(And I also posted here.)
1) By the way, “left blogostan” is clearly, and quite rightly, in an uproar over CNN’s hiring of Erick Erickson of Red State as a political consultant today, yet another conservative welcomed with open arms by our corporate media.
I’m not going to expound on this any more than my A-list “betters” have already. Instead, I’ll merely link to this pretty-all-encompassing Media Matters post on the subject to give you an idea of how wretched a move this truly is.
2) John Harwood of the New York Times lamented the partisanship of Washington politics here on Sunday; he did so while opining on another initiative in which the Repugs did their “Lucy-pulling-the-football-from-Charlie-Brown” number, this time on the financial reform bill sponsored by outgoing Dem senator Chris Dodd (boo-freaking-hoo, people!)…
(Repug Senator Bob) Corker (who allegedly tried to work with Dodd on the bill), a former Chattanooga mayor, pointed to Democrats’ pursuit of health reform under special budget rules preventing a Republican filibuster, insisting that the effort poisoned the atmosphere when “we were so close” to success. Mr. Dodd saw a simpler cause. “It’s not the rules of the place,” he declared. “It’s the chemistry of the place.”
This post from Crooks and Liars tells us that Corker pretty much wanted to drag out the whole process, which isn’t surprising when you consider how hard the banking lobby worked and how much they spent to try and eviscerate the bill, as noted here (Corker most definitely is their lackey in this process – so much for Harwood’s oh-so-elegant notion of regulation “woven into...financial firms’ soundness,” or something).
As noted here, though, Ted Kaufman of Delaware seems to “get it,” but along with Dodd, he’s leaving too (and this Think Progress post tells us more about the Dodd bill).
Also, Harwood tells us the following…
Even since the younger Mr. Dodd won a House seat in 1974, bipartisan negotiating teams have produced legislative breakthroughs. Senators Bob Dole, Republican of Kansas, and George McGovern, Democrat of South Dakota, collaborated on food stamps. Representative Dan Rostenkowski, Democrat of Illinois, and Senator Bob Packwood, Republican of Oregon, overhauled the tax code; President Bill Clinton signed a welfare reform bill passed by the House under the leadership of Newt Gingrich, Republican of Georgia.
I’ve been meaning to say something about this for a little while, and I’m going to weigh in now at last. I’m sick of reading this idiocy about how Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich supposedly sat down like reasonable men and, in the true spirit of bipartisanship, forged some kind of a compromise on welfare reform. That is nothing but inside-the-beltway mythology; as noted here, Baby Newton Leroy originally proposed only two months of welfare for women and children who qualified for assistance, and he definitely used the issue to attack President Clinton, as noted here (basically, the “Big Dog” was trying to apply the brakes while Gingrich rode the crazy train full steam down the tracks).
3) And speaking of nuts, Michael Medved at clownhall.com recently opined as follows (here)…
On March 4th, university students across the country participated in angry protests against tuition increases and budget cuts on their campuses. The demonstrators portrayed themselves as victims of oppression—ignoring the fact that the University of California system, for instance, already subsidizes each of them to the tune of more than $10,000 a year beyond tuition!
Meanwhile, in the land of reality (here)…
California's budget cuts have crippled a higher-education system known as one of finest and most accessible in the world.
"It's really a denied dream," said Jack Scott, chancellor of the 2.9 million-student California Community Colleges.
The community college system took $520 million in cuts in the 2009-10 academic year, or 8 percent of its budget. Scott estimates the system is serving 200,000 "unfunded" students, and thousands are being turned away from oversubscribed or unavailable classes.
The Cal State system has lost one-fifth of its state funding in the past two fiscal years, a $625 million reduction, and students have absorbed a 32 percent tuition increase this year. The system's 48,000 employees took a 10 percent pay cut through furloughs -- two full days per month, across the board. The system is cutting 20,000 students this year.
And from here…
(The nonpartisan California Legislative Analyst’s Office) notes that (Gov. Schwarzenegger’s) budget relies on a controversial interpretation of Proposition 98 that reopens last summer's dispute over how much California owed schools then and in future years. (Proposition 98 is the 1988 constitutional amendment that dictates the minimum level of funding for K-14 schools.) Schwarzenegger's budget reclassifies education funds from 2008-09 so as to reduce the amount the state would have to give schools in 2009-10 and 2010-11.
Education groups on Wednesday gathered at the California Teachers Association office in Sacramento to charge that the governor had reneged on his agreement in last year's budget. While education leaders said they hoped not to litigate the issue, a CTA attorney was among the participants in the press conference, and they said they believed they would prevail if they had to ask the courts to hold Schwarzenegger to last year's budget deal.
LAO states that "the Governor's proposed funding level is based on his interpretation of the constitutional provisions of Proposition 98 regarding the creation and payment of maintenance factor. If a different interpretation were to prevail, the minimum guarantee would be significantly higher." LAO says the state would owe schools $2.2 billion more in 2009-10 and $3.2 billion more in 2010-11 than the governor wants to give them.
So of course it’s the fault of the students for demanding that king’s ransom of 10 grand a year for their education, which probably isn’t even a drop in the proverbial bucket when it comes to the other costs they’ll incur over the course of pursuing a degree (and I’m assuming Medved’s math is right here, which is probably generous on my part).
As noted here, though, Medved has to manufacture a “bad guy” in as dramatic a fashion as possible to earn his “right-wing” cred. Given his utter failure to communicate California’s educational budget woes in this post, though, he should probably stick to demonizing Democrats, liberals and the like in Hollywood movies, since that seems to be about his speed.
No comments:
Post a Comment