Democrats have said they want to cut elsewhere in state government to find money for aid to schools. Senate Democratic Leader Scott Heidepriem of Sioux Falls said state government in previous years has forced agencies to cut spending by a certain percentage, and that approach could work again.
“It’s so simple it’s amazing to me,” Heidepriem said, adding that he doesn’t believe the Republican governor is willing to control the size of state government.
It doesn’t surprise me one bit. Even when the economy was good, Rounds refused to properly fund education, now he has an excuse and he is going to run with it.
While more than 90 percent of Democrats said they wanted to boost state aid to schools by more than the 3 percent recommended by Rounds, only about a quarter of Republicans said they believed state aid should increase by more than that.
Even if the legislature gets a super-majority to be veto proof on an education bill (which I don’t see) Rounds will still find a way to overstep the legislators, just like he did with the blender pump tax and laptops (how did that work out for yah, Mike). He simply doesn’t like to be told what to do. This will be a true test for the legislators. Will the typical Republican cheerleaders like Krebs cave to their favorite state Republican? Will the Dems do more then mouth off to the media and internets about how much of a brat Mike is? (seriously, that’s my job, not yours.)
It’s time to show Rounds that he has been extremely ineffective as a governor and quite possibly, unethical (another thing legislators are too chicken-shit to do something about).
POVERTY HAS AN EFFECT ON EDUCATION FUNDING
One has to wonder though, maybe education funding is sufficient in South Dakota. Student test scores are always pretty decent, but high school dropout rates are high. One reason may be the growing problem of poverty in our state.
A couple weeks back a SF School district representative gave a presentation to the city council about poverty in Sioux Falls. Some scary stuff, here are a few highlights.
– 40% of caucasion children in the SF school district are on FREE or reduced lunches, and that number is as high as 75% in minority community.
– Supt. Dr. Homan doesn’t like to have late starts with bad weather because she wants to make sure these kids get something to eat for breakfast.
Some of the other numbers are hard to swallow to. A lot of these kids also have little winter clothing to wear, and often go hungry on the weekends. The amazing part about it is, it is not discussed much by our local or statewide politicians, it is kind of a ‘silent problem’. After the presentation, one councilor even had this to say, “Thank you for the presentation, but what is this council supposed to do with this information?” And maybe this is the problem. I think politicians think if at least 51% of people in the community are doing OKAY, we can ignore the minority. I find it ironic that Sioux Falls spends more per year on mowing an acre of parkland then they do educating a child. Who knew grass was more important than a decent education? Nice priorities, Huh? I also wonder how much money in education funding is going towards feeding, counseling and healthcare for some of these kids? Something that parents should be responsible for, that is, if they can afford it. The problem isn’t just funding education properly, it is also about creating a business atmosphere in SD that creates more living wage jobs. Government can’t create higher paying jobs, but they can help attract those kinds of businesses. Just imagine if we spent half the money we do on tourism for business development, what kind of impact that would have on the state? (of course than Lawrence and Schiller would have to go out and find real clients).
It’s time for our legislators (it’s too late for the governor) to realize the root problem of education funding – Poverty and low wages.
I heard an interesting excuse for not funding education better yesterday from someone I used to think was smart:
“We don’t need to be spending any more money to educate these kids ’cause they’re just gonna leave the state anyway.”
Apparently, he’s not alone in his thinking.
He’s right, the smart one’s leave and the dropout’s stay.
Pingback: SD Watch Must Reads for 1/12/09 « Missouri Valley Eclectic
A few of us come back.
It’s still no excuse not to fund our schools properly.
I heard a similar story concerning corporate training.
“You could possibly spend money on training and have the employee leave or spend no money on training and have the employee stay.”
The other thing I don’t understand is this. Rounds is in a panic- tax collections are down. We need to cut spending, the sky is falling, etc.
Munson and Mr Burns are telling us that there is a drop in tax collected but it’s not that bad. The city of SF can keep spending.
Who’s right?
Did you also see in today’s paper there was a 308 permit drop in new single family homes built over the last year? Yet we increased the sales tax based on building NEW streets for NEW home development. What homes? People will either be buying older homes or just keeping the one they have for awhile longer. Though I do admit, with the low interest rates, this will be a good time to buy, or re-finance (which I hope to do soon) if you have the money and a job.
I also heard there is another bond vote coming down the pipe for a multitude of ‘quality of life’ upgrades such as the Zoo and Big Bear.
I often wonder what dreamland Munson is living in, and more importantly why the council continues to vote for it?