Jackson Free Press

Funding adequate education in the state of Mississippi has morphed into a political battle with consequences beyond school walls. Initiative 42 has been through a few rounds of contempt and scrutiny, but despite the 42-vs.-42A drama that the Mississippi Supreme Court has yet to end, legislators against the initiative aren't waiting for 42A to help them get their way. They have quickly drawn a threatening line in the sad over public-education funding—potentially affecting jobs, higher education and all other state services.

The original filing from the Initiative 42 camp recommends tying funding to the state's general-fund increases, potentially taking seven years if the increase stays at 3 percent. The initiative's advocates are quick to admit that their way of funding MAEP may take longer. Whether it takes the perfect seven years or 10 or 15, they are OK with it as long as it gets funded. They do not suggest funding MAEP by creating new taxes, and they didn't mention budget cuts because, well, they figured that funding through general-fund increases would work as a compromise that could convince conservatives that it is a financially sound plan. They were wrong.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Herb Frierson, R-Poplarville, proved that the Legislature is not interested in listening to Initiative 42 advocates beyond the constitutional wording, especially if the initiative passes. He told all state agencies, save the Departments of Education and Medicaid, to prepare for immediate 7.8 percent budget cuts to fund education starting in fiscal year 2016.

Initiative advocates called the proposed budget cuts "scare tactics"—because they are. Frierson is preparing cuts for something that hasn't happened yet. Initiative 42 isn't up for a vote until November. Even if it does pass, Frierson just proved that state agencies can be required to prepare budget cuts in a little over a week. So who's to say they couldn't do that again once the initiative actually passes?

And most importantly, why is Frierson ignoring the more conservative approach to funding MAEP, by tying the increases to future revenue, which would offset the costs? The fact that he is proves that his strategy is political and a way to scare people into voting against it. This latest ploy shows that to certain legislators, fully funding public education isn't about education—it's about control. If they want to influence public opinion of ballot initiatives using tactical budget-cut proposals, they will. If they want to add an alternative measure to a ballot to try to confuse voters, they will. They can.

Frierson didn't explain why he immediately turned to state agency budget cuts to fund an initiative that he and several Republican candidates are so against in the first place. Advocates for Initiative 42 can call the budget-cut proposals scare tactics until November and beyond. But the reality is that while a constitutional amendment can force the state to fully fund public education, it cannot tell them how to do so. If Republicans were interested in following current law and adequately funding public education, they would be looking for a way to make it work. They aren't, but it's time to.