Long Island’s three remaining congressmen reacted angrily last week to Gov. Kathy Hochul’s proposed state budget, which they said included “massive cuts” to school districts.

The three congressmen – Anthony D’Esposito (NY-04), Andrew Garbarino (NY-02) and Nick LaLota (NY-01) – were particularly upset that these cuts to some districts were proposed at the same time spending on the migrant crisis would rise $500 million to $2.4 billion.

“It is shameful for Gov. Hochul to propose a state budget with Draconian cuts to over 40 Long Island school districts while providing billions to pay for the ongoing migrant crisis,” D’Esposito, Garbarino and Nick LaLota said in a joint press release that did not mention the 77 Long Island school districts getting more money under the proposal.

“Implementing these debilitating spending cuts without addressing the underlying issue of sanctuary policies is a slap in the face to the taxpayers of New York. Long Island students should not have to pay the price for our state’s failures. If the governor wants to put our students last, then Albany must act immediately to right this injustice,” they concluded.

The comments by the Republican congressmen, now down to three following the expulsion of fellow GOP Rep. George Santos (NY-03), raised many questions.

For starters, why were three U.S. congressmen criticizing the state budget? They are not state assemblymen or senators. They are congressmen who are supposed to represent their constituents in Washington.

This is particularly relevant at a time when House Republicans, kowtowing to far-right legislators in their own party, continue to struggle to approve a federal budget for more than three months and regularly threaten economically disastrous federal government shutdowns.

And how exactly is the migrant crisis the state’s failure?

The three congressmen referenced New York City’s status as a sanctuary city that by law is obligated to house asylum seekers – often men, women and children who have risked their lives walking thousands of miles to flee even greater danger at home to enter the United States legally until federal law.

But the migrant problem is not limited to New York City. It’s a national problem impacting cities and states across the country that is controlled by the president, the Senate and, yes, the House.

A bipartisan group of senators is in the process of hammering out a compromise to address an immigration system that has been broken for more than 20 years with Democratic senators now bending to many of their Republican counterparts’ demands.

Republican senators said last week that the deal is a once-in-a-generation opportunity that will not be available next year even if the GOP takes the House, Senate and presidency.

Those speaking in support of the bipartisan legislation include Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Whip John Thune and Sen. Lindsay Graham.

But House Speaker Mike Johnson, who the three Long Island congressmen joined in unanimously supporting him for the post, said he will not bring the legislation to the House floor.

“This is not the time for comprehensive immigration reform,” Johnson said.

Johnson, who led House Republicans’ efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, said he would only bring immigration reforms to the floor when there was a Republican in the White House.

Even worse, Johnson has tied immigration to a $110 billion package proposed by President Biden to provide $60 billion in aid to Ukraine, $14 billion to Israel during its war with Hamas, money to aid our defense in the Far East and $14 billion to strengthen security at the southern border.

The failure to fund Ukraine would by itself be a catastrophic foreign policy disaster that would undermine America’s standing in the world by abandoning an ally in its fight for freedom. This would embolden dictators in Iran, China, North Korea and most notably Vladimir Putin in Russia.

It would also take away the funding needed to reduce the flow of migrants to New York City, among other places.

But instead of publicly pressing Johnson to do the right thing, D’Esposito, Garbarino and LaLota are criticizing Hochul.

And it’s not as if the three don’t have any leverage with Johnson.

Any one of the three Long Island Republicans could move to oust Johnson under a disastrous agreement in the GOP caucus that allows just one member to call a vote to remove the speaker.

The three Republicans’ characterization of Hochul’s budget does not appear to be any better than their choice of House speaker.

The three congressmen offer no proof that school districts in New York would get more money from Hochul if they ignored the humanitarian crisis and cut or eliminated any aid for migrants.

She might just remove the spending on migrants and reduce the budget – something Republican officials regularly support.

And the “massive cuts” that Esposito, Garbarino and LaLota cite come in a budget proposal calling for $34.75 billion in state aid to school districts – 2.43% more than the 2023-2024 school year.

Long Island would see a 3.04% increase in state aid for education with Nassau County doing better than Suffolk County with a 4.89% increase, according to an analysis by Newsday.

Yes, there would be a decrease in aid to 40 school districts.

This comes as state Budget Director Blake Washington told Newsday, after-school aid increased by $7 billion over the last three years, with an additional $13 billion increase in federal aid during the same period

“It’s now time for the state to provide a more sustainable level of funding,” Washington said.

On the North Shore, school districts saw increases in state between 18% and 47% for the 2023-2024 school year.

These are districts whose spending per student ranged from $24,250 in the Floral Park-Bellerose School District, which is made up of only elementary schools, to $47,7276 for the North Shore School District.

Under Hochul’s proposed budget, every school district on the North Shore would see an increase in state aid in 2024-2025, led by Manhasset at 8.43%, except for three –  Floral Park-Bellerose, Mineola and Port Washington.

Floral Park-Garden City faces a 2.36% decline after a 32% increase last year, Port Washington would receive 0.61% less after a 30.16% increase and Mineola would get  0.063% less after a 24.29% increase for 2023-2024.

And while there are some losers, 77 school districts would see increases in state aid that in some cases would address past imbalances.

“We are very happy that the governor has recognized the shortfall in funding we have experienced in past years and is bringing us up to the levels enjoyed by other districts,” said Wayne Loper, superintendent of the Valley Stream Central High School District, where a nearly 12% increase is proposed

State officials are also quick to point out that these numbers are proposals in Hochul’s budget and are subject to change.

School officials in districts that see a decrease will inevitably challenge the numbers. If some districts were shortchanged, then that should be corrected.

But this misses a point also ignored by D’Esposito, Garbarino and LaLota.

The inequity in the state budget is not the decrease in state aid for some schools after three years of increases.

It is that the state budget has still not addressed the wide differences in spending per student in what is called a public school system.

This year, for instance, East Williston is spending $42,627 per pupil while neighboring Herricks is spending $27,327. Roslyn is spending $39,344 per student while Sewanhaka not too far away is spending $31,492 per year.

Where is the fairness in that?

The state has made progress in recent years in addressing this disparity, thanks to changes in allocating state aid. But it still has a ways to go.

If D’Esposito, Garbarino and LaLota want to be helpful, they should stick to their jobs in Washington and support the immigration reforms agreed to in the Senate.

And leave the state budget to state officials.