How to fix Utah's education problems.

Now, I realize this idea may well catch on and run like wildfire through all 3 people who frequent this blog, but the whole subject infuriates me so much, I have to put down my solution to it, its cathartic.

Every year around legislation time here in Utah we hear the same thing, not enough money is going to schools, why aren't we putting more money into schools, etc.. I found it especially nauseating this year as people were wanting to 'hold education harmless' in this budgetary crisis, even though they got like a 10% funding increase just last year, when everyone thought the State was flush with money. Heaven forbid they feel the bite of the budget axe like everyone else.

This post won't be about how we should decrease funding for education, I'm not espousing that position (though it is important to note that we spend more on education as a state than any other thing budgeted). This post will be about how that vast sum of money could actually be put to some sort of efficient use.

One of the biggest problems is the popular idea that we need 'local' control over our schools. I don't even know if anyone has ever defined that in the debate, as it makes no logical sense. Are people fearful that those in Vernal will push their Godless views on us Davis Countians? Or maybe that the special and unique needs of the student in Washington County couldn't possibly be addressed through the same curriculum as the kid going to Bear River. "Local Control" has acheived near unimpeachable status, it is good because it is good. We value it, because it is valuable. Ridiculous.

I would like to tear local control from the cold dead fingers of the bloated beasts that are school districts, and give all that power to the state. Let me explain. If one were to do a little reasearch (which I have), one would find that the number of administrators in a fairly good sized school distric (say Davis County), is just seven people fewer than the population of Albania. There are 5 curriculum supervisors for special education alone. Now we are not talking about Special Ed teachers, no, we are talking about district level administrators, making well over what the top teacher in the district is being paid. Now, forgetting for a moment that it shouldn't take 5 people to administer special ed for Davis County, let alone just the curriculum; does anyone really think that every single school district in the state needs a duplicative position, coming up with curriculum for the special ed needs of a school that may be within walking distance of the next district to the North, or South?

This is the bare bones of my proposition.

All local school districts are disbanded. There is a superintendant of schools for the state of Utah. This superintendent then has around 2 dozen assistant superintendants (or whatever title makes people happy). Each of these individuals, like VP's in a corporation, are in charge of a different area/geographic locale. When there is a local issue, this assistant can meet with the principles, teachers, whoever is needed from the local area. And guess what, instead of having some giant monstrosity of a district building, that meeting could take place in any number of buildings that the government already owns....called schools.

There can be a curriculum committee, for the entire state, as the kids in different areas of the state do not need separate curriculums. You can have specialists (either serving as assitant superintendants, as previously mentioned, or on the curriculum committee), for things like Special Ed. or ESL.

There can be one, count em one purchasing agent, so that instead of each district having separate contracts for books, paper, etc., there is one. Guess what, paper is the same in St. George as it is in Logan, and Houghton Mifflin doesn't have different Chemistry textbooks in Tooele.

There are 200+ individuals on Davis County Schools payroll that make more than the highest paid teacher. People scream that teachers need to be paid more. Well, from the way it looks, its not because there isn't money being spent on the State level.

The current division in the school districts in the Salt Lake Valley is going to cost the State an estimated 1 million dollars, just this year. And what was the purpose of that? Why did the people rise up and kick out the west side of that school district? That's right 'local control', which in this case was a catch phrase that merely covered up the idea that the wealthier east siders just didn't want their money going to the poorer west side schools. Nice.

I would love anyone, please, to point out how anything that a local school district does couldn't be done better on the state level. I would love for anyone to point out what would be worse through State control, without using the phrase 'local control'.

The education budget in this state could be cut significantly, and I'm not even talking about taking that money away, but think how much more could be done with that money. Of course, the UEA would collectively crap a brick at the very idea. Why? Who knows. They like to be contrary, case in point.

What about local school boards you say? I again throw down the gauntlet, please tell me what benefit they give the community. The only thing of substance that I know of that the Davis county school board did, was effectively end the Church's allowing missionaries to do service in public schools, everywhere in the country. Thank your local school board member, it was the best service I got a chance to do, until we were told we couldn't anymore, because of the consequences of a Davis County School Board decision.

So, please, I beg of you, anyone who thinks this is a flawed idea, please give a better one, or somehow try to defend the current system. Its not that I have to be right, its that I want a better system. So if this isn't it, let me know what would be.

