The Eternal Stimulus
posted at 5:00 am on August 10, 2010 by Mike Antonucci
[ Congress ]
Only now, as the edujobs bill has overcome its largest obstacle in the Senate, are people beginning to ask questions about how this is all going to work.
The Texas constitution may keep that state from receiving $800 million.
Nebraska is in line to receive about $59 million, even though Jess Wolf, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, said, “We haven’t lost a lot of teachers at this point, (but we’re) certainly fearful that we might.”
I can’t say I’ve read every statement about the edujobs bill, but I certainly don’t recall anyone saying the money was needed to reduce fear.
Maryland should receive about $179 million, yet the Washington Post notes, “officials have no estimate of layoffs for the school year that begins in a few weeks.” The Baltimore Sun reported “most of [the state's] school systems are not planning to lay off teachers,” and that several were hiring new ones.
The money can be used to increase teacher salaries, which will be good news in Wisconsin, where education employees are scraping by this year with average compensation increases of only 3.75 percent, instead of the average 4.13 percent they’ve enjoyed since 1993.
Even before the Senate vote, the “yo-yo effect” of pink-slipping then rehiring teachers continued.
In California, 82 Santa Cruz teachers were called back and in Vallejo a total of 58 teachers had their layoff notices rescinded, leaving only 20-30 still out. In Scranton, Pennsylvania, teaching positions will likely be safe for the fall.
Politico reports on grousing from House Democrats, stating that “some of their vulnerable members will feel like they have to walk the plank, yet again, on a politically unpopular economic-stimulus agenda, while reminding voters of their failure to handle routine budget work this year.”
What’s a measly $10 billion out of nearly $700 billion in annual spending on public education anyway? Well, it’s the notion that the people who are drowning in the ocean are bailing out the people in the lifeboats.
A few weeks ago, the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government ginned up a neat little report, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data, on the nation’s job situation. Figure 1 is a depiction of the change in employment since the start of the current recession. The blue, yellow and green lines are the public sector. The red line is the private sector.
There’s more. After 30 months of recession, local government education employment (the category where most teachers and support employees reside) has yet to approach a one percent decline.
Of the 35 states for which we have data, 13 lost jobs in the education sector from the spring of 2009 to the spring of 2010. Mississippi was unchanged. The other 21 states had education employment increases – including New Jersey, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
It is highly likely that many of the teachers who were laid off this year – whose jobs we are now trying to save – were only hired because of last year’s stimulus money. They are essentially wards of the federal government. If this is the road to economic recovery, then we should simply hire as teachers all of the nation’s unemployed.
After such a huge victory in the Senate, you might think the teachers’ unions would be content to get out with the $10 billion, but they’re already raising the specter of perpetual bailouts. Richard Iannuzzi, president of New York State United Teachers, said the additional money only allows districts to delay the inevitable for a year because revenues are not suddenly going to rebound anytime soon.
The federal government is now firmly in the business of hiring and paying your local school teachers according to the flawed and self-interested projections of district administrators and teachers’ unions. It won’t be so easy to go back.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Why does the Federal government send money back to the states?
Well, everyone knows that it is to buy votes. Who started it? Remember Nixon’s ‘revenue sharing’? Was it done before Nixon?
For fifty years the federal tax rate has been too high, and state rates too low. The Feds spent all that surplus FICA tax trying to buy votes from the states and now it’s time to pay of the promissory note called Social Security, the Feds don’t have any money, the states don’t have any money, because government for fifty years has been a lie.
Skandia Recluse on August 10, 2010 at 7:01 AM
We’ve lost a lot of teachers in SWFL. After the sheriff drove the illegal aliens out, surprising how many unneeded schools and teachers we have left.
tarpon on August 10, 2010 at 8:13 AM
The 111th Congress already possess a spot in the history books. Since President Obama has been sworn into office, these “representatives” have spent MORE OF YOUR MONEY than any Congress in 230 years. But, alas, there’s one more record to put in the books. With the House of Representatives returning from their summer break, Democrats in the House plan on passing the quickest piece of legislation before returning to their districts. Price tag: A 26 billion dollar payoff to the teacher’s unions—a large percentage which is going to blue states who have been the most irresponsible at controlling their budgets.
While Democrats are touting this last spending bill as a saving grace for 160,000 teachers and other public employees, they are also saying the bill is paid for by eliminating the expansion of food stamp benefits in 2014. Sound familiar?
Yes, your Democrats, (and President Obama), created the health care entitlement by deferring the cost into the out-years. And, they say this multi-trillion dollar fiasco will be paid for by cutting Medicaid and Medicare to the tune of billions.
Any one see a pattern here? Democrats create give-a-ways that they promise will be paid for by cutting popular programs—in the future. Only one problem, they won’t be in control in the future. Republicans will get the blame if the make these cuts, and Democrats will cry (again) about how these mean old Republicans are taking benefits from the mouths of Seniors and Children.
It’s a ploy right out of Bernie Madoff’s playbook.
Open mouth and swallow.
Rovin on August 10, 2010 at 10:17 AM
This post has been promoted to HotAir.com.
Comments have been closed on this post but the discussion continues here.
Ed Morrissey on August 14, 2010 at 2:38 PM