Consolidation of ed departments stirs heated debate in Senate
From Missouri Digital News:
MDN Menu

MDN Home

Journalist's Creed


MDN Help

MDN.ORG: Missouri Digital News
MDN Menu

MDN Home

Journalist's Creed


MDN Help

MDN.ORG Mo. Digital News Missouri Digital News MDN.ORG: Mo. Digital News MDN.ORG: Missouri Digital News
Lobbyist Money Help  

Consolidation of ed departments stirs heated debate in Senate

Date: April 20, 2010
By: Trevor Eischen
State Capitol Bureau
Links: SJR 44, SJR 45

JEFFERSON CITY - While the Senate gave first approval to combining Missouri's two education departments, debate stalled on a subsequent proposal outlining the details.

The consolidation is one of many moves made by the Senate in the session to "reboot government." 

"Right now, the Coordinating Board of Higher Education is the greatest oxymoron in state government," President Pro Temp Charlie Shields, R-St. Joseph, said.

Before the Senate are two joint resolutions that detail the merger. The legislation, sponsored by Shields, dissolves the current education departments and boards and creates a new one, combining both higher and elementary and secondary education into one department. Senate debate stalled on a companion proposal that outlines the authority the new board would have over education in Missouri.

The intent of the bill, Shields said, was not limited to saving what he predicted to be a "million plus" dollars for the state. The ultimate goal of the consolidation, he said, was to create one education department "responsible for the entire spectrum from pre-K to post-secondary."

Sen. Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, tried inserting an amendment to the bill that would exempt the University of Missouri from the jurisdiction of the newly created education board in Shields' proposal. Many senators spoke against the amendment, which Schaefer eventually withdrew from consideration.

The amendment would have provided the University of Missouri with the power to circumvent the the new board for its funding request.

Sen. Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau, said he did not agree with this extension of power.

"I have no problem if we want to exempt the University of Missouri from all the taxpayer money and to exempt them from the appropriations process here," Crowell said. "But I have yet to see a time in my service in the General Assembly where the University of Missouri has not come here and ask for money."

Schaefer said Crowell, as well as Sen. Gary Nodler, R-Joplin, misunderstood his amendment and the "constitutional obligation outlined in the Missouri Constitution." He said the language in the state constitution allows the UM Board of Curators to suggest appropriations directly to the General Assembly without an education board as an intermediary.

The university is the only higher education institution recognized in the Missouri Constitution.

"I know (other institutions) don't like that," Schaefer said. "But you don't get to pick and choose the provisions of the constitution that you think you want to enforce. You got to take in lock, stock and barrel."

After Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-St. Louis County, suggested repealing the University of Missouri as Missouri's priority from the constitution, Schaefer conceded and withdrew his amendment. But Schaefer said even though he couldn't get the University of Missouri special privileges, he said Missouri has too many higher education institutions.

"If we are low on funds, which we truly are, then what we need to do is look at how much are we giving to these other institutions," Schaefer said.

Some senators said they disagreed with a second amendment, proposed by Nodler, under which the new board's power was unclear. While the Nodler said the board would not have a lot of power, other senators argued that the vague language gave the board power over regional higher educational boards.

Sen. Frank Barnitz, D-Lake Spring, said he worries the board could render institutions' regional boards useless and close several of Missouri's universities.

"At the end of the day, the goal of this thing is not to preserve institutions; the goal is to have a more educated citizenry," Shields said, adding states like Iowa only have three higher education institutions that serve the entire state population.

Barnitz said he disagreed with Shields and said it is more important to give students choices. 

Shields said consolidating universities would be a viable option to state funding over a smaller area.

"We have a state with institutions in every corner offering duplicate programs all over the state, and at the same time, we're not a very high state in terms of educational retainment," Shields said.

But Shields said he doubts the General Assembly could do something like that without many internal disagreements and huge constituent disapproval.