free and completely close down most health and human services… which would destroy the state’s economy and hurt millions of people. If you understand the state budget, then you’d know that your suggestion is ludicrous and will never happen. Where do you think those billions of dollars are going to come from? More than half of general fund expenditures already go to education.
The notion there is all this money lying around that’s not going to education, but could be, is a fantasy that the right wing perpetuates. The state has other essential and basic obligations, too. I’ll add that Medicaid dollars are protected due to federal matching funds, and debt service is constitutionally protected. Those can’t be touched. We could raid higher ed, but that would be robbing Peter to pay Paul. No one in the Legislature will be in favor of that.
What we really need to do is raise more revenue. That is the best solution to this funding crisis. It’s time to impose a capital gains tax on high earners. Idaho, hardly a liberal state, does it. So does Oregon. We can, too.
It seems to me that Pat M. and Andrew are both right. The penalties would not fix the problem, nor are they intended to. They are designed to get the legislature’s attention but are not likely to do that, either, given the minuscule dollar amount of the penalty.
The court has made it quite clear that the current funding system is untenable. The legislature simply must find a new source of funding, and the one Andrew suggests is probably it.
It is the place of the elected representatives of the people to determine what the vague wording of Article IX, Section 1 of the state Constitution means. (“make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders”) If the people feel that more funding is needed (an absurdity given the massive growth in the state education budget over the last 50 years and our national ranking on spending per student) then the people will elect representatives to change the funding level. It is NOT the role of a small number of Supreme Court justices to impose their interpretation of it on all the people.
By what magic standard is the court able to say to the dollar how much provision is exactly ‘ample’ and how much education is defined by that statute, and what age is ‘child’ and what is young adult. This is the role of the legislature, not the beholden flunkies of WEA donations.
Remember, in a free nation, the people impose their will on the government, not the other way around: We call that ‘tyranny’.
Merrick, you don’t seem to have a very good grasp of constitutional law. If you did, you’d know and appreciate that the role of the judicial branch is to interpret laws. That’s why we have a judicial branch.
The legislative branch makes laws, the executive branch enforces them, and the judicial branch interprets them. Each branch keeps the others in check. That’s our system of government: it’s built on the idea of separation of powers. Dates back to the drafting of the U.S. Constitution in Philadelphia in 1787.
As Justice John Marshall declared in Marbury v. Madison (decided in 1803), “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”
The Supreme Court is doing its job by interpreting Article IX, Section 1 of our state Constitution.
The nine justices of the Washington State Supreme Court, by the way, are our elected representatives, because at the state level, we elect our justices. They serve six year terms, and they must retire by the age of seventy. If a justice retires or steps down, the governor makes an appointment, but otherwise, who serves on the Court is determined by the people.
We have been underfunding our schools for decades. That is what the McCleary case is all about. The Supreme Court found that the Legislature was failing to provide adequate funding to meet what the Legislature defined as basic education. Read the briefs and the Court’s orders and educate yourself… you’ll learn a lot. So long as you have an open mind, that is.
When will the citizens of Washington State read and seriously consider implementing the findings of our 2002 Tax Study Commission? That study found our tax system regressive and over-responsive to the ups and downs of the economy. Our under-funded public programs, including education, fell even more behind during the economic downturn beginning in 2008.
The bi-partisan commission recommended reductions in sales and B&O taxes and the addition of a moderate income tax. It’s about time we take the tax study off the shelf and get on with what was a logical solution to our ineffective and regressive tax structure.