Why Not “Begin In ‘11?”
Since his utter lack of accomplishment has effectively removed his name from gubernatorial consideration on the Democratic side, fewer people are paying less attention to what S.C. Superintendent of Education Jim Rex has to say these days.
Which is a good thing, because all this guy ever does is spit out PR gimmicks aimed at masking the same old “solution” – which is pouring more taxpayer money into a tragically-flawed system that refuses to change.
Take Rex’s latest PR stunt, “Begin In ‘10,” which apparently ignores the fact that he’s been in office for two years already and gotten absolutely dick done.
Oh well, in all fairness to Rex, “Begin in ‘08″ doesn’t rhyme … and rhyming is essential to any effective reform plan.
Anyway, here’s the skinny on “Begin in ‘10″ from our friends at The Voice:
Just days after South Carolina State Superintendent Jim Rex announced his plan for a new statewide property tax, he also introduced befuddled lawmakers and frustrated taxpayers to his “Begin in ‘10†program.
Despite two-years in public office, the plan is Rex’s first major attempt at a specific and comprehensive overhaul of a statewide public school system best known for its shameful 55% on-time high school graduation rate.
Also, Rex’s method of addressing the “funding crisis” in education (which is to furlough teachers) neglects to mention that our state’s school districts have squirreled away at least $700 million in surplus funds – $200,000 of which recently went to pay for the addition of a putting green at a private golf club in Spartanburg.
Which means there is no funding crisis.
We don’t need to “Begin in ‘10,” people. We need to “Begin the begin …”
Oh, and in case you were wondering, that kid is simply getting a jump start in supporting Rex’s “Begin in ‘11″ plan …
Comments
By Jim is cool on February 4th, 2009 at 5:38 am
I guess it’s better than “benign in 9″
or “whine in 9″
By Nope on February 4th, 2009 at 6:29 am
If fewer people are paying less attention, does that mean more people are paying more attention?
But you didn’t say what you think of the actual plan, beyond quoting the Voice for School Choice’s self-serving knee-jerk criticism.
And how about an honest discussion of district reserve funds. Should they save (like, to pay for buildings), or should they not?
By BBeltBuckle on February 4th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Intoducing a plan for a new statewide property tax when unemployment is at 9.5% is absurd, and hardly merits an “honest discussion”
As for the reserve fund, if this is a serious crisis, then they ought to be spending that money, not crying to editorial boards and lawmakers about their lack of funds.
By BIN News Editorial Staff on February 4th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
The good news is the voucher scam is dead in SC. And everyone knows it.
Jakie said so when he said Howie needs to take his “baggies” of money and go home. You see Jakie knows sic(k) willie and his “buds” at the Voice for Voucher Scams are bought and paid for by Howie and his carpet-buggers.
No one pays any attention to their anti-education propaganda.
Come on sic(k) willie. Do something constructive to help all children in SC rather than just the few who would benefit from your voucher scam.
Sign the petition:
http://www.goodbyeminimallyadequate.com/