Brian Williams introduced a report on NBC Nightly News (4/21/10) with this declaration: “Public schools from coast to coast in this country are looking at tens of thousands of layoffs, a lot of them teachers, because the money is not there.” Correspondent Ron Allen went on to report:
In Springfield, Illinois, thousands of teachers turned out to try to save their jobs and programs; music, art and sports activities all being threatened with elimination. Many school districts are hoping for federal stimulus help, but in the meantime are locked into longer teacher contracts and higher salaries for tenured teachers. Some experts predict that American education must adjust to a new reality.
This was followed by a quote from Michael Petrilli (who is identified as representing the Thomas Fordham Institute, which is not identified as a conservative education group): “Not only do our schools have to go on a diet, they need to adapt to a whole new way of life because I—this money is gone, and it’s not coming back anytime soon.”
Concludes Allen: “A crucial test now facing the nation, how to educate more than 50 million public school students with less.”
“Less”—that’s the key message here, that teachers, parents and children need to accept that “the money is not there” and “adapt to a whole new way of life”—one in which teachers get paid less and children get less education. Only, if the “money is gone,” where did it go?
Here are some facts from the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis: Between 1971, when I was entering my school-age years, and 2009, the U.S. per capita GDP doubled, from roughly $21,000 to $42,000 a year (in constant dollars). Since 1984, a couple of years after I graduated from high school, it’s risen by 50 percent—from about $28,000. Just since 1996, the nation’s income per person has increased by something like 20 percent.
Assuming that educating our children is at least as important as our other national priorities, we ought to be able to fund education twice as well as we did 40 years ago, and half again as well as we did 25 years ago. Why is it, instead, that NBC is telling us that schools are going to have to get by with less? Because while the country as a whole has a lot more money, most of it has gone to making the rich richer—and they have no intention of getting by with less.
I am a student from Willoughby, Ohio. While I am lucky to live in an area that has a pretty good school system, I know Cleveland schools are not so lucky. The Cleveland Labor union estimates 650 members may lose their jobs. And obviously this isn’t the only place. Detroit is planning a major reconstruction of their school program, closing 25% of their public schools and promoting private schools. Democracy only works when you have an educated youth learning the truth. Obviously our “leaders” don’t want that if they can’t fund schools. Now I am by far the not an expert on this topic. So if anyone has any complaints with what I said post ’em. That’s the only way I am going to learn and see everyone’s view.
Justin, Here’s an expert’s view on the US education system: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/5/protests. Here’s another expert view: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-dixon/when-reforming-education_b_530799.html. If you want to know what NBC and other major media outlets are doing right now, read Naomi Klein’s “Shock Doctrine”: http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine. If you want to know what happened to redirect business profits and wage-earner income to a small coterie of international financial capitalists over the past 40 years, read these political-economic experts: Gerard Dumenil and Dominique Levy’s “Capital Resurgent: Roots of the Neoliberal Revolution.”
Now all of US policy is conditioned by the following article of faith, as espoused by a 20th century right-wing expert organizer, Ludwig von Mises: “Men are born unequal and…it is precisely their inequality that generates social cooperation and civilisation.” To paraphrase US President Richard Nixon, “We’re all conservatives now.”
Yet, the work of these experts can show with data how our contemporary drive for social, economic and political inequality is the bane of social cooperation and civilization: economist Robert H. Frank & social epidemiologist Richard G. Wilkinson. And since you’re in high school, an accessible introduction to the impact of reformed education in the US is Daniel Brook’s “The Trap: Selling Out to Stay Afloat.” Or watch Adam Curtis’ documentary series “The Trap.”
Justin, it’s encouraging to see someone your age clued in on the straight skinny, when so much in our education system and popular culture mitigates against that.
If you’re up for it, I’d be curious to know why that is. Of course, it might be as seemingly simple as keeping your eyes open. That was essentially the case for me. As I matured, the contradictions between what I was told were the principles we should live by, and the reality of how those principles served as a cover for their moral flipside, became glaringly apparent.
In other words, there was something wrong, very wrong, with this picture, and I couldn’t deny what was right in front of me, in spite of the societal siren song tempting me to do so.
Does that jibe with your experience?