Big fan of Energy Solutions

So, ES is back in the news. They have been trying to find a way to be allowed to expand their business to accept a very, very, lucrative contract. For those of you who don't know, ES specializes in disposal/management of radioactive material. Now hold on, I know the term radiactive makes you think of Marty McFly in his big yellow suit putting the Plutonium in the Delorean, but there are lots of types of radioactive material. I'm not an expert on radioactive materials, however, there are different levels. What Energy Solutions wants to do is bring in low level waste from Italy. Italy, not surprising, has no where to really put it, so they are willing to pony up big dollars (or Lira, though I would suggest that ES gets dollars), for somewhere to put it. Think about it, Italy is only 116,000 square miles with a population of 59 million, Utah itself is 85,000 with like 2.5-3 million. So, space wise, we're pretty open. But I am getting ahead of myself, I'll get back to our natural resource later.

Many people are completely against ES being allowed to do this, at the forefront is Gov. Huntsman. Though, I really think the reason people are against it is more PR and scare tactics than anything else. People seem to imagine glowing liquid being poured into their sewer's when they think of radioactive waste disposal. Please take a moment to go to this site. It is an aerial satelite view of Clive Utah, the only thing in Clive, is the ES disposal site.

ES has been blocked at every turn in trying to get authorization to bring in the italian waste. They have come up with a new proposal. With the state in such dire straights, economically, ES has proposed that in consideration for getting authorization to bring in the waste, they would give Utah 50% of the profits of the italian contract. That portion is estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Now, I frankly think that ES should have already been allowed to do this, as I don't understand the roadblocks put in front of this legal, legitimate, and very successful employer in our state. But, with this to sweeten the deal, I cannot fathom saying no. However, our Governor has vowed to veto any legislation that allows it. Some are hailing him as a hero, standing on the tracks, not allowing the death sludge into our state. I think he's being a grandstander.

With the clear boon to our state, and the fact that we are talking about a very good employer, and business, it baffles me that the State seems to be doing anything and everything they can to stand in the way of this businesses expansion and success.

Pride

So, I think in his being incredibly naughty, my son Hyrum gave my Dad a greater surge of pride than any of us ever did in our obedience. So, yesterday we left our kids at my parents for an hour or so while Alisa and I ran to Target. When we came back we were just in time to catch the tail end of his being in trouble. Apparently, he crawled under the piano and found a complex system of pegs, springs, levers, etc. that I didn't even know where there. Well, as Hyrum is wont to do, he messed with it, and took it completely apart. This resulted in all the pedals falling off. It took my Dad a while to get it all put back together again. Anyway, the result was my Dad saying that Hyrum would have to be an engineer. He then said we needed to get Hyrum an erector set, lincoln logs, tinker toys, et. al.. I think my Dad is hoping for an engineer in the second generation, since none of us turned out to be one.

Stimulus, as I see it.

So, I am filled with a dual sense of anger and joy about the stimulus bill passing. I am of the opinion that one was needed, and not just one filled with tax cuts, I don't think that would have helped much of anything. However, I am angry at how it seems people (see democrats in the House and Senate for the most part), decided that this was the time to increase spending on so many of the things that they support. Now, some of these can be argued that they are good and worthwhile or not, but thats not what this bill was supposed to be about. This was emergency stimulus, meant to be money injected into our economy to create jobs, stop losses, boost the economy, and in general begin to right the ship of the American economy. Some of it did that, and I am grateful that it passed, some I think is the worst kind of irresponsible spending forced through under the guise of stimulus, and peppered with the threats of 'if you don't pass this, people will lose their jobs'.

As of now, I will be referring to the house bill, as that is the one that I could readily find this specific info on. This won't be the final product, but I doubt it will be too much better. I will be referring to this chart I found it helpful.

Good Things: Military construction, Highway construction, federal building repair, water infrastructure, defense facility repair, national park renovation, anything construction related.

Maybe: modernizing nations electricity grid (depending on what is meant by this), Elementary and secondary school renovations (again, depending on what they mean specifically), community development grants (" "), Rural development, Extend unemployment benefits (this one is a big iffy for me, it really depends on how it is implemented)

Things I don't like at all:

18.5 billion for renewable energy programs. The only way I would be on board with this is if it were actual construction, this shouldn't be a research bill (though I support research funding, just not here).

17 billion for pell grants. This has nothing to do with stimulus, again I am not against pell grants as a rule, but it doesn't belong in this bill.

