By Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
Organizers of the KC area "tea parties" on Wednesday are ready for people to mock their cause. If I could figure out what that cause is, I might join in.
But what are the tea parties really all about?
-- Taxes are too high?
Wow, now that's a bandwagon to jump on. No one's ever made that accusation before.
-- Congress is spending wildly?
Again, I've never heard that contention in 25 years of writing about government. That's a new issue, something worth writing a congressperson about.
-- The nation's federal debt is crippling our future?
OK, now that one has my attention. It's a real problem for my kids. But wait a minute. Didn't those wonderful Republican politicians pump up the deficit and the debt during the years they controlled the presidency and Congress earlier this decade? Yes, they did.
But now that the Obama administration and Democrats are pushing through bills that will increase the deficit, "debt" has become a four-letter word for the GOP and arch conservatives.
If you can't make it to a tea party on Wednesday, I will summarize the rhetoric that will be heard: Taxes, spending and the nation's debt are too high.
There, that just saved you two hours of your time right there.
Delicious
Digg
Saved me two hours or cost
Saved me two hours or cost me three minutes to read this drivel?
So if 100B is set aside for
So if 100B is set aside for dwindling school budgets, what about reforms? What about merit pay? What about stipulations attached to the money being given out to these schools which will require anything, or is it another AIG fiasco we are heading into? I am all for helping out with the problems schools are having, but there is a valid question being raised below (even though done so rather harshly) - is this not just liberals supporting the same liberal agenda in our failing schools? And no, it is not liberals failing our schools, it is the failure of teachers and the failure of the union to do anything about it (which supports the Dem's) which has failed our schools. So what about reform? That is a valid question.
And nice off-handed jab. And no, it does not make me entirely happy.
agreed
Look into it and let us know what you find. You expressed a desire that stimulus funding include money for education, and I established that it does.
I noticed that a number of states and districts are seeing this federal influx as a way for them to reduce state and local spending on education -- and the Secretary of Education has cautioned that poor choices by those states and localities in spending the education stimulus dollars will result in them being disqualified from the second round of funding, to be released later this year. Is this enough? Why or why not?
Ok, so...
Look into it and let us know what you find. You expressed a desire that stimulus funding include money for education, and I established that it does.
I noticed that a number of states and districts are seeing this federal influx as a way for them to reduce state and local spending on education -- and the Secretary of Education has cautioned that poor choices by those states and localities in spending the education stimulus dollars will result in them being disqualified from the second round of funding, to be released later this year. Is this enough? Why or why not?
Ok, cudos to you for pointing out that it does, but he says he set aside $100 billion in spending for education reform. What does that mean? Are we going to override the say of the union? Are we going to allow merit pay for teachers? Are we going to dismantle the moronic plan of "NCLB"? Are we going to incorporate reading and writing in the plans or just focus energy on science and math? Are we going to require more unfunded mandates for school districts?
As a matter of fact, the Sec. of Ed saying that cuts to current funding for education on the state and local level leaves these districts exempt from future funding is great - why? Because then it keeps the temptation (or should) to cut spending in ed with the dollars recieved from the fed and trying to allocate it elsewhere. This should in fact increase spending by more than what it would appear on paper should districts try to do just that.
I have a problem with our current ed system in America - 23rd in the world of industrialized nations in math and even lower in science is rediculous - but what is even more rediculous is the time we try to throw at these subjects and cut the even more important subjects of reading and writing. These alone help students to connect with their surroundings become aware of their community, and most importantly give them a truely critical mind. Math in higher functioning levels requires a critical thinking mind, just as science does, but the basics of both do not require nearly as much critical thought than reading "Romeo and Juliette" or discussing the implications in "Of Mice and Man" or "Huckleberry Finn."
No, reform is more than saying you can't cut spending. Reform is about getting rid of the system which has failed us for 50 years and implementing a new system, a radical system, change the system, something! Please, no more NCLB.
