The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3812
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Ladas [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:13 pm ]
Post subject:  The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Stimulus Pushers from the WSJ. Bold by me.

WSJ wrote:
To treat Washington's spending addiction, the November elections are the taxpayer's best chance to stage an intervention. But until then, President Obama and the Democratic Congress are determined to keep pushing strung-out state governments to take one more fix.

Witness yesterday's 247-161 largely party-line House vote to approve a Senate bill shovelling another $26.1 billion out to state education and Medicaid programs. The White House has promoted the bill as emergency assistance for strained state budgets. But this unique brand of therapy drives states to spend more, not less. The "assistance" is so expensive that several governors were begging for relief even before Mr. Obama signed it into law.

Standing with teachers yesterday in the White House Rose Garden, Mr. Obama said, "We can't stand by and do nothing while pink slips are given to the men and women who educate our children or keep our communities safe." Maintaining the salaries and generous benefit plans for members of teachers unions is indeed a top Democratic priority. That's why $10 billion of the bill's funding is allocated to education, and the money comes with strings that will multiply the benefits for this core Obama constituency.

Specifically, the bill stipulates that federal funds must supplement, not replace, state spending on education. Also, in each state, next year's spending on elementary and secondary education as a percentage of total state revenues must be equal to or greater than the previous year's level.

Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi did the math and figured out his state will be worse off. Mr. Barbour says the bill will force his state "to rewrite its current year [fiscal 2011] budget. Preliminary estimates of the Mississippi Department of Finance and Administration show that we will now have to spend between $50-100 million of state funds—funds that must be taken away from public safety, human services, mental health and other state priorities and given to education—in order for an additional $98 million of federal funds to be granted to education. There is no justification for the federal government hijacking state budgets, but that is exactly what Congress has done."

For Texas, and only Texas, this funding rule will be in place through 2013. This is a form of punishment because the Beltway crowd believes the Lone Star State didn't spend enough of its 2009 stimulus money. Apparently Texas politicians have been clinging to the quaint notion that the government should try to live within its means.

Texans also seem to have an old-fashioned appreciation for the rule of law. On Friday, 22 GOP Members of the state's Congressional delegation sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "This provision would have Texas violate her own State Constitution," they wrote. "The Texas Legislature has sole authority to determine State appropriations. Moreover, one Legislature cannot bind a future Legislature. Requiring the State to assure that a future Texas Legislature would commit to spend funds in accordance with these provisions would violate the Texas Constitution."

Texas Governor Rick Perry is also opposed to this new "assistance" from the federal government. He understands that one-time payments that force permanently higher state obligations are a windfall for government employees. But if given the choice, taxpayers would just say no.

That's because taxpayers are figuring out that these state bailouts are only making unions more reluctant to share their sacrifice. While Mr. Obama quotes the union figure of 160,000 potential lost teacher jobs, those don't have to come out of the classroom. According to research by Eric Hanushek of Stanford University, student enrollment grew by 22% from 1990 to 2007, but teacher employment grew by 41%. Since 2000, enrollment has grown by 5% but teacher employment by 10%.

The unions themselves could have prevented some layoffs had they been willing to adjust their rich benefits. In Milwaukee, for example, nearly all of the 500 teacher layoffs announced earlier this year could have been avoided if the unions had agreed to change health plans that cost $23,000 per teacher per year for family coverage. They could have accepted a still-rich $17,000 plan. The unions chose the layoffs, betting (correctly) that Democrats in Washington would come to their rescue.

Keep in mind that this teacher bailout also amounts to a huge contribution by Democrats to their own election campaigns. The National Right to Work Committee estimates that two of every three teachers belong to unions. The average union dues payment varies, but a reasonable estimate is that between 1% and 1.5% of teacher salaries goes to dues. The National Education Association and other unions will thus get as much as $100 million in additional dues from this bill, much of which will flow immediately to endangered Democratic candidates in competitive House and Senate races this year.
***

So in the name of still another "stimulus," Democrats are rewarding their own political funders, putting the most fiscally responsible states into even greater distress, and postponing the day of reckoning for spendthrift states. Oh, and Mr. Obama rushed to sign the bill Tuesday, violating his campaign pledge to give the public five days to read legislation online. As we say, the only way for voters to stop such fiscal abuse is to run this crowd out of town.

