The Pentagon recently told Congress that it used $5.6 billion worth of bombs and missiles in just the first 48 hours of the American attack on Iran earlier this month. It’s just one number that reveals the staggering financial cost of military adventures. But the truth is, the number is so big that I have a hard time getting my head around it. Maybe you do too. So let me draw a couple comparisons that help illustrate the scale of the choices being made on our behalf, using our own East Penn schools as a point of departure that put the kind of choices being made about our tax dollars into stark relief.
One of the premiere weapons in our military’s arsenal is the SM-3 missile, designed to protect American forces from drones and other kinds of incoming fire. The average cost of these missiles is $25.4 million. How much is $25.4 million? Well, let me translate that into local public education costs, which-- like the SM-3 missiles- are paid for with our tax dollars. East Penn spends a little more than $20,100 per student per year on education, for just over 7,500 students. This entire cost for a full year could be paid with less than the cost of 7 such missiles. And while we don’t know the exact number that have been used in the current war, military experts estimate dozens were fired in just the first 48 hours of the bombing campaign.
Another way to think about that same $25.4 million is that a single SM-3 missile could pay for the entire education, from kindergarten all the way through high school graduation, of almost 100 East Penn students.
Oh, and that one missile? It represents only 0.4% of the $5.6 billion expended in just two days.
And I can’t resist one more comparison: The first 48 hours of the U.S. attack on Iran cost taxpayers an estimated $117 million per hour for munitions alone. That means that the weapons used in just 48 minutes of the bombing campaign cost more than the entire projected costs of the “realignment” plan East Penn recently shelved after public outcry-- including my own-- over its cost. And paying for the realignment plan with local tax dollars would have meant school tax increases at the legal maximum for the foreseeable future and interest payments on the needed loans for decades.
A single SM-3 missile could pay for the entire education, from kindergarten all the way through high school graduation, of almost 100 East Penn students.
My point in making these comparisons is not that our country doesn’t need a robust military. And I’m painfully aware that none of these numbers or comparisons tell the story of the real cost of war, including the more than 150 young girls killed while attending school by U.S. forces, the dozens of civilians killed by Iranian counterattacks against American allies, and the eight U.S. soldiers that have been killed, and 140 injured, in the war in its first week.
But while this human cost is incalculable, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take the actual financial costs into account too, as citizens and voters. Comparisons like these make the price tag of war more concrete, and bring home the opportunity costs of war in ways that watching the nightly news or scrolling through war-related memes on our social media feeds do not.
Former East Penn board member Chuck Ballard was well known for reminding us that “every budget represents a values statement.” I hope when the next cycle of conversation and debate over school taxes comes around-- and its coming very soon-- we all remember what these comparisons reveal about the values statement our elected leaders are now making with so much of our tax money.
Related reading:
Thanks for your continued interest about EPSD.
I still kibitz frequently even though my term on the board ended nearly half a lifetime ago.
Most of my comments are related to finances. I warned them in 2023 when a retiring board made a rushed vote about a proposed K8 realignment what I believed the financial limits would be, and then in 2024 and 2025 I suggested full Act 1 Index millage increases to effect what they could afford. Now it seems that an undefined $75 million option might be barely affordable, which is essentially congruent to the total $100 million figure I suggested for all K12 capital I suggested back then. In 2024, I also told them about UMSD's 8 year plan for its new HS. You also wrote here on Halloween 2023 about EPSD's $250-325 million plan.
Here is my latest letter to EPSD, about a week ago:
Folks,
Although I can’t make it to your 3/9/2026 meeting, I’m particularly interested in the item 5 presentation and discussion about the budget / long range capital and fiscal plan.
My three main questions are:
1) Will anything be included for HS projects now? (In the fall of 2023, info was promised for Spring 2024, and in the fall of 2025, info was promised for this spring).
2) For the K8 schools, I have serious questions about the MS costs. The costs for construction at the MS for the ES rezoning / non-realignment option seem huge, even without expansion. Perhaps there are reasons for that like areas of the buildings which are obsolete, worn out, needing to be modified for non-traditional uses, or otherwise unsuitable. Are these really all needed? (The same could be true in the realignment plan, but it's more dramatic for the case without a MS expansion)
3) The 2015A&B Bond Issue Preliminary Official Statement shows an Eyer capacity of 1350 pupils and an LMMS capacity of 1192 pupils. If these numbers are correct, isn't there enough space in Eyer for all of 5th and 6th grades already? It seems like we are working from lower baselines now, but there might be an explanation.
Two other points:
4) My FL area school district is currently looking at closing several schools because of over-capacity, which they project is only going to get worse because of declining birth rates. Your latest demographic study has a lower case with barely static enrollment – perhaps it might be even lower now.
5) I appreciated the new graph showing historic and projected debt service and capital reserve expenditures shown on page 23 of the 2/23 presentation which shows a good attempt for preserving funds during the last few years. Sadly, that hasn’t always been the case:
In the 2009-10 budget, $16.2 million of debt service was 15% of all revenue.
In the 2014-15 budget, $15.2 million of debt service was 12% of all revenue.
The $10+- million for debt and capital in 2021-22 shown on the new chart is only about 6% of all revenue.
And the numbers for 2024-25 and 2025-26 are under 5% of all revenue,
Plus, the percentage will get lower even if the capital allocation remains the same since the total budget will naturally grow over time.
This is what I warned about a decade ago when the old debt service was retiring and more of it should have been preserved for future capital needs then.
Ditto my suggestion to you two years ago garnered from Upper Merion's 8-year financial plan for their new HS.
Good luck.
regards, Ted