And the liberals come out to
And the liberals come out to bash! I spoke against almighty Obama, and since he said it would create jobs, and it was remarkable and it would be fast, I guess you just agree with him and bow to his beck and call, huh?
I already showed I support infrastructure to a certain point, and also stated why I am skeptical, like it or not.
I said not much - I did not
I said not much - I did not say none. I also do not disagree with spending money on building roads and bridges, as you would see in my post, but I guess you forgot to regard that and pick apart what you wanted to see.
What I think would help would be to spend money in education, fix that system so people who actually do graduate high school have more skills than just reading, writing, and 'rithmatic (The Three "R's") - we need to make sure our youth are getting real skills for the real world - we need mechanics, computer techs, roofers, foremen, road workers, all those kind of jobs which support our industry in the US, not just teach a child how to properly say, "Welcome to McDonald's, may I take your order?"
Also, 150k jobs saved or created in a years time is great, but I was talking immediate action. In front of my old apartment they have been working on a 3 miles stretch of road widening it from 2 to 4 lanes with a turning lane. The project was only supposed to take 1.5 years - it is now 4 years later and the project is millions of dollars over budget, and 2.5 years behind schedule. The same workers have been working every GOOD work day (weather permitting) since they first broke ground (I know, I see the same group of guys each day) - so I know that road projects create jobs and keep people employeed, but at the expense of who and what, and to what ends at what cost? It irritates the hell out of me to know my tax dollars are being wasted - not spent, wasted.
What projects will this $48 Billion cover? Where? Special interests? People who signed onto the bill only? Is it spread all ove the country? What about the road in my neighborhood? What about money to finish this project? That's why I am skeptical.
twas/mouth
If you'd actually researched the issue, you'd no doubt be happy to know that over $100 billion is set aside for eductation reform.
Nearly $44 billion for schools was made available April 1 and is to help states and school districts jump-start reform efforts and stabilize shrinking budgets. Another round of funding will be made available for states' applications later in the year, according to the federal Education Department.
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/20090413/NEWS04/904130312/1063
nice try flop....
giving 100B to continue the same lib agenda in our schools does not qualify as EDUCATION reform.
Keeping the failed union led programs that have failed our children for DECADES is not reform. It is paying-off the teacher unions. You libs should be ashamed at how you continue to keep our African American brothers and sisters in these Hell holes you libs call schools. But, on the other hand, the AA's do keep voting for you, don't they? Maybe that's the goal of your education reform.
Anyone here
think that Grunt doesn't have any clue what he's talking about?
Yep, me too.
Only lib kool aid drinkers agree with you flop...
Or are you saying the libs which run the KC schools are doing a fine job. Unaccredited, but a fine job.
You libs don't like facts, do you?
One thing though
Pouring money into infrastructure building does not have much of an impact on the economy like we need now. Giving money to businesses with hopes of being repaid (AIG said it ain't gonna happen) won't help now, and pouring billions into privately owned and operated companies in the hopes that their failure MAY cause a huge problem in the economy is down right dumb (IMO). Stop spending tax dollars on this stuff - spend it on education and more important things (Ok, so roads are also infrastructure, but we do need them, as well as safer bridges!)
Tax cuts, yes, cut spending on stupid programs that do not work, stop pouring money into ones that are broken in hopes of fixing it, because that does not work either - this is historical, not a guess. Education messed up? Don't throw money at it, change the program! Teachers to lazy to "teach?" Get rid of them and hire ones who are excited and willing to teach! Pay the good ones better, and get rid of the bad ones who refuse to continue to learn.
Sorry, I could go on, and rant, but this thing has got me in a tizzy.
Infrastructure...
Right, because giving people jobs has no bearing on the economy at all....
learn to read
Right, because giving people jobs has no bearing on the economy at all....
I Said not much, right now... learn to read, or do that teach that in liberal colleges anymore?
I read you like a cheap novel...
Right, because giving people jobs has no bearing on the economy at all....
