Two School Systems, One Nation Divided
In America, we fund public schools based on local property taxes — and that means rich neighborhoods get well-funded classrooms, while poor neighborhoods get what’s left. The result? Two public education systems: one for the wealthy, one for everyone else.
Nations like Finland, South Korea, Canada, and France fund education centrally, ensuring equal investment per student, regardless of where a child lives. These countries consistently outrank the U.S. in math, reading, and graduation rates — because they prioritize fairness over geography.
How It Works
- Replaces property-tax-based school budgets with a statewide, centralized funding model.
- Guarantees equal per-student funding, adjusted for inflation and tied to education costs.
- Provides weighted supplemental funding for students with additional needs, modeled on Denmark’s taximeter system.
Full Text
The PUBLIC Act
Section 1: Title
This Act shall be known as the “PUBLIC Act.”
Section 2: Purpose
To establish a statewide, equalized per-student funding model for K-12 public education, replacing local property-tax-based school funding with a centralized system that guarantees every child the same educational investment, supplemented by additional support based on need.
Section 3: Findings
Congress finds that:
- The United States ranks below peer nations in educational outcomes, including literacy, mathematics, and graduation rates.
- Reliance on local property taxes to fund schools creates systemic disparities between wealthy and low-income communities.
- A child’s access to quality public education should not be determined by the real estate wealth of their neighborhood.
- Countries such as Finland, South Korea, Canada, and Denmark have implemented centralized, per-student funding models that promote educational equity and national performance.
- Denmark’s “taximeter” model, which combines a base per-pupil grant with supplemental needs-based funding, demonstrates a successful international approach to equitable school finance.
Section 4: Provisions
(a) Equal Per-Pupil Funding Guarantee
Each public K-12 student shall be allocated an equal base amount of public education funding annually through a state-managed Education Trust Fund. This base amount shall be adjusted annually for inflation and tied to the Consumer Price Index for Education.
(b) Elimination of Local Property Tax Funding
Effective fiscal year 3 following enactment, no public school district may rely on local property tax revenue for operational funding. Such revenue shall be redirected to the State Education Trust Fund to be distributed equitably under the new system.
(c) State Education Trust Fund
A dedicated State Education Trust Fund shall be established to pool all public education funding. This fund shall be responsible for distributing both base and supplemental allocations to public schools based on enrollment and need-based criteria.
(d) Supplemental Needs Adjustment (Modeled on Denmark’s Taximeter System)
In addition to the base per-pupil grant, the following weighted funding adjustments shall apply:
| Category | Additional Weight | Description |
|---|
| Students with disabilities | +0.5 | Verified IEP or special education designation |
| English language learners (ELL) | +0.3 | Based on official ELL status |
| Low-income students | +0.4 | Eligible for free/reduced-price lunch |
| Students experiencing homelessness | +0.6 | As defined by McKinney-Vento Act |
| Rural/remote students | +0.2 | Determined by distance from nearest city center |
| Secondary students (grades 9–12) | +0.1 | Higher cost-of-instruction adjustment |
Total funding per student shall be calculated as:
Total = Base Grant x (1 + Total Applicable Weights)
These weights shall be reviewed every two years by the State Board of Education and adjusted through public rulemaking processes.
(e) Transparency and Public Reporting
All public schools shall receive and publish an annual funding report detailing: base funding received, weight-based supplemental funding per category, and total per-student allocation. Reports shall be made publicly available and submitted to the Department of Education.
(f) Federal Incentives
States that adopt and implement the PUBLIC model shall be eligible for federal grants through the “Equal Classrooms, Equal Futures” initiative, to support infrastructure upgrades, administrative transition, and implementation training.
Section 5: Implementation Timeline
- Year 1: Establishment of the State Education Trust Fund and development of infrastructure and reporting tools.
- Year 2: Pilot implementation in five diverse school districts.
- Year 3: Full statewide implementation and cessation of property-tax-based funding.
Section 6: Enforcement
Noncompliance by any local or state authority will result in: (1) Ineligibility for federal education grants; (2) Corrective funding adjustments overseen by the Department of Education.
Section 7: Severability
If any section, subsection, or provision of this Act is found to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions shall remain in effect.
Disclaimer
I’m not a lawyer, and this isn’t finalized legislative language — but I’m also not waiting around for someone else to write what’s clearly overdue. We need more single issue, readable bills.
These are serious drafts from someone running for Congress who believes voters deserve more than slogans and vague promises. And yes, once elected, I’ll work with the Office of Legislative Counsel, the Congressional Research Service, and policy experts to refine every section into fully enforceable law. That’s what they’re there for.
But make no mistake — the intent, urgency, and direction are already here.