Thanks for the links Mara. I check Democracy Now! almost daily (I kind of remember that article but I must have either just glanced at it or skipped over it). It is a great website with great interviews and discussions. I frequently print out the interviews and use them for my current event in American Government. To answer Doug Latimer’s question, I got introduced to politics and independent media websites through punk rock bands. In particular Rise Against and Anti-Flag. Both are straightedge vegetarian bands who use their music to fight against injustice. Anti-Flag in particular provides many resources for kids like me to learn the truth. That’s how I learned about Democracy Now! and FAIR as well as other great independent websites (like Truthout.org). I sometimes think how I would love to take American History again and realize how “great” our textbooks can be at distorting the facts (I have to give props to my teacher last year who gave us A People’s History by Zinn in that class). I am currently reading it. Anyways, thanks for the info and post any more questions or comments if you have them.
Justin, thanks for posting your comments. “A People’s History” is an excellent book, and I’m so glad you are reading it, and that a teacher introduced you to it. I had to find it on my own in my 50s! Considering your inquisitive mind and the sources you have cited, you may be aware of the issue of money-in-politics. (That’s how this thread started, right? “Money for schools is…gone.”) You may want to check out the web site publiccampaign.org for info about public funding of campaigns–otherwise known as “clean elections” or restoring our democracy. Because as you may be aware, the reason we don’t have money for schools is that our elected representatives are not working for US. Anyway, it’s great to know you’re out there in Willoughby. I’m in Cleveland Heights!
Whatever happened to the tax rates that were in effect in the 50’s, 60’s, and through the 70’s? Why aren’t the richest taxed now as they were then? The right wingers say we “leftists” are trying to rearrange the distribution of wealth. Of course, they’re wrong again. The “distribution” of wealth has already been rearranged by tax breaks for the rich and corporations. We on the left are trying to get things back to where they were before! I see no reason why a billionaire cannot get along with a LOT less. The gap between the “haves” and the “have-nots” has gotten way out of proportion. Lots of our problems can be solved with a more progressive income tax.
I don’t think we can fail to mention explicitly the permanent war economy and the incredible absorption of resources by the military establishment in understanding why the education of ordinary citizens has a low priority.
Thanks for replying, Justin.
You may be aware of Common Dreams (http://www.commondreams.org, oddly enough). I get their daily compendium of org press releases, news items and opinion pieces, and while I have to wonder why some of it passes muster, there’s quite a lot of solid intel and insight to be gleaned.
See what you think. As for folks to keep an eye out for, off the top of my head, I’d recommend Chris Hedges, Naomi Klein, Glen Ford, Ali Abunimah and, of course, Noam Chomsky.
I try to take what I think’s the best there and elsewhere and repost it at my dinky little blog above. Check it out if the spirit moves you.
Connect the dots!
The costs of Bush’s $1.3 trillion tax cut [for the rich] and a $3 trillion war [see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR2008030702846.html%5D drastically reduced discretionary federal funding to states and municipalities. Now states are having to scrimp and save in order to balance their budgets. â┚¬Ã…“Scrimp and saveâ┚¬Ã‚ is code for under-funding essential human services. That $4.3 trillion â┚¬Ã…“shortfallâ┚¬Ã‚ is the equivalent of about $14,300 for every man woman and child in the U.S. Here in the state where I live, with a population of 6,500,000 our share of that works out to over $93 billion!
The state legislature here just raised taxes on cigarettes, soda, and bottled water in order to help fund the state budget. Those taxes fall most heavily on working class people. (I wonder why the legislature didn’t raise taxes on limousines, yachts, diamonds, and 5000 + square foot housesâ┚¬Ã‚¦hmmm.)
Connect the dots. Shortfalls only affect the working class. Less than 2% of all households in the U.S. have earnings in excess of $250,000. (The wealthiest 400 families have a combined net worth of $1.57 trillion!) Those rich folks own stock in companies that produce military hardware, and all that entails, and oil stocks too! The war is making them filthy rich!
(Speaking of oil companies, did you know EXXON had earnings of $48 billion yet paid zero taxes to Uncle Sam?)
Connect the dots. War[s] and tax cuts to the rich wind up costing the rest of us dearly. Is that justice? Anyone answering â┚¬Ã…“yesâ┚¬Ã‚ to that question is practicing Newspeak linguists.
I haven’t time to read all these blogs, but I’m impressed by the intelligence of those I did. I especially want to encourage everyone to read Howard Zinn. He is not your typical public school history resource — such is the shame! At a recent family reunion, I found a copy of “A Simple History” belonging to my granddaughter,
and this gives me a little hope for a world humans may have doomed. Howard Zinn recently died, but Noam Chomsky is still alive. I think everyone should read him too. Read on, everyone!! The importance of this to me is that this is my first blog, and I’m 75 years old. -)
I’ve had JUST ABOUT ENOUGH, with this BIG LIE, that the school funds are tapped!
