Friday, March 5, 2010

Education Budget Cut Brawls Begin

Millions rallied across California to protest deep spending cuts to schools and universities. Demonstrations, marches, teach-ins and walkouts were planned in what was called the "March 4th National Day of Action for Public Education."(AP-March 4)

And it starts in California.... a shining example of how liberal entitlement has crippled a state.

Thousands of students in roughly thirty-two states protested and walked out of classes Thursday as part of the National Day of Action to Defend Public Education.

The natives are getting restless now that a dose of fiscal reality is smacking them in the face.

But honestly, if you visit the websites promoting these protests it appears to be fueled by very Left Wing organizers, Education unions, and liberal college professors who are trying to save their paychecks. It is obvious their desire to agitate and stir up unrest on campuses, and high schools, especially in these times of economic distress.

And unfortunately it isn't limited to college campuses or high schools. Even elementary school kids are being used as props and continue to be brainwashed with an entitlement mentality... even chanting Obama's robot slogan "si se puede". The money these protesters spent on T-shirts alone could probably fund a computer lab.

Let's face it colleges and other schools just cannot pay for both services and enormous employee pensions and benefits, and also give aid to help students afford to attend school.

Something has got to give.

Where is it written that anyone is guaranteed a certain level of education?
Where is it written that the public must continue to pay enormous costs for a failing education bureaucracy which has become an unending pit of fiscal demands?
And where, pray tell, are the stunning results we should be getting for the money "We The People" are paying? Why do we have such an expensive education system that delivers children that cannot read, write or do mathematics? How many more REMEDIAL classes must be funded on COLLEGE campuses?

The reality is that if everyone cannot afford the high price of education and if they eventually stop attending these expensive colleges as a result, then the price will come down. High costs of college are mainly the result of runaway college prices subsidized by easy government grants and loans (mostly loans). I mean, honestly, the tens of thousands of dollars that these college tuitions cost are just ridiculous. Our kids have the equivalent of mortgages when they graduate! The majority cannot touch a college education without government assistance and loans these days. The more money the schools can lay their hands on through government loans and subsidies, the higher prices soar. All one has to do is look at what college used to cost before government subsidies got involved.

College, high school, elementary schools... they all suffer the same problem. Too much government involvement and too much union control. The administration wins, and your kid loses, and you get stuck with a very big tax bill.

The reality is that the public cannot be expected to continue to empty out their pockets to satisfy education union demands. It is continued subsidies and increased funding which continues to feed the spiraling cycle of higher costs. Administration wants more and more. They would increase tuition at colleges before they cut their own salaries. Public schools will continue to demand higher taxes instead of cutting their own administrative salaries and benefits. And then they blame the public for not ponying up.

Oh right.... it's for the kids.

The cuts are coming.
Deal with it.


Anonymous said...

"Where is it written that anyone is guaranteed a certain level of education?"

I believe it is in our state constitution and may be in your state constitution as well. Refer to the following at

"During the last half of the twentieth century, the New Jersey Supreme Court built an impressive reputation for its "intellectually rigorous and forcefully progressive" interpretations of state constitutional law. (1) The court's status as a jurisprudential entrepreneur rests, in part, on decisions that involve social and economic life--most notably, its enforcement of the positive right to an adequate education...

The state constitution's education clause is best known; article VIII, section 4 commits the legislature to "provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of free public schools" (6) and the court has interpreted this right to require the redistribution of public funds from one school district to another if needed to secure an adequate education for the state's children..."

In addition, I have been teaching for 23 years and my salary is 52,000 and I have only had health insurance coverage provided for the last four years. I am not married so this is the only household income. Does this fall under your erroneous definition of "enormous employee pensions and benefits," or shall I go without a pension and apply for welfare when I retire?

If you're going to pick on anyone why don't you research the salaries of public school superintendents? They are state employees who seldom enter a school building and speak to the faculty once a year. There are over 60 superintendents in NJ making over 200,000 a year.

Judy Aron said...

My state constitution says what the state is mandated to do, as was brought out by the Sheff vs. O'Neill lawsuit, is that the state must provide an equal opportunity to receive an adequate education. That's it. Period end of story.

No certain level of education is guaranteed and the term "adequate" is not defined anywhere. Adequacy is subjective but what is essential is local control of curriculum (soon to be history I am afraid)

Read my previous post here

I totally agree with you - the administrators usually suck up lots of resources and it is disgraceful that a multi million dollar school system anywhere has teachers begging for supplies when administrators are making 6 figure incomes.

As for your compensation - if it is so crappy then why don't you leave? I know I would.