Obama Attacks Education Cuts, Nelson Unable To Defend
Yesterday, President Barack Obama made clear he is not accepting the Senate "Gang of Moderates" compromise as is, while the Senate moderates failed to mount a logical defense of their cuts.
In short, the Senate compromise on economic recovery means to prevent $70 billion in unintended "Alternative Minimum Tax" increases largely for upper-middle-class Americans (desirable perhaps, but not stimulative and best dealt with in a tax reform bill), the diminished but still influential "Gang of Moderates" slashed $16 billion for jobs in school construction and improvements, as well as $40 billion for aid to distressed state governments, a cut which will risk massive layoffs for police, firefighters and teachers.
Bizarrely, the Senate moderates' talking point is that their compromise is all about "jobs, jobs, jobs," when their version would create or save 600,000 fewer jobs.
The President had made modernizing our classrooms a central feature of his case for the economic recovery bill. Despite the Senate cut, he still is.
At the Elkhart, Indiana town hall, he was quite blunt:
The Senate version cut a lot of these education dollars. I would like to see some of it restored. And over the next few days, as we're having these conversations, we should talk about how we can make sure that we're investing in education, because that's what's going to keep companies investing right here in the United States over the long term.
At the evening press conference, he was not explicitly critical of the Senate, but his position in favor of the House school construction funds was unmistakable:
Education, yet another example. The suggestion is, why should the federal government be involved in school construction?
Well, I visited a school down in South Carolina that was built in the 1850s. Kids are still learning in that school, as best they can, when ... it's right next to a railroad. And when the train runs by, the whole building shakes and the teacher has to stop teaching for a while. The auditorium is completely broken down They can't use it.So why wouldn't we want to build state-of-the-art schools with science labs that are teaching our kids the skills they need for the 21st century, that will enhance our economy, and, by the way, right now, will create jobs?
After the press conference, "Gang of Moderates" leader Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) was pressed by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow to defend the school construction cuts. His response is nonsensical (emphasis added):
MADDOW: Why did you push to cut more than $15 billion of school construction money out of the bill?NELSON: Well, the Republicans who are looking to join with us have an aversion to federal money going for that kind of a program. It is a state responsibility, local responsibility. Local governing boards - boards of education.
I, too, am concerned about money coming from Washington. As governor, I faced the under-funded mandate of special education where the Federal Government promised to be a partner with it. I faced back here a decision about "No Child Left Behind," another under-funded federal mandate.
There is a very sincere concern about the Federal Government getting involved in local education. My colleagues on the other side were very leery about that, and so they insisted that that not be included at the level that it had been.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
So, because Senate "moderates" are concerned that the federal government won't keep school funding promises to states, these federal legislators are cutting proposed school funding to states. Got it?
The argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny. And President Obama insistence on talking up education is ensuring that it gets scrutiny.
Next question: will the President do the same today for aid to state governments?
One sign: at today's town hall in Florida, the President will be joined by pro-stimulus Republican Gov. Charlie Crist.
Originally posted at OurFuture.org
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
It is a shame that the education cuts have been made. Maybe some of the Repubs should spend some time in the schools, watch the hungry children come in every day. I still remember the day I traveled the neighborhoods campaigning for Barack and got to see how some of my school children live. I knew then that he would help them. It's okay the Republicans send their children to private schools. They have money. They don't realize the number of Americans that don't have that choice and know the schools need help. I hope the Republicans actually delete themselves from the face of the earth. They should go live on Limbaugh planet since he seems to be their educator. What a shame that they had to cut education. Oh, they are good at creating legislation but, don't fund it. That would be wrong to fund. You only fund those rich folks on Walstreet. My gas bill this month for heating was higher than my paycheck. When is somebody going to care about the teachers?
The focus here is exactly right. Make all the anti-recovery Senators and Representatives explain why they oppose funding for schools. Spending that creates and saves jobs in the short term, while preparing our future work force (not only children, but also adults learning new skills after losing obsolete jobs) to do the work that our country needs done and to contribute to our economy through their spending and taxes, is NOT WASTEFUL. They think they can just throw around terms like "pork" and about half the country will automatically jump on their band wagon without stopping to consider the source or analyze the claim. The best cure for that mentality is - Oh my - EDUCATION!
It's actually the Reptilian Party, not the Republican Party. And they all operate out of their ancient reptilian brains, which are wired for survival by focusing on the 'four effs' : feeding, fighting, fleeing, and f ...... g
That's a good one! Probably very, very true as well.
First Mr. Scher, I would like to thank you for not being derisive of these moderate allies, as at least one other blogger on HP was.
I disagree with your statement that Nelson (or more correctly as he stated, "the Republicans who are looking to join with us") has a position which is non-sensical.
It makes a lot of sense to recognize that extending federal government involvement into school construction is new and may or may not be good in the long run. What if in the future voters start voting down bond issues for new construction, expecting federal money instead?
