Inside The Educrat Empire
You’ve heard us refer to the “education establishment” in South Carolina before, but what exactly is it?
Obviously, we all know about the State’s Ministry of Failure and Non-Competition, which employs an army of educrats to “administer” what is hands down the nation’s worst system of public education.
South Carolinians shell out over $11,000 per child – more than double what we spent a decade ago – and yet less than half of that makes its way through the bureaucratic/ consulting maze.
We also know about the “Education Oversight Commission,” which has basically devolved from its intended purpose into yet another worthless, status quo bureaucracy – an increasingly incompetent, inefficient and corrupt entity that basically spends millions of dollars a year giving us a rosier picture of what “generational neglect” looks like.
But these bureaucracies aren’t the extent of the S.C. taxpayer’s investment in failure – nor are they the extend of the “establishment” that’s fighting to keep the 73,000 South Carolina school children (most of them black and poor) stuck in failing schools.
This morning, our friends over at The Voice have a must-read post introducing you to the so-called “non-governmental” wing of the educrats’ Alphabet Soup Mafia, except that in many cases your tax dollars are funding their lobbying and propaganda operations, too.
These educrat associations – which typically represent school board members and local administrators – are the root of this state’s chronic academic woes.
They are the ones blowing thousands on travel and other non-essential expenses – while in the same breath threatening to fire or furlough teachers.
They are the ones spreading misinformation about parental choice.
They are the ones using taxpayer resources to wrongfully attack politicians for legal, properly-disclosed contributions.
They are the ones sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars in reserve funds while they complain about inadequate funding.
Most importantly, though, they are also the ones who are responsible for – and who insist on preserving – our state’s woefully-outdated “top down” approach to educating our children.
Which means they are the ones responsible for our current failure as a state – not the General Assembly, not the State Constitution, not the constant cry of underfunding, not “poverty,” not “racism,” not Howie Rich, not us here at FITS … and certainly not our teachers.
Check out the story … it’s an eye-opener.
And while the Voice report may be “propaganda” itself, at least it’s aimed at fixing the problem (as opposed to exacerbating it).
And at least they’re not asking you to pay for it.
Comments
By GGIH on May 1st, 2009 at 12:52 pm
So now only ONE DOLLAR of $11,000 per pupil gets through the bureaucracy? I’d argue with that, only it’s no more outlandish than all the other claims you make about schools and school funding. If you’re wondering whether to believe anything FITS says about education, here’s your answer.
By Republic, The on May 1st, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Great to see that so many can put food on their tables by defending failure.
By baker on May 1st, 2009 at 1:49 pm
This is yet another WAY overblown and misleading story.
Here’s a quote: “The South Carolina affiliate of the far-left National Education Association (NEA) teacher union, the SCEA is infamous in the Palmetto State for using public money (in the form of teachers’ and bureaucrats’ dues) for direct cash “donations” to their favored politicians.”
I’m pretty SCEA dues come from the teachers themselves. It’s THEIR money. Yes, they are public employees, so the taxpayers fund their salaries. But does anyone honestly believe that once the paychecks are cut public employees shouldn’t have the right to spend their money the way they see fit? That would be a strange and bizarre concept. What else would SCRG and FITSNews forbid public employees to spend their earnings on? Is SCRG proposing taking away Constitutional rights here?
School boards, meanwhile, consist of ELECTED people. And many elected politicians have taxpayer-funded public relations machines.
I’m honestly not sure how SCASA dues are paid. If that comes out of the school districts’ budgets, then perhaps SCRG has a small point….in regards only to that organization.
By GnuBerry on May 1st, 2009 at 3:30 pm
You seem fixated on vouchers.
By B-Side on May 1st, 2009 at 3:35 pm
I’m pretty sure SCASA employees are on the state healthcare plan. Wouldn’t that count as taxpayer subsidy?
By ouchi on May 1st, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Baker, Good post! Teachers has professional associations as do engineers, journalists, political consultants, and [gasp] yes –the chamber of commerce. A little history here. The legislature for decades refused to allow teachers to have a check-off on their paychecks for payroll deduction of dues. They feared creeping unionism. Then along came an alternative group I believe called the Palmetto Educational Assn., nonpartisan, nonendorsing, and more independent which more teachers are joining.
I repeat your assertion: since when can one not spend ones own money on what one wants. My teaching relatives have choice and belong to neither assns.
Another story in which tidbits of the truth get woven into a web of cynicism for a picture of disasterous proportions with the lamest of solutions and most blatant of agendas.
By Lexvegas on May 1st, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Baker, there are 70K plus kids trapped in failing public schools and you are defending the rights of unions and politicians to lobby against fixing that. You are truly callous.