I Said not much, right now... learn to read, or do that teach that in liberal colleges anymore?
Oh, I can read just fine. What I can't do is translate your gibberish.
If you want to believe that pouring money into infrastructure building won't have much of an effect on the economy right now, there's not a lot of hope for you....
And, thank you for assuming I went to a "liberal college", whatever that is....
When all else fails, call someone a liberal.
I'd call you a tool, but that would be insulting to other tools....
hmm
Wonder what you think would.
Anyhow, I think we're starting to see the projects bear fruit, and will be seeing more in the coming months.
Obama, who plans to deliver what the White House called a "major" speech on the economy on Tuesday, said 2,000 new projects to rebuild U.S. highways and bridges already had been approved under the $787 billion stimulus plan that became law in February.
That plan provided $48 billion to the Transportation Department for infrastructure improvements, including $28 billion for road projects.
"By the end of next year our investment in highway projects alone will create or save 150,000 jobs, most of them in the private sector," Obama said during an appearance at the Transportation Department to plug his plan.
"What is most remarkable about this effort ... isn't just the size of our investment or the number of projects we're investing in. It is how quickly, efficiently and responsibly those investments have been made," Obama said.
"This government effort is coming in ahead of schedule and under budget," he said.
He said the 2,000th project would widen a highway and rebuild an overpass in Michigan beginning this summer, creating 900 immediate jobs and double that number by the time it was finished next year.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/burningIssues/idUKTRE53C3LT20090413
Moves money into projects that benefit the public and creates jobs, putting money into the hands of Americans who can spend it, thus helping restart the economic engine.
Just doesn't seem like crazy talk, y'know?
Under budget?????
I think the bar (budget) is set pretty high. So even if it's "under budget", it's a budget full of pork that shouldn't have been there to begin with. It's like me budgeting myself $50,000 for a new car, and then buying one for $40,000. I get to say I was under budget even though I paid too much for 4 wheels.
the fruit we are seeing....
going to be sour apples for quite a while with the big 0 and Eddie Haskill...
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2Q2M2YzMDZiMGNmYjA4OTJkNTJjYjkyMTFkOGM1MTI=
What about mentioning the
What about mentioning the fact that even though Rep.'s did in 8 years to "pump up the national debt" the Dem.'s and the Obama administration are crippling (tripling) the national debt in one year?
I personally support the "Tea Parties" but mainly because I think it may actually do some good. It is remeniscent of the real Tea Party in Boston where the dissidents of the oppressive, over-taxing, and corrupt government of England which was crippling the Colonists, finally stood up and said no more. The current administration is using MY tax dollars and giving them to PRIVATE companies and banks because of the fear of failure - but that is the way a Capitalistic system works, isn't it? We let the bad fail, and the good prosper.
I am sick of people trying to say that the problem with this administration is about raising taxes when the reality is that it is about spending our hard earned money to pay for things like schools and roads, and ensure the safety of our homeland and instead giving away money in huge, never-before-seen sums to people who failed in the first place and do not even DESERVE to do business anymore!
Why don't you liberal journalist get outraged atthe fact that $800 Billion was spent to prop up big business instead of giving it the poor, hungry, or needy? Hipocrits!!!
I agree
Yes. I don't understand what these people are complaining about -- we've got a stimulus bill that is investing money into our infrastructure and creating jobs, the "bailout" bridge loans that the government made to financial institutions are going to be repaid (see the news today on Goldman Sachs for example - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/13/AR2009041302803.html ), and we're moving back to a culture of accountability.
95% of Americans have either no tax increase or lower taxes under the Obama administration -- with the only increase being a modest return for those with incomes of over a quarter million to rates that are lower than they were under Reagan.
The "protests" seem to be much ado about nothing, apparently fueled by the Ron Paul faction and funded by a few billionaire conservative funders.
I really don't get what the teabaggers are getting excited over -- but I do hope that they wear eye protection while they're engaged in it! lol!