Missouri school officials worry about tight budgets after legislature underfunds education 89%

By Lilley Halloran0%

5/11/2026, 9:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Slippery Slope, and Negativity Bias, with Pessimism Bias as the most egregious example at 22.9% saturation with 165 hits. Analysis detected 1,059 faulty-reasoning hits from 719 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 82.2% and a BS Rank of 89% (2,365 of 21,180 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 88.80% of the article peer group.

Some Missouri school officials say the state's decision to fall about $190 million short of fully funding its K-12 foundation formula will create uncertainty for districts. 
The legislature sent its annual budget to Gov. 
Mike Kehoe on Wednesday, which keeps the same amount for schools  over $4.2 billion  as last year's. 
It's the first year since 2017 the General Assembly has not increased funding for public education. 
That decision has undermined confidence in lawmakers' ability to send money to schools in future years, said Matt Michelson, director of education policy for the Missouri State Teachers Association. 
"And so when that confidence is shaken, districts are more reluctant to give teachers raises," Michelson said. 
"They're more reluctant to fund programs, to start new programs." 
Michelson said districts across the state have made an effort to improve teacher recruitment and retention, but the budget could harm any progress. 
"When teachers start seeing their pay stagnant, and districts start pushing back and saying that budgets are tight because the legislature has said budgets are tight, it's going to make it harder to really beef up those recruitment (and) retention efforts," Michelson said. 
Tough decisions had to be made in a tight budget year, said Rep. 
Ed Lewis, R-Moberly, a former teacher who helped craft this year's budget. 
"It's so easy to tear down, it's very difficult to govern," Lewis said. 
"It's a lot harder to actually get down here and make the choices and say, 'Well, we've increased, we've increased, we've increased. 
It's time to be flat this year and make sure we have a little bit on the bottom line so that we're not going to short people next year.'" 
Although each district will feel the change differently, Ritenour Schools Superintendent Chris Kilbride said the money his schools won't get this year would have been enough to cover all of the bus drivers' salaries and benefits, or the cost of running the district's libraries and media centers, for a year. 
The district will have to scale back on curriculum development and supplies to prioritize paying teachers, Kilbride said. 
"It amounts to us looking everywhere outside of salaries where we can trim, so that we can work to make staff whole, and so that we can try to minimize the impact to kids," Kilbride said, adding that it's not enough to keep state funding for education the same because "everything else in life is getting more expensive." 
St. 
Louis Public Schools is "already doing some belt-tightening as it is," said Byron Clemens on behalf of the American Federation of Teachers St. 
Louis Local 420. 
"It seems the legislature has abdicated its responsibility in not fully funding the public schools while prioritizing giving taxpayer dollars to private and religious schools," Clemens said, referencing the legislature's decision to allocate $10 million more for private school vouchers than last year. 
Lewis said the legislature has appropriated record levels of funding for Missouri schools in recent years. 
He also pointed to money for education not included in the foundation formula, including transportation funding and grants for small schools. 
"What we are seeing are superintendents telling their teachers that, 'You got to get up there and whine, and whine, and whine and complain because you know they're underfunding us,'" Lewis said. 
"It isn't true." 
Lewis, who said the way the foundation formula calculates funding increases for schools is "arbitrary," is one of the lawmakers appointed by Kehoe responsible for rewriting it by December. 
And schools should not be concerned about funding because they have a record amount of money in reserves, Lewis said. 
Kilbride this isn't true for every school district. 
Ritenour already relies on the fund to pay teachers until the state provides its annual funding. 
Adding to the future uncertainty are the facts that lottery money for schools fell short of expectations last year and voters will decide whether to replace the state income tax with higher sales taxes  both of which could also affect the education budget. 
"We're heading into a time of a high level of uncertainty around funding, and that's the worst thing I would say for children," Kilbride said. 
"Children deserve stability. 
Children deserve consistency, and so do teachers and staff." 
Copyright 2026 St. 
Louis Public Radio 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 3.6%Columbia Missourian: 2.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.4%Lilley Halloran: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.4%This article: 5.1%Lilley Halloran: 5.6%Columbia Missourian: 5.5%Framing Effect5.1%This article: 15.0%Lilley Halloran: 1.8%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Loss Aversion15.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.0%Lilley Halloran: 3.8%Columbia Missourian: 4.5%Optimism Bias9.0%This article: 22.9%Lilley Halloran: 3.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Pessimism Bias22.9%This article: 13.1%Lilley Halloran: 6.2%Columbia Missourian: 5.4%Negativity Bias13.1%This article: 10.0%Lilley Halloran: 2.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias10.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%Lilley Halloran: 1.4%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%In-Group Bias6.0%This article: 4.5%Lilley Halloran: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 6.3%Lilley Halloran: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.5%Ad Hominem6.3%This article: 4.5%Lilley Halloran: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Straw Man4.5%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 3.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 6.0%Lilley Halloran: 1.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.1%False Dilemma6.0%This article: 13.8%Lilley Halloran: 2.4%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Slippery Slope13.8%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.0%Lilley Halloran: 4.4%Columbia Missourian: 3.6%Hasty Generalization6.0%This article: 2.9%Lilley Halloran: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Red Herring2.9%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.1%Lilley Halloran: 10.4%Columbia Missourian: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion5.1%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 2.7%Columbia Missourian: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 1.5%Lilley Halloran: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Burden of Proof1.5%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 9.2%Lilley Halloran: 3.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.6%Anecdotal9.2%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 1.5%Lilley Halloran: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice1.5%This article: 4.5%Lilley Halloran: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Indoctrination4.5%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lilley Halloran: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

719 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers74%attributed speech188writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageMatt Michelson • 29 words • 0.0% coverageMatt Michelson • 17 words • 0.0% coverageMatt Michelson • 10 words • 0.0% coverageMatt Michelson • 23 words • 0.0% coverageMatt Michelson • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageEd Lewis • 13 words • 0.0% coverageEd Lewis • 22 words • 0.0% coverageEd Lewis • 29 words • 0.0% coverageChris Kilbride • 50 words • 0.0% coverageChris Kilbride • 18 words • 0.0% coverageChris Kilbride • 58 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageByron Clemens • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageByron Clemens • 43 words • 0.0% coverageEd Lewis • 16 words • 0.0% coverageEd Lewis • 21 words • 0.0% coverageEd Lewis • 32 words • 0.0% coverageEd Lewis • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageEd Lewis • 20 words • 100.0% coverageChris Kilbride • 8 words • 0.0% coverageChris Kilbride • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 0.0% coverageChris Kilbride • 25 words • 0.0% coverageChris Kilbride • 3 words • 100.0% coverageChris Kilbride • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Ed Lewis

100%flagged-word coverage
156 attributed words29% of attributed speech52% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Indoctrination+12.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Ed Lewis: 12.8%12.8%Biased Writer Voice-5.9 ptsWriter: 5.9%Ed Lewis: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.