By RON PAUL on May 1st, 2009 at 4:08 pm
NO MORE PUBLIC SCHOOLS!!!!! GET BIDS FROM PRIVATE EDUCATORS AND TEACH THE KIDS PROPERLY.READ THE CONSTITUION…NO DEPT OF EDUCATION !!.WHY ARE AMERICANS SO DUMB?? WHY CANT THEY FIGURE THIS OUT?? IRONIC..? BECAUSE THEY WERE TAUGHT IN PUBLIC SCHOOL.THEY WANT YOU TO BE DUMB SO THEY CAN LEED YOU AROUND LIKE SHEEP.WAKE UP PEOPLE
By Jack on May 1st, 2009 at 4:08 pm
You’re right they are not asking me to pay for their propaganda; they’re asking me and every other taxpayer in South Carolina who does not have a child in private school to help pick up the tab for their children’s expensive private school education.
If helping children is what your goal really is, how about putting your money where your mouth is. Instead of giving everyone in private school a tax break; I propose a bill that takes the same amount of money we would expend on giving tax breaks and sets up scholarships fund for children who are currently in failing schools, to go to private schools if their family income falls below a certain level. We could also allow corporations to contribute to the fund, and get a tax deduction. This goes directly to the alleged problem, and everyone pays their fair share of the experiment cost.
Win, Win, right?
By Toyota Kawaski on May 1st, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Yesah Mr.Rich right away
By GGIH on May 1st, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Good job on the correction. I guess that’s what happens when you put the same words together over and over again in varying order, without thinking about what they mean.
By baker on May 1st, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Lexvegas — I think what I’m defending here is constitutionally protected speech….at least where the SCEA is concerned. With the School Boards Assoc., I think it’s not much different from all the many other elected officials who have spokespeople or marketing executives on their staffs. Again, if money for SCASA comes out of taxpayers’ pockets, then maybe there is a complaint….but that’s a lot less, in my opinion, than what Will and his “friends” at SCRG are trying to stir up.
That said, I’m not necessarily a huge fan of teachers’ unions….the SCEA, of course, is hardly a union, as it has no real power to negotiate contracts for its members. Either way, I’m not their biggest supporter. I was just trying to point out what a sham that article was.
So, I don’t know that any of this is “callous.” Indeed, I think the SCRG solution to fixing our schools is impractical and illogical. So, someone not agreeing with your idea doesn’t necessarily make that person “callous.” Of course, if a person or group is using thoroughly dishonest propaganda and bait-and-switch tactics to get their way…..
By BIN News Eidtorial Staff on May 1st, 2009 at 6:14 pm
It’s refreshing that BIN News is no longer the only voice exposing sic(k) willie as a voucher pimp.
He has nothing honest, intelligent or original on education.
He only quotes his bud (singular) at Voice for Voucher Scams.
And the other fake groups like:
S.C. Voucher Scam Council.
South Carolinians for Responsible Government Voucher Scams.
South Carolina Voucher Scam Policy Council
All astro-turf scams. Nothing close to grass-roots.
That’s why they don’t have membership lists.
By Kobayashi Maru on May 1st, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Kind of makes you wonder about how many poor students Howie could’ve rescued from “failing” public schools with the millions he’s spent pushing his voucher plan in SC – I mean, of course, if that’s what he’s really about. All of that money – elections; hundreds of anti-public school mailings and TV and radio ads; pay for lobbyists to push the issue – as well as pay for some to stay out of it; hats, t-shirts and buttons for all of the home school kids; some of the best rallies money can buy; countless trips for politicos to Milwaukee; “studies” touting the merits of their product; lawsuits and lawyers; a “SC-based” fully staffed organization with nothing to do year-round except push this one issue; bloggers; and, well, it just makes you wonder.
By BIN News Editorial Staff on May 1st, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Kobayashi Maru makes great points. Except the part about Milwaukee trips. How is that a perk for the voucher scam wackos? Every been there? In winter?
K.M. please keep this porn site in perspective. It’s run by a voucher pimp.
A paid political voucher pimp.
By The Senator on May 2nd, 2009 at 1:12 am
Jack on,
You just made The Senators day, just as we lay me down to sleep we realize there are folks much more F***ing stupid-err than we, and that makes us feel good, real good. Sweet Dreams Jack off or is it on, oops. Hey got some property for sale in Iowa if you are so inclined, maybe something coming avail in NH soon?
By Flowers on May 2nd, 2009 at 4:41 am
I accept this site why because I learn more information from this site
By BIN News Editorial Staff on May 2nd, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Flowers, “more” of what information? She probably gets her other news from the National Inquirer and Hustler. Both are equally reliable to fitsnews.
