Remember earlier this year when dozens of South Carolina’s leading politicians – including S.C. House Speaker Bobby Harrell – were bemoaning the thousands of teachers that were going to be fired if Gov. Mark Sanford refused to accept a controversial pot of federal “stimulus” money?
Surely you remember – after all, they spent tons of your money promoting the “big lie” (you know, the one with the little percentage attached to it).
What the taxpayer-funded whiners didn’t tell you, of course, was that in April of this year, S.C. Superintendent of Education Jim Rex spent a whopping $400,000 on educational “consultants.”
In fact, his annual consulting tab is now closing in on $2 million.
From The Voice:
Despite a steady stream of complaints from administrators about how budget cuts are forcing the Department of Education to do its work on a “bare bones” budget, the bureaucracy has managed to find enough money to continue paying out political consultants and contractors. Teachers have been cut, but spending has been maintained for former employees of political campaigns.
- January-$296,526
- February-$358,398
- March-$366,996
- April-$397,876
- May-$333,791
- YEAR-TO-DATE: $1.7 million to consultants and contractors
Jim Rex -and other public education “leaders“- need to face the financial challenges before South Carolina public schools through prioritization and accountability. Instead of seeking to maintain a budget fraught with fat and waste, true leaders would step forward to cut costs that are unproductive, and not directly affecting classroom instruction.
As noted previously on FITS, big chunks of that money is going to pay for political consultants, too, including excessively shrill and whiny ones like Rex’s top PR advisor, Zeke Stokes.
Stokes, not surprisingly, is reportedly in the thick of Rex’s upcoming gubernatorial bid.
But hey … it’s all “for the children,” right?
By UpYers June 16, 2009 at 12:32 pm
What exactly do these “consultants” do? Obviously they are not serving any role in education. When does education begin and politics end?
By CNSYD June 16, 2009 at 1:58 pm
I am not advocating that what is going on is right but there is a possible explanation. Having worked for the Federal government years ago, I soon found out you could not hire permanent employees but you could have all the consultants you wanted because they weren’t “permanent”. Is this what’s happening here?
By Todd June 16, 2009 at 8:21 pm
How many teachers that actually have face time with kids would these consultant fees pay for?
By John Steinberger June 17, 2009 at 7:51 am
The state Dept. of Education has a building full of Educrats and they need to hire consultants, as well?
By so what June 17, 2009 at 11:10 am
It’s funny how you and Earl talk about how Rex puts political consultants on the payroll, in an attempt to make it look like he’s the only one. Actually, it’s something that’s been forever. Currently, Henry McMaster does it (Trey Walker), Eckstrom does it (RJ Shealy) and I think Sanford paid Jason Miller like $100,000.
By Earl Capps June 17, 2009 at 1:51 pm
So what – I raised the question on this site ONCE, and only after someone started potshotting at Democrats who were sniping at Eckstrom for hiring RJ Jr. I simply asked why if it was wrong for Eckstrom to do it, then why they weren’t asking Jim Rex and Grady Patterson why they had their political operatives on the state dime.
If you could please enlighten me as to what the difference is, or tell me that it’s wrong, regardless of the officeholder’s partisan affiliation, please feel free to speak up.