It took three years (and a tough reelection campaign) for Nikki Haley to finally come up with a proposal on education. Unfortunately for South Carolinians, the neglect didn’t spare them from the contempt, because Nikki Haley’s long record of slashing at public education has hurt students, teachers, and our state economy for years.
So as Governor Haley finally talks about public education this afternoon, remember that her actions reveal more about her position on public education than any Hail Mary initiative launched in the midst of her reelection campaign:
· Nikki Haley’s veto pen has hit education hardest. “Of the nearly 200 budget vetoes Gov. Nikki Haley has issued during her three years as governor, no government service has been struck more than public education. A review of the governor’s budget vetoes shows the first-term Republican has vetoed $110 million worth of public education programs and services since 2011, vetoes that account for more than a quarter of the $419 million she has vetoed in state spending since 2011.” [The State, 6/27/13]
· SC 6th worst in the country on slashing school spending & harming public education. “Even in 2008, before the dramatic budget cuts the state has enacted in the past few years, South Carolina spent the fourth-lowest amount on education. As fiscal year 2014, South Carolina primary and secondary students will each be educated with about $500 less than before the recession. The lack of education funding is, in part, due to the political ideals of Governor Nikki Haley. In 2011, she vetoed the state’s budget and included $56 million in cuts to education. In addition, Haley refused to accept money from the Education Jobs Fund — a federal program intended to mitigate budget constraints in schools across the country. South Carolina was the only state that did not seek money from this program.” [24/7 Wall Street, 9/24/13]
· Haley opposed expanding 4-year-old kindergarten. “Currently, eight school districts are receiving state dollars to offer 4K as part of a pilot program. The 2013-2014 budget would expand that to other school districts with a high percentage of at-risk children….Haley says she does not support the idea, but she agrees with the need to get children in high poverty areas ready for school.” [SC Radio Network, 6/15/13]
The only thing worse than Nikki Haley’s failure to notice the crisis in South Carolina public education is the devastating harm that her neglectful and contemptuous policies have done to South Carolina’s students, schools, and economy.
South Carolina’s ready for new leadership and real accountability.
(Editor’s Note: The above communication is a news release from a political party and does not necessarily reflect the editorial position of FITSNews.com. To submit your letter, news release, email blast, media advisory or issues statement for publication, click here).
“Hurt” public education???? They don’t need any more money!!!! It was reported in The State that one district in the midlands – Lexington/Richland 5 – increased by 25 students over last year. But their operations budget went up $9.4 million! Craazy!!!!
so were they in the red the previous year? those stats are meaningless.
District Five ain’t never been in the “red”
The only thing Red in District Five are taxpayers’ faces as a result of their genitals constantly being squeezed by District Five School Board milking taxpayers for every damn penny they have
From District Five, you are correct. We need a statewide education plan not a district by district plan. And while we’re at it, lets reduce the number of districts. Say one per county.
I remember reading somewhere that a huge inhibitor to one-county-one-district notions in SC was high school sports teams, no joke.
Saw some clips of the HS football game playoffs. Looked like we could have saved some big buck on stadiums. Couldn’t even fill up two of the sections. Probably some were better attended but that might be the exception.
Idiotwind – What would give you reason to think that that district (or any district in the midlands) was in the red?
Doesn’t necessarily mean they are in the red. For a budget to relatively remain the same, it does have to account for inflation or other increases in costs beyond the school’s control, although I’m doubtful it would account for the whole amount.
And how much of it was one time money to address some need v. recurring monies?
What is their full budget? What part of the budget increase is simply adjusting for inflation? Just curious on that one.
You’re right, though, K-12 does not suffer from a lack of cash, but from a lack of decent administration in most cases.
Teach firearms for males, prostitution for females. They shouldn’t have a problem finding a job in SC where they can a good wage.
No more money, Nikki will save us, that’s the Nikki plan, UH-RA !