WHERE, is ALL this money that taxpayers, has spent playing the LOTTERY?
Children have to have 22 credits to graduate now; unlike it were, when I came out of high school (needing 18; graduating with 18 1/2).
I’m concerned about ALL of the children and there children, who has to muster these evils that lurk, that undoubtedly, will hinder (as it has for years), there concentration on there education!
The last thing they need, is for the monies NOT to be there, for those that are determined to make it!
WHAT are the children to do?
PS: I have a solution!
1. Stop talking about cleaning up corruption and DO IT, that way, we’ll be able to see where our school funds has landed! (don’t be suprised that so amny people is aware of this fact)!
2. Tax the businesses, that profit, from these evils, such as the culprits that we are learning are stealing our school funds! I bet you then, we’ll find MORE of our school funds!
3. Take the mask, off AIG, for this cat and mouse game that the government is allowing to be played, stalling with the return of these bailouts, is unbelievable!
PS: It is TOTALLY amazing to I, that these companies are allowed to take taxpayers mones, don’t do anything productive (for the consumers, who sign their checks) and have the audecity to cry FILE, when it’s time to produce!
My final question, is to my president? When are you going to realize, (no offence), that Chicago, needs to be hospitalized, for something is terribly wrong with the bueaacrats that exist here. This town, is under AUDIT, all because the right people, are not given the right opportunity to get us out of this mess.
We need a NEW ELECTION, ASAP!
From the mayor, to the AG, to the Chief of School Board!
HELP!
PPS: CHESTER MENTAL HOSPITAL, IS SWARMING WITH EMPLOYED PEDIPHILES AND THE HEAD ADMINISTRATOR< PATRICIA KELLEY< SHOULD BE THE FIRST TO AGO, ALONG WITH HER HUNCHO, CHRIS ROBINSON!
WISDOM
There’s a lot of wisdom right here in the comments to this story. It’s a pleasure to read the thoughts of such a strong group.
I’d like to add that some of the famous websites and people mentioned in the comments NEVER go to the top. It may be that they have been compromised, or they have yet to learn the facts or to accept the facts. It’s a process — because the facts are so shocking to our American “We’re Supreme In Every Way” worldview.
There can easily be excellent funding for education AFTER we get ahold of the reins of our government and sever the hose from our Federal Reserve bank to the supreme thieves.
The wisdom comes after acquiring some knowledge of history, especially the control of money. It’s part of the vital history that nobody gets in school.
Please visit:
http://www.EqualPartyUSA.org
A true representative democracy — and prosperity — are within our reach.
When any nation chooses to use over half its national budget for military hardware, and allow secret agencies like the CIA an unlimited secret funding, other public funding is bound to suffer…other than business subsidies, if the biggest lobby group in the world (chamber of commerce) can help it.
There’s a lot of talk about lotteries, income tax, military spending, etc. I thought schools were paid for by mill levies on property taxes. At least I thought this was true in Colorado. If I’m basically correct, then the recent housing / mortgage crisis explains a lot of our present conundrum (my property taxes went down some 15% even while money itself becomes worth less and less, because of economic factors like increases in energy costs). So we can bitch and moan about where I income taxes go, but isn’t this a red herring? Aren’t the funding streams entirely different?
What am I missing here? (BTW, I was certified to teach HS science in the late 80s, but declined the profession entirely when it became apparent that the economic support for education in this country was unsustainable, esp. in inner city environments — because it was paid for through local property taxes. Where am I wrong?)
You’re right, Sasqwatch–the way schools are funded (like here, in Illinois) is utter madness. A thinking person might be inclined to think that it’s done deliberately. There’s plenty of money for the War Department, and for coddling the criminals on Wall Street, but the age-old cry of “there’s no money” and “learn to get by with less” always goes up when school budgets come around for consideration. Lewis Lapham has written many fine essays on this–if you’re still around this site, Justin, check out his collection of essays entitled “Hotel America.” Let’s face it, if our country wanted to really get first-rate, fully funded education for all children, we would have exactly that, overnight.
