Texas Gov. Perry refuses $700m for education from the Fed. (Bowie: school district, property tax)

[jimboburnsy]

Originally Posted by Dopo

Explain exactly how Texas would lose control of its education?
or are you just guessing that it's going to happen?

Are you just guessing that the stimulus money would somehow find a way to be securely and efficiently delivered and applied to the benefit of the children of Texas? Has any other stimulus money done that?

Has any Federal appropriation done that since WWII?

[crbcrbrgv]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

Texas-Ex here who spent 17 years total in Austin before moving back to CT. I enjoyed my time in Texas quite a bit. I'm glad you had a contemporary education while you were in high school. My impression is, however, that evolution is still "up for debate" in many communities and that theology and science are intermixed pretty regularly....

I had the opportunity to familiarize myself with Austin and then the small town mentality that was only 20 miles away and experienced both worlds.

Actually, one could argue that these communities have the right to mix theology and science. After all, school boards and their curriculum are the quintessential form of local government policy and mandate. Now do I personally think religion/creationism should be taught in school? Absolutely not. I would live far away from such towns.

I'm a fairly liberal guy (many in the Houston forum would probably say bat**** crazy liberal) but I am with Perry on this one. In fact, I think many Texans regardless of their political views are with him. We like to keep our school politics local whenever possible. After all, this is truly the American way.

[Bo]

Originally Posted by Poltracker

700,000 milion sounds like alot of money and it is but it is really just a drop in the bucket when spread out state wide and over a couple of years. It plays like a windfall to the general public and effects public opinion (see above posts) because of that perception but is not really the big windfall it sounds.

There are a couple of districts in San Antonio with annual budgets over $1 Billion. $700 million distributed proportionally across all of Texas spread across years really doesn't amount to much at all. If those $$$ come with obligations that each district spend a larger portion of its own money a certain way (unfunded mandates), then the wisdom of rejecting a fairly small pile of cash to protect a really big pile of cash is clearer.

[Poltracker]

Originally Posted by Bowie

There are a couple of districts in San Antonio with annual budgets over $1 Billion. $700 million distributed proportionally across all of Texas spread across years really doesn't amount to much at all. If those $$$ come with obligations that each district spend a larger portion of its own money a certain way (unfunded mandates), then the wisdom of rejecting a fairly small pile of cash to protect a really big pile of cash is clearer.

Exactly my point.

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by Dopo

Can somebody please explain this s.... to me?




http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/13/us/AP-US-Texas-Education-Funding.html (broken link)

Texas won't compete for up to $700 million in federal stimulus money for education because the program ''smacks of a federal takeover of our public schools,'' Republican Gov. Rick Perry said Wednesday.The funding is from the U.S. Department of Education ''Race to the Top'' program, a $5 billion competitive fund that will award grants to states to improve education quality and results. The program, created in the economic stimulus law, is part of Democratic President Barack Obama's efforts to overhaul the nation's schools.

The grant is a one-time payment, but the costly and unnecessary mandates will cost billions of additional dollars to be funded by the state in perpetuity. It's kind of like a drug dealer giving you a $10 bag of rock but you buying thousands of dollars in additional fixes over the next few decades after you get hooked. The difference is that a drug addict can quit his addiction with enough willpower. The entrenched bureaucracy protecting any government program never lets go.

[EasilyAmused]

By turning down federal dollars, we also turn down a federal curriculum in the future. I actually think it was an extremely good move.

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by EasilyAmused

By turning down federal dollars, we also turn down a federal curriculum in the future. I actually think it was an extremely good move.

The encumbering of this grant with expensive and unnecessary ongoing mandates is a really unfair and ideologically-charged way of handing back money that the states paid out to the feds. The right way to do it would be to provide block grants, with only the requirements that (1) it is spent on education, and (2) the state education budget - excluding the grant - must either stay the same or decrease no more, on average, than the other state departmental budgets.

[Bo]

Originally Posted by Poltracker

Exactly my point.

I know. I wasn't disagreeing, I just wanted to expand on your point because I believe that understanding the scale of the funds and the secondary commitment involved is the key to understanding the governor's choice.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by Bowie

I know. I wasn't disagreeing, I just wanted to expand on your point because I believe that understanding the scale of the funds and the secondary commitment involved is the key to understanding the governor's choice.

Let's say that you guys are right,
then why aren't all the other states rejecting it, if in fact they are getting a few dollars per student and then forced to run programs that they won't have money for them.

[Bo]

Originally Posted by Dopo

Let's say that you guys are right,
then why aren't all the other states rejecting it, if in fact they are getting a few dollars per student and then forced to run programs that they won't have money for them.

Couple of educated guesses...

They're so desparate for money that they're willing to look past the unfunded mandates.

Their governors are members of the President's party, which means they either support the mandates or they fear the internal partisan backlash that would result from not accepting the money.