Author:  Uncle Fester [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:23 pm ]
Post subject: 

Raise your hand if you are at all suprised. Now the money goes to the teacher, the teachers money goes to the union, and the union money goes to the Dem's who passed the bill, a perfect circle jerk has been achieved and we are the Oookie cookie at the center

Author:  Mookhow [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Quote:
For Texas, and only Texas, this funding rule will be in place through 2013. This is a form of punishment because the Beltway crowd believes the Lone Star State didn't spend enough of its 2009 stimulus money. Apparently Texas politicians have been clinging to the quaint notion that the government should try to live within its means.


:lol:

Author:  Diamondeye [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Since when does Congress have the power to tell a State how its going to spend its money?

Author:  Vindicarre [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

Just like they did with the 55mph speed limit and the lower BAC for DUI's, they just withhold funds from those who don't do their bidding.

Author:  Müs [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Diamondeye wrote:
Since when does Congress have the power to tell a State how its going to spend its money?

Well, since yesterday apparently.

Author:  Khross [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Diamondeye wrote:
Since when does Congress have the power to tell a State how its going to spend its money?
It's a practical result of the Fourteenth, Seventeenth, and Incorporation Doctrine.

Author:  Ladas [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Vindicarre wrote:
Just like they did with the 55mph speed limit and the lower BAC for DUI's, they just withhold funds from those who don't do their bidding.

Do states have the ability to reject these funds? I can't image how Congress could make them accept the funds with the conditions (which is why they played their tricks with legal age and speed limits), but I wouldn't put it past this Congress either.

Author:  Khross [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Ladas:

Interstates make things complicated. Tennessee rejected Federal Highway funds for years, as did Louisiana, but both are getting lots of other pressure for the condition of Federal Highways in their state.

Author:  Lenas [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:10 pm ]
Post subject: 

You mean Ladas, good sir.

Author:  Khross [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Curse my mortal brain ...

Thanks, Lenas.

Author:  Ladas [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Khross wrote:
Ladas:

Interstates make things complicated. Tennessee rejected Federal Highway funds for years, as did Louisiana, but both are getting lots of other pressure for the condition of Federal Highways in their state.

I'm not familiar with Tennessee's decisions, but in LA, it wasn't that they refused the funds, its that the funds were withheld because LA refused to make to their alcohol laws.

In this case, the states get the money first, then have to change their laws or their budgets after the fact. Presumably if they don't, they have to give the money back.

I haven't read the bill yet though to have the specifics, I was just speculating.

Author:  Khross [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Ladas:

The problem is that the States are still on the hook for maintaining Federal Highways whether they take the funds or not.

Author:  Uncle Fester [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yeah unfunded Federal mandates!

Author:  Müs [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 3:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Khross wrote:
Curse my mortal brain ...

Thanks, Lenas.


Its ok, blowing as many rage points as you did earlier does tend to leave one a little drained.

Author:  Khross [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 3:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Malkav ...

That was just a willpower.

Author:  Müs [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The recent NEA bailout had some interesting "strings"

Khross wrote:
Malkav ...

That was just a willpower.


I see you more of a Glass Walker Ahroun. ;)

Author:  darksiege [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

White Howler Metis Galliard

Author:  Müs [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

He can't be a White Howler. There aren't any anymore :p

Author:  darksiege [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Müs wrote:
He can't be a White Howler. There aren't any anymore :p


That is right, they are called Black Spiral Dancers now...

Author:  Müs [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:20 pm ]
Post subject: 

Khross is too sane to be a BSD ;)

Author:  Monte [ Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:47 pm ]
Post subject: 

18 Billion dollar budget Deficit in Texas. Live within it's means? ORLY? Heh.

The Governor could start with cleaning up his own tax-funded luxury lifestyle.

There's a proposal on the table to put a state income tax into place for people making 100K or more. It would be the only state income tax Texas has. I think it's a great idea.

I'm not sure how people justify being deficit hawks while being anti-taxes.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/