There are two reasons for the crisis in funding. I. The wealthiest citizens pay essentially no taxes. This includes real wealthy people, wealth concentrating foundations, and of course, huge corporations. In 1965 the top tax bracket was 84% and now it is 24%. Capital gains taxes have been all but eliminated and so have inheritance taxes. No money coming in. II. We’re engaged in two simultaneous wars and we maintain an armed forces larger than all the armed forces of all the other nations of the earth combined. This was not true in 1965, when we had one war and a total expenditure for military budgets that was comparatively smaller than it is today (as a percentage of GDP). It doesn’t take a math whiz to deduce that when you have less money coming in and more going out (to things other than education) there is going to be a reduction in other programs like education, public health, transportation, and other infrastructure. This is the inevitable result of the neoconservative influence on national policy, really beginning in the Nixon years and accelerating rapidly under Reagan and the Bushes (and not really decelerating under Clinton).
The real money is in the hands of huge corporations, who hire lobbyists, and contribute grandly to our elected officials campaigns in return for tax loopholes enabling Exxon etc to pay NO tax to our government! We need to get the money out of campaigns altogether, and close those loopholes. At least a minimum tax on their profits should be in place. Then there would be plenty of money for educating our most precious resource- our people. The media never mentions the disproportionately small contribution of corporations in the nation’s income…Could it be because the few “news” outlets are owned by huge corporations?
What was the per capita amount spent in 1971 compared to the per capita amount spent today?
Jessica MacGivray has it exactly right. So does Martha Heinz. I teach but I’m disgusted at the way unions are just caving in on the “bad teachers must go”, “tenured teachers cost a lot of money” and “the problem is the teachers’ unions”, etc. It’s a diversion and it’s time to wake up. We haven’t had real unions in a long, long time. A real union wouldn’t put up with this effort to evade the problem which is subtle and no amount of high stakes, multiple guess testing or charter schools is going to help.
Look at the “Race to the Top” program: is it any surprise that most of the money is going to programs which have a strong charter school component? If we’re really honest about the problems with education, it’s that it’s harder to remove those kids that won’t work and won’t behave. That’s why private schools are at times seen to be better. If a kid doesn’t behave, they are asked to leave–simple and effective. Now the charter and private school folks will say that this doesn’t happen much but the kids know the score going in, i.e. that they will be asked to leave, and therefore it’s likely that they adjust their behavior.
Could it be that the folks who are happy to siphon money away from all public ventures have found what seems like a fiscally sound way to finally scrap public education altogether? Who would want to teach with everyone on their back with unrealistic demands from everyone from school board members to parents to state education departments, and on and on? Why not go into teaching private school where one can be appreciated for one’s expertise? Tenured teachers aren’t a bad thing–they indicate the quality of the job itself and they have expertise that’s learned from years of trying to do the right thing by kids, in most cases against all odds. If we had real unions, we could support each other and stand up to these attacks but again…
Sure, if per-capita GDP has doubled since 1971, in real dollars, one would think that government would also have twice as much revenue to fund additional programs or increases to existing programs.
But, this article is sorely flawed. It leaves out two critical facts:
1. How has taxation changed since 1971. I’m pretty sure that people pay more in taxes today than they did in 1971, perhaps by a factor of 2. Why is this important? It is important because government likely has at least twice the money it had in 1971. Perhaps FOUR times the money.
2. How much is actually being spent on education. The actual sums are enormous and have increased dramatically since 1971. There is so much waste today in K-12 public education. For example, about half of the money spent on salaries goes to non-teaching positions. Some districts are below 40%, others are in the 60% range. Imagine how much could be saved (or redirected) if most of the salaries went to teachers.
Lastly, what a shame the the people behind this website have appropriated the word FAIR to characterize what is in reality a left-wing outlet.
DaveW-
It is called FAIR because they go after misleading reporting. Does all misleading reporting have to be right-wing? No.
However, since the advertisers currently dominate and control the main stream media (MSM) and since those advertisers are PREDOMINANTLY businesses, then you are going to find that this website is mostly populated by left-leaning articles. You will have to deal with it. Crying that there aren’t enough examples of left-leaning bias is simply an insufficient complaint. Unless suddenly all the folks with $ are the leftists and they advertise, the MSM that FAIR comments on is going to be right-shifted.
As to your point #2: this is exactly what the main article should have asked. Not just FAIR’s argument about “where’s the money”, but also why is it going to admin? The answer is that public schools have a massive amount of administration because of the right-wing idea that schools needed to be more “accountable” from back in the 1990s when Republicans forced schools to have a bazillion new success mandates. Now, I am all for improving education. And I am all for increasing the standards, but why did we build up a crop of six-figure salaries in schools where we already have overloaded teachers?
