Thread by @TracyNovick

4 o’clock. Tea time. Time for some #FBRC myth busting.

The first objection I hear all the time to passing an #FBRC bill is:

"We don't have the money!"

Read.
The.
Bill.

The bill calls for a phased-in implementation done by annual meetings to agree among Gov-House-Senate on that year's implementation.
It's a commitment and it's a plan.

Literally no one--no, not even me--is expecting that the state is going to add $2B+ in funding for education next year.
These things take time.
There is, however, no advantage--NONE--to putting it off.

There is, on the other hand, the significant DISadvantage of children's education being continually held hostage to political expediency.

...bringing me nicely to the second myth:

"We have to pass Fair Share first."

This sometimes is accompanied by "because otherwise K-12 education won't fight for Fair Share"...which, people, unless you think we also believe in fairy godmothers, is not a real objection.

Do we need the Fair Share funding? Heck, yeah.
Do we have to ensure that we pass the ballot initiative first? Of course not.

In fact, we substantially strengthen the "no, really, it's for education" argument if #FBRC has already been passed.
We already made the deal.

Today I heard "My rep supports the House bill."

Uh...that's not a thing.

There was no House bill reported out of Committee on #FBRC.

You've got S.2525, or you've got nothing. This is an up or down, support or not, decision.

(So if that was the answer you got, call them back)

Another thing I'm hearing:

"But the bill changed!"

Ok, let's set side aside for the moment that the Legislative process by its very nature is going to involve amending...

What the bill does is the same.
It implements the #FBRC recommendations.
That’s what it’s always done.

If you read the bill—and if you read outside budget language, it’ll even seem familiar—all that has changed is how the low income section works has been fleshed out.

(And by the way, I HOPE no one is hearing “I haven’t had time to review it yet.”)

“But it binds future legislatures!”

Uh, if you actually worried about that you’d never pass a thing.

But again:

Read.
The.
Bill.

Every year, there’s an agreement made on implementation that year.
Surely you can “bind future legislatures” to a MEETING?

There’s one more I have heard, and that one I can’t help you with:

“Leadership doesn’t want it.”

Think about what this is saying:

Leadership not only determines outcomes...

But “leadership” and those who cite them are fine with the inequitable system as it exists.

That’s a pretty significant indictment for someone to offer.

Sure that’s the principle you want to stand on?

Kids can’t wait for political expediency.

Call your reps.
Get them to sign the letter.
Let’s get this voted through the House.

No more fairy tales.
Let’s get to work.
#FBRC

unroll

Also @jack, please take the original out of suspension. We were using it! @TwitterSupport