Public education funding exists as both a blessing and a curse. The blessing is clear: taxpayer support ensures our mission remains pure—educating the next generation to create a better future for society. Unlike for-profit enterprises, we’re not driven by profit margins but by accountability to our communities and responsibility to provide essential services. This funding model should mean ALL students receive the support they need, regardless of cognitive ability, physical capability, or educational preparation.
The curse lies in the complexity of that very accountability.
In Texas, over 80% of K-12 institutions and approximately 40-50% of community college funding comes from local tax dollars, not counting state or federal support. While this creates powerful accountability to local communities, it also breeds resentment. Taxes are taken involuntarily, and many taxpayers—understandably—don’t appreciate their hard-earned money disappearing into public coffers, especially in an economy where everything costs more each year.
Yet this resentment contains contradictions. There’s a direct connection between quality school districts and housing values. Strong schools drive community demand upward. (Side note: This is one reason I oppose Texas’s school grading system—I believe it digs deeper holes for struggling communities. But that’s a blog for another time.) These same taxpayers don’t complain when they sell their homes at inflated prices or when young people become productive citizens contributing to their neighborhoods, state, and country.
Unfortunately, their resentment resonates with politicians—particularly in Texas—who continually seek ways to defund schools and privatize education. Whether through eliminating property taxes, supporting vouchers, interfering with curriculum, or imposing unfair accountability measures, political support for education has declined as the issue has become increasingly politicized.
The results, however, are undeniable. Educated societies demonstrate lower incarceration rates, better health outcomes, higher employment, increased voter turnout, and countless other positive outcomes.
I understand what accountability to a community means. If public institutions cannot effectively communicate the value of their services, why should taxpayers fund them—along with stadiums, performance venues, and campus expansions? It’s a fair question, even if the answer is complex.
My point isn’t to criticize institutions or taxpayers, but to explain the perspective from inside these institutions.
Newspapers eagerly publish articles highlighting top educator salaries, essentially gaslighting readers about compensation. School failures become long-running stories. Can anyone name a positive school district story that lasted longer than a Texas Education Agency takeover?
School administrators—essentially stewards of taxpayer investments—face relentless scrutiny, providing monthly public meetings and reports not just to elected board members but to entire communities.
Even those advocating for teacher pay increases often criticize current institutional spending, suggesting schools simply “find” more money for raises. This ignores increased expenses and the reality that providing education costs exponentially more than thirty years ago, when accounting for technology, workforce programs, and other advancements.
My primary concern is that achieving complete accountability to an entire society contributing involuntarily (unlike customers choosing for-profit services) feels nearly impossible given the parameters. We need quality staff but must keep salaries within what the average taxpayer deems acceptable. Imagine how ineffective businesses would be operating under this constraint. We should maintain lean staffing while somehow overcoming challenges created by turnover from employee burnout. We must provide first-class education while voters refuse to support bonds funding the buildings and facilities necessary for well-rounded learning.
Over the years, I’ve heard it all. People whose children have graduated suddenly decide they no longer want to support school districts—a violation of our society’s unspoken social contract. Others quickly remind us that we work for them when they want an individualized service beyond the scope of the standard rules. There’s truth in that we work for them, but individual taxpayers don’t deserve special treatment any more than a single shareholder deserves it from a public company.
My entire adult career has been within taxpayer-funded institutions. I chose this path because of its focus on improving communities through mission-driven work. However, in a society experiencing increasing political interference, growing resentment toward government institutions, and what appears to be systematic dismantling of public resources, I’m uncertain whether this is a career I’d encourage others to pursue.
In a capitalist society placing money as a top priority, I’m not sure it’s wise for anyone to build a future in an organization designed to serve everyone when people are becoming more individualistic and less concerned about society’s greater good.
The Everyday Human 