By Fits Lies on May 2nd, 2009 at 9:42 pm
The U.S. provides a “free” public education for its children. We, SC, figure that we don’t need to pay taxes to pay for this education. You Republicans (or should I say right wing wackjobs) think that we don’t need to pay taxes and then we can just blame the SCEA for the problems which you people who don’t want to pay taxes cause by underfunding the schools. Then you rich folk now want us, the people, to pay for private school which most of the citizens of this state can’t afford. Absolutely AMAZING. The conspiracy you always want to talk about is really the misdirection you right wingers are using. Use guns and abortion to get them on your side, then side with the corporation and bankers to keep the normal folk poor…..yep, love the Republican Party (or used to when it was the sane party, not overrun by the right wingers)….
By B-side on May 3rd, 2009 at 9:07 am
“Instead of giving everyone in private school a tax break; I propose a bill that takes the same amount of money we would expend on giving tax breaks and sets up scholarships fund for children who are currently in failing schools, to go to private schools if their family income falls below a certain level. We could also allow corporations to contribute to the fund, and get a tax deduction. This goes directly to the alleged problem, and everyone pays their fair share of the experiment cost.”
If I’m not mistaken, this is exactly what Student Scholarship Organizations do, and it is a big part of the legislation the school choice crowd is pushing this year.
By Insider on May 3rd, 2009 at 9:51 am
Baker – I know that most of the School Districts and I would be willing to bet that ALL of the districts pay dues to the SCSBA on behalf of the local boards. That IS taxpayer money. I’ll bet that 90% of the SCSBA revenue is paid from SC school districts general fund. I know the district that I live in pays the dues – and they are not cheap.
I was told two years ago by an ex-member of the State Board that the SC State Board of Education does not pay annual dues to to the National School Board Association for their lobbying efforts and has not for several years. If this is still the case, I don’t know. If they don’t – then good for them.
One of the big problems with real education reform, and I not just talking about vouchers or tax credits for parents of homeschoolers and kids who attend private school, are largely tied to the groups in the VSC article. They care less what parents and open minded educators in SC think when it comes to education in SC.
By baker on May 3rd, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Insider — With regard to the school boards, as I said, I don’t see that as much different from other elected officials who have taxpayer-funded p.r. operations. And I think it’s worth keeping in mind that school boards are democratically elected, so it’s reasonable to believe that their communications efforts are, to some degree, an extension of what the majority of voters in their communities agree with or approve of.
That said, again, I have my criticisms of such organizations, including the SCEA. But I am absolutely floored that a libertarian-leaning group like SCRG would claim as “public money” wages that school teachers pay in dues to their organization. It’s just a really bizarre argument.
By Jack on May 3rd, 2009 at 5:51 pm
B-Side, you are not understanding my proposal. I propose no tax credits for private school. That would cost the state money, for which the taxpayers, other than parents of kids in private school, would get nothing in return. I.E. we would be subsidizing the private school tuition of people whose children are already in private school.
Under my proposal, the state would make scholarships available to children who are in failing schools, and only if their income is below say average family income for the state of South Carolina. Thus if you believe sending your kids to private school is necessary because your school is failing, and your income is such that you cannot afford it on your own; you could apply for a scholarship.
I would support such a program, as an experiment as to whether this so called competition has a positive impact on public education. This would be much less expensive than subsidizing the tuition of people already sending their kids to private schools.
The school choice people will never support this because they are not interested in improving education in SC. They are interested in the state subsidizing their choice of private school for their children.
By GetAClue on May 3rd, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Come on Will, how can you be this one sided? Have you researched tuition at private schools or the transportation costs and “fees” to attend a “nonfailing” public school in a differnt school district?
If so, how much of a government subsidy would be enough for the “73,000 South Carolina school children (most of them black and poor)” to make that “choice”?
The reason the children of this state are being short-changed in their education is money, federal money and the lack of teachers who care about their students. School districts in this state will not receive federal funding unless they “pass” a certain percentage of students, whether they are able to read or write. How do you think so many children graduate without those skills? Teachers are afraid to have those children repeat a grade because of pressure from administrators. I could not believe it when I heard of this practice.
Maybe we should all stop the blame game and sit down together and work together for a solution that will benefit those who need it the most, the children.
If the SCRG isn’t able to do that then maybe the SCRG should spend thier resources and efforts toward getting the General Assembly to place a question on the ballot to repeal Article XI of the South Carolina Constitution dealing with Public Education. Chances are, that will never happen.
By EducateYourself on May 4th, 2009 at 2:04 am
Ron Paul…perhaps you should have read the South Carolina Constitution, specifically the article addressing public education, prior to posting your comment.
Fits Lies, it is the State, not the United States, who is responsible for providing a free public education.
In the event that either of you are interested in educating yourselves, here’s a link to the SC Constition.
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/scconstitution/a11.htm