20 billion for food stamps. Before anyone gets up in arms about me wanting kids to starve, if this program is getting stretched thin, then they need to look at how it is run. I found this on the internet. It has a chart of maximum amounts you can get based on number in family and income. One example, the maximum for 5 people in the household (same as I have), is 643 dollars. I make what I consider to be a fairly good living, and we budget 200 dollars a month for groceries. Now, that is low end, because we choose to put money on other budget things, and we could definitely spend more. But 643 dollars as a monthly grocery budget is frivilous. Flat out frivilous and irresponsible. The fact of the matter is, if we needed to, we could survive on less (and I don't mean just eating ramen). 200 dollars a month is eating well, but making choices, and shopping sales etc. I in no way support 20 billion more to food stamps, not until there is a complete overhaul of their evaluation system, then if they still need more money, I would be behind it.

11.1 billion, other unemployment compensation, I don't even know what that means, they already added more on for unemployment insurance.

29 billion on education programs. This is not an education bill, its supposed to be stimulus. I don't care if the programs are awesome, this is the wrong place.

20.2 billion to the Dept. of Health and Human services. Their budget is wildly bloated if they actual can claim to need 20 billion more. I would love to know what they specify this money is needed for.

5.6 billion in expanding broadband. Again, this is not stimulus. It can be argued (and is elsewhere on this blog), whether its something the feds should get involved in, but certainly not in a stimulus bill.

3 billion in research grants. Wrong place, period.

40.8 billion in health insurance assistance for the unemployed. This looks like an end run frankly. I'm not sure exactly how or in what way this is supposed to be implemented, they already have 90 billion in temporary federal medical assistance (I assume medicaid and medicare).

So, just those things are 165 billion dollars. None of which I see as even remotely stimulus. Oh well, whats done is done. But I don't like how it was done.

The dangers of Nitrous Oxide

Three things so far.

So, Obama has been in place for a few weeks now. Personally I think the whole first 100 days idea is pretty dumb, because I don't think any presidency can or should be judged on their first 100 days, but that is a different rant.

Anyway, I wanted to comment on three things I have seen so far, and how I judge the administration on those.

First, I was ecstatic to see that the Obama administration is taking the BLM by the scruff of the neck and shaking some sense into them. Now, I may not agree with the reasons, I think Obama's administration will be more against domestic drilling as a blanket stance, and that isn't my opinion on it, however, I do love the fact that they are going to hold the BLM to the rules and regulations that are already in place to protect natural resources. Utah's BLM in particular has been running roughshod over regulations playing fast and loose with rules that I frankly agree with that require certain levels of research and discretion with our natural resources. No more energy corporation rubber stamps from Utah's BLM. I give the Obama administration an A+ on this one. Good job.

Second, Obama has been talking a lot about the new stimulus package, and how it must be passed now. My opinion is similar, I do think a stimulus package is necessary, and I do think the quicker the better. However, I think it does require a big level of scrutiny to make sure this doesn't become (or isn't already) a big Christmas tree for everyone to hang their own pet projects on. I do not think rhetoric like mentioning how many people will lose their jobs every day this package is debated is helpful, or productive. I think it is a bullying tactic to get Republican Senators to pass the bill and shut up about those parts they think are excessive, or unhelpful because they aren't actually stimulus. So, I agree there needs to be a stimulus, but I am very disappointed by the tone of the rhetoric that seems to be trying to stifle debate in a hurry up don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain, because this is important, way. Because of the importance of the issue, and how much I hate that kind of rhetoric: D+

Third, I am conservative, I do like the idea of smaller government in areas that I don't think the government is necessary. Case in point. Obama is talking about trying to take broadband internet access to everyone in America. Now, in theory I think it would be great if everyone had access to broadband internet. In fact, I thought it was a great investment for all of the Utah communities to decide to get on the wagon for the Utopia project. But, that is my point, I thought it was a great idea for the communities. I in no way think it is a good idea for the federal government to get involved in providing access to the internet for all citizens. This is not a vital bit of anything. Are there benefits to having the internet, sure, but I don't think they are a federal government interest. I remember that I was the first person in my family to have a private email address, and it was only a few months before I left on my mission, so, I do know that one can get along without the internet all together, let alone high speed broadband access. For going off on a completely uneccessary tangent that is stupid, and is nothing the federal government should be getting involved in: F.

So, not a lot of surprises so far. Because of our differences on what government should be involved in, there are sure to be lots of disagreements between me and this administration, but I like to give credit where it is due, and hope that good decisions keep coming.