I think if one is interested in “taxes” then one only has to look at the tax rates for the wealthy from the Eisenhower administration to the Bush administration to see that they truly aren’t paying their fair share even rate-wise, not to mention the fact that many of these folks and corporations game the system to pay little or nothing.
NCLB was a joke and teachers knew it. Accountability is fine if you’re building a house but when it applies to trying to sort out whether a kid learns because of you, despite you, or if you have no effect is truly impossible. Then to try to do it with kids that you can’t pick, or someone else chooses “randomly” (in many cases “pets” get their pick first), it becomes truly ludicrous. Life isn’t a multiple-choice event.
I do agree with what’s said above about the fact that much of the spending is wasted at the top and it’s even worse now as teachers are losing their jobs. Class sizes are increasing as we “race to the top” but I disagree that this column has a left-wing bias. I think in our quest to be “fair and balanced” few folks will call out blatantly obvious falsehoods and misrepresentations. We need to be careful about going overboard to give everyone a voice–especially when some of these “voices” are corporately controlled. Just look at how the tea party movement is controlled by corporate interests and how they are able to manipulate many older fearful misinformed folks to demonstrate against their own best interests. Follow the money folks and be very skeptical. I can understand why wealthy folks would be against funding education, social security, medicare, health care reform, etc…even if I find it repugnant but for middle-class to poor folks to do so is beyond me.
Maybe it’s just a desire to rub elbows with the upper crust in hopes that they’ll get trickled down upon but you’re not having a beer with these folks unless you’re ultimately paying the tab.
Obama and Duncan’s Race to the Top is even WORSE than Bush’s No Child Left Behind. Forcing states to compete for dwindling pots of cash… all based on bogus and destructive assessment and curriculum policies… is a travesty. What’s next, Obama trumping Bush by calling for the murder of an American citizen? Oh, wait, never mind.
Its not about how much money is spent, but HOW the money is spent. Raising the salaries of the teachers and administrators doesn’t do a darn thing to help educate students. Guaranteed raises and pensions are killing the system. They’re right. The money isn’t there any more. Speaking as a life long Democrat I can’t stand this. I want my two children to get a solid education…not be forced to learn particular things so they can pass one test so the district can get more funding. Its my belief that all education funding should be handled on the local levels. The better districts will attract more students and therefore more funding locally. Bad districts will end up with fewer students and can use their funding better until they start putting out a better product.
Richard said:
Connect the dots!
The costs of Bush’s $1.3 trillion tax cut [for the rich] and a $3 trillion war [see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR2008030702846.html drastically reduced discretionary federal funding to states and municipalities. Now states are having to scrimp and save in order to balance their budgets. â┚¬Ã…“Scrimp and saveâ┚¬Ã‚ is code for under-funding essential human services. That $4.3 trillion â┚¬Ã…“shortfallâ┚¬Ã‚ is the equivalent of about $14,300 for every man woman and child in the U.S. Here in the state where I live, with a population of 6,500,000 our share of that works out to over $93 billion!
The state legislature here just raised taxes on cigarettes, soda, and bottled water in order to help fund the state budget. Those taxes fall most heavily on working class people. (I wonder why the legislature didn’t raise taxes on limousines, yachts, diamonds, and 5000 + square foot housesâ┚¬Ã‚¦hmmm.)
While I agree with the point Richard is making here (which is: to make up for the reduced discretionary funding states have to raise taxes on things which tend to disproportionately affect the working class) I don’t have one small bone to pick. I don’t know what state you are from, but I live in Texas. The reason why in Texas the state legislature raises sales taxes and doesn’t raise taxes on things like “limousines, yachts, diamonds, and 5000 + square foot houses” is because the state does not collect a property or an income tax. Municipalities earn money through property taxes–not the state government. That’s why when buying a house in Texas you want to research what city your house will be in, because that will determine how much you pay for that house. I’m not sure if “diamonds” fall under property taxes though, but I think you seemed a little facetious in your suggestion of taxing those. I do agree with you though, in cutting discretionary spending to states, the federal government is forcing states to find new ways to gain revenue. Seeing as how most states only have a sales tax, this forces them to raise taxes which adversely affects the middle and lower classes. I also want to add that in Texas the governor has no say in formulating the budget, maybe this would explain GWB’s ineptitude in this regard. Again, I don’t know what state you’re from, so if you happen to be from a state which can and does collect a property/income tax, then I’m sorry I wasted your time.
Crap. I meant to say “I DO have one small bone to pick.” I hate when I miss stuff like that.