And if the federal government starts paying, won't they want to choose which schools and what features, choices that under our current system are made locally? My children's schools in the Boulder (Colorado) Valley School District are undergoing major rennovations. The plans for those were developed with intense parent and community involvement. That would have been necessarily changed - not necessarily for the better - if the federal government were paying the bill.
IF questions like these were answered, I may be more open to construction funding than these moderates. But I believe their view that it is simply better not to invite the federal government in at all is very 'sensical', and in fact principled. It may be ironic, but it is not non-sensical. If we admit that, it may be possible to have a little genuine debate which would improve the bill.
We here in Boulder are quite a privileged lot. We can afford to build our schools as we like, and, as a community, value education. To apply the standards of Boulder to, say, inner city Chicago is ridiculous. If the stimulus package cuts both funding for school construction AND aid for states where, exactly, does one expect the money to come from?
I suggest you read Jonathan Kozol. His book Savage Inequalities, though written 20 years ago, is still germane to the conversation we are having today. Don't let our little Utopia (or darn near) blur your vision of the rest of either our state or our country.
I thought the idea here is that the federal govt. would be funnelling this money to the local/state govts. with the instructions that it x money be used for school construction project, y money be used for etc....
I don't think the federal govt. is looking to choose which schools get how many of what kind of projector - etc....
am i wrong?
Mr. Obama explained that exact point to the Contractor in the audience in Ft. Myers today, the funding for school construction would come through established State programs if they are already in place.
Point taken, commentator101. I believe it's vital that the spending be structured such that the local community has some control over investment of federal funds. Note, however, that the school in South Carolina to which the President referred is almost certainly in a school district too poor to raise the funds for school construction. There are thousands of such schools across the country, where the local tax base is simply insufficient to support increased funding for education--whether that funding goes to build or improve schools, hire teachers, or buy books. Boulder is a wealthy town with tax dollars to spend for these things. Imagine you lived in an impoverished inner city or rural district instead: given the choice between no funding and no improvements for your children's school, versus federally directed funding resulting in improvements, even without much local control, which would you choose?
A lot of these "moderates" come from wealthy, privileged backgrounds who have no idea what the working poor face on a regular basis. Many of our poorer citizens work at more than one job and have neither the time nor the energy to attend meetings, whether it's a good idea or not. If the community has the input, that's very well and good, but if not, the kids still need a school that isn't falling down around their ears and they deserve the same good books and equipment as the rich kids get. An education should not be decided on by the dollar signs, as it is far too often.
It is far better to have new schools built by the Federal Government than to do nothing at all and let the kids suffer. It is easier to learn in a bright, well-appointed school, and the tax-base to provide same just does not exist in some areas.
Republicans truly believe that if people remain ignorant, they can manage to continue dazzling them with their small talk and boo hiss. They still don't understand the importance of intelligence!
Um... why can't funding for schools go into a separate, most likely less contentious EDUCATION Bill? What does it matter which bill it's in as long as it gets passed? Are the Democrats that clueless?
Because the funding for schools will put folks to work soon. Tax cuts won't, so why can't some of those wait for another bill. Anything that creates jobs should take priority over tax cuts. Especially spending that not only creates jobs, but leaves something tangible to show for it that will benefit a community and enhance our future competitiveness. That is the definition of a win, win.
You could make that argument about almost any of the jobs creatuions features of the Stimulus bill. If we had to wait for every piece of it to come through various "appropriate" committees it would take a long, long time......while the economy continures its free-fall.
I'm convinced from watching all of this unfold over the past couple weeks, the republicans in the Senate are Literally trying to sabotage this bill for purely political reasons, trying to make the bill into a POS that wont work well at all.
I think Obama needs to wake up and start understanding that the GOP will continue to be nice to him to his face while Plotting his demise and consequently the demise of the American people that arent rich, to his back.
People keep giving the GOP the benefit of the doubt by saying stuff like "we All want to help"...blah blah blah, but the evidence piles up over and over that the only people they want to help are their Bosses - the richest people in America.
The GOP will Not allow this legislation to work for Obama or the American people because they want him to fail, and they dont care how many people they take down with him.
If they cared, you think for one minute they'd have let the economy slide like this with the mortgage and banking problems since 2006-7? Nope, the rich were still getting rich and thats all they care about.
Remember the scene in the first Indiana Jones movie where the great big guy is heading for Indie and whirling his huge sword and you think omigod? And then Indie pulls out a gun and shoots the guy? That's what the Democrats need to do with filibuster rule.
I agree, does anyone know what size of vote is needed to change the rules of the Senate? So either move to a House type rule where bills are assigned a specific amount of time for debate, or as some other posters have commented, go back to true filibusters - bring it up on the floor of the Senate, and make them talk for 24 hours straight, 7 days a week, no weekend recesses, etc.
They don't want to educate anyone in the first place. Thats why they're the party of Joe the "unlicenced" plumber and Sarah Palin. If it were up to them we'd all have a 3rd grade education.
you got it. ites easier to fool the sheep and get them behind you with 'downhome talk' and 'good ol boy' ideas if the masses are ignorant, and you give them as many guns as possible.
The great staw man in education is funding like cost per pupil means better grades of better education . . . in reality we all know crappy grades are a result of crappy parents in most cases.
How else can you explain inner city schools receiving more dollars per student than suburban schools yet many of them cannot graduate 50% of kids from high school.
If the parents don't care, it is rare to find a kid that does care.
It is my understanding that buildings are going to be upgraded and new ones built. This isn't money going for books, programs within the schools and whatever. If you have never read Kozol's Savage Inequalities- give it a read. It will open your eyes to the woefully inept schools MANY of our children are attempting to learn in- our "disposable" children in urban and remote rural areas.
A building is pretty but won't fix our education problems until parents become responsible.
If you give Detroit public schools golden drinking fountains and million dollar desks they aren't going to see a massive change.
Hey tm, didn't see your reference to Kozol when I posted above. I think it should be required reading for anyone wanting to cut any education dollars. If people think that the schools make no difference in the education of their children, just the parents do, then let's see them put their kids in some of the schools Kozol describes. Wanna bet if they would?
Yes, education is underfunded . . . I think we can clearly see that by looking at our state budgets.
In Georgia for example, only 57.4% of their budget goes to education! How are kids supposed to learn with only $11+ Billion a year?
In my state, Minnesota, a tiny 49.1% goes to education!
So teachers in Minn. do they have to pay for classroom supplies out of their paychecks?
What is the breakdown of that 11 billion? I am sure it covers all salaries, leases, insurance buses, maintenance, fuel oil, cafeteria, mold and asbestos abatement, educational equipment etc.... There are about 2800 public schools in Minnesota serving over 80,000 kids.
What would you rather see the money spent on?
Yeah and in Minneapolis we spend $16,000 per student . . . only 40% graduate.
What's you point?
Mine is the money doesn't mean success.
The work of the design and construction industry (which is at a standstill right now because the banks are not lending money to owners to build), accounts for nearly one in 10 dollars of our national GDP.
http://www.aia.org/advocacy/federal/AIAS078578
Here is a great study the analyzes the cost benefits of "Green Schools" to a Community:
http://www.cap-e.com/ewebeditpro/items/O59F9819.pdf
The study finds a cost benefit of $74/sq ft of school for a cost of $3/sq ft of school, leaving a net gain to the community of $71/sq ft of school space.
...and as Mr. Obama explained to the Contractor in Ft. Myers today, the funding for school construction would come through established State programs if they are already in place.
This cut is no more than obstruction for obstruction sake.
Or just stupidity.
Our school district had 40 year old "temporary" classrooms.
This was back in 2000.
The idiotic "IDEOLOGICAL" argument is that they do not want the FEDERAL government involved in any way in the local SCHOOL DISTRICT....
What kind of stupidity is THAT - I think NELSON needs to get with his OWN constituents:
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-30021676_ITM
Nebraska Budget:
Record $1.7 billion annually for K-12 & higher education, 85% of new spending is for the
education of our children.
http://www.budget.state.ne.us/
I'm interested to see why you think the feds should be supporting all the states?
BTW, you could save a lot of money if Omaha didn't allow a bunch of illegals to use taxpayer money to attend school.
Obama is correct about education and I feel confident he will keep pushing the point until he gets what we need. The proper funding of education is not popular, but in the long run, it is the only way people will eventually invest anywhere, in a small area, a large town, a city, a state, a country.
We cannot move forward with an ignorant populace.
The only reason republicans want that is for their own short-term gain of being re-elected.
Look at the record and the history....We have spent exponentially more money on education over the last 30 years and what has it gotten us? A population which is more ignorant than ever. It was too much spending and too much bad credit that got us into this mess, and the only thing that will get us out is to go back to traditional values of hard work, personal responsibility, faith and family values. Unfortunately, this society will never exist again....
tell that bs to the underpaid educators. and the students in crumbling buildings. and the parents that are being asked to include soap,paper towels,kleenex in school supplies because of budget shortfalls.
urweatherman- read Kozol's Savage Inequalities. The money is not being distributed equitably. The suburbs and high-value areas get the lion's share because of the tax structure regarding property taxes. Urban and remote rural areas get left out of the loop and do not get the funds they need to provide a proper education. It's pathetic and immoral .
I have an idea. Why don't we cut funding for education out of the bill only for the Republicans districts that do no want it to be part of the bill. Then they will be serving their constituents. ; )
I have a better idea. Let's cut ALL stimulus programs for the districts of anyone voting against it. Then we can tell their constituents how fiscally responsible their representatives have been. This should be particularly effective for those running in 2010. And their opponents can remind the voters over and over during the campaign.
Here here.
Unfortunately, there are sensible, reasonable Republicans, Democrats and Independents in those districts who need jobs, healthcare and better schools. They would be the victims, not their obstructionist representative.
One plan that may work: Every congressperson that thinks taxes are evil, should agree to work for $1 per year and return their unseemly tax-paid salaries back to the people.
That would be an honorable display of their principles.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
