Census Bureau confirms DC schools spending $29,409 per pupil

Andrew J. Coulson of the Cato Institute explains how he got the Census Bureau to revise their numbers.

Excerpt: (links removed)

Four years ago, I wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post revealing that DC spent nearly $25,000 per pupil during the 2007-08 school year. I calculated this figure from the public budget documents of the District of Columbia, which I subsequently summarized and linked on this blog.

No education reporter followed up on my findings, and much lower per pupil figures continue to be reported to this day. My $25,000 figure was even greeted with skepticism by analysts at free market think tanks. One state education policy analyst wrote to say that my figure was “out of line with credible information,” and that I gave my critics “too much ammunition with this clearly questionable set of statistics.”

Indeed, the Census Bureau figures for DC’s total K-12 expenditures were substantially lower than mine. I made a note to track down the discrepancy, but other projects intervened. When I updated my calculation to use DC budget estimates for the 2008-09 school year, I found that District spending had risen to over $28,000 / pupil. The comparable number for that year reported by the Bureau of the Census was just $18,181 (which you get by dividing the total expenditure figure in Table 1 by the enrollment figure in Table 15).

So you can see why most folks were skeptical. Skeptical, but wrong.

Back in March of this year I asked my then research intern to contact the Census Bureau and ask where they got their total spending data. It turns out, they got them from a DCPS official. We presented evidence to the Bureau that that DCPS official had missed a few line items when completing the Census Bureau’s forms—to the tune of about $400 million. The Census Bureau agreed and is in the process of obtaining corrected data for the 2008-09 year. In the meantime, they made sure to ask DC officials to include all relevant items when filling out their forms for the 2009-10 school year. The result: Census Bureau data now show DC spent a total of $29,409 per pupil (obtained by dividing total expenditures in Table 1 by enrollment in Table 15). This is just a bit higher than my calculation for the preceding year.

Kudos to the Census Bureau for taking the initiative and getting DC to accurately report its public school expenditures. Now that education reporters can simply open a Census Bureau .pdf file and divide one number by another, I wonder if any will report what DC really spends per pupil? I suspect that they still will not, continuing to mislead the general public, but I would be delighted to be proven wrong.

Oh, and, BTW, this spending figure is about triple what the DC voucher program spends per pupil—and the voucher students have a much higher graduation rate and perform as well or better academically.

He’s talking about the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship voucher program which Obama dismantled and defunded in order to appease the teacher unions.

According to U.S. News, D.C. students are underperforming:

South Dakota, Nebraska, and Washington, D.C. performed the worst, with some of the worst student test scores and college readiness indexes in the nation.

Keep in mind that D.C. votes 92.5% to 6.5% for Obama in the 2008 election. This is where leftism in education comes from.

We ought to care about this, because the students in Washington D.C. are some of the poorest students in the nation – and they are often minority students. What sort of opportunity to succeed are we giving these children when we allow leftists like Obama to destroy voucher programs that are their only hope?

Filed under: News, Arne Duncan, Barack Obama, Cost, Education, Obama, Public School, Rank, Ranking, Rating, School, Scores, Socialism, Student, Teacher Union, Voucher, Washington, Washington D.C.

Senator Marco Rubio’s speech at the conservative CPAC 2012 conference

If I had to choose one Republican who gives great speeches on what it means to be a conservative, I would pick Marco Rubio. (25 minutes)

Here’s an article from Human Events about the speech, for those who can’t watch it or listen to it.

Excerpt:

Rubio ranked the strength of the American people alongside the importance of economic and military strength, for it is our people – not our government – who have made us great.  He sees critical institutions of society, which contribute to the strength of citizens and families, under assault by the Obama Administration.  “We have a President who, just a few days ago, issued a mandate ordering religious institutions to follow his ideals… telling religious-based organizations that they must, by mandate of the federal government, pay for things that religion teaches is wrong.  You may not agree with that religion’s teachings, but that’s not the point.  The point is that the First Amendment still applies.  Religious freedom still exists.”

He confessed he isn’t sure what the foreign constitutions Justice Ginsburg admires might have to say on the matter, but he knows what the United States Constitution says: “The federal government does not have the power to force religious organizations to pay for things that organization thinks is wrong!”

On the scale of history, only a “moment” has passed since world wars were fought against totalitarian evil.  What followed could hardly be described as “world peace,” and cleaning the blood from the edge of the statist hammer has not softened its essential nature.  “Today millions of people around the world are part of the middle class because of the rise of democracy and free enterprise.  Did that happen on its own?  Is that the natural state of man?”  Rubio suggested a study of humanity’s long history beneath the boots of oppressors answers that question.

Democracy and free enterprise spread, not because they are humanity’s default condition, but because “the most powerful nation in the world believed in these things, fought for these things, spoke out for these things… and most importantly, was an example of these things.”  The power of the American example transcends military and political force, because “all around the world, there are people who know there is someone just like them, living here, doing things they cannot.”

“What happens if we diminish, because we can no longer afford to be the leader of the free world?” Rubio asked.  “What happens if we diminish because our leaders decide they don’twant to be the leaders of the free world anymore?  What happens if we retreat?  What happens is that we’ll leave a space, and that space will be filled by someone else.”  The likely candidates for our successor as global hyperpower are totalitarian states like Russia and China… whose measure Rubio took by noting that they’ve vetoed United Nations efforts to rein in Syria’s dictator, Bashar Assad, because they reserve the right to use such brutal tactics against their own people.

Rubio understands that the clash of civilizations cannot be won from an easy chair, or a death bed.  “The greatest thing we can do for the people of the world is be America,” he concluded.  “That’s what’s at stake here.  That’s what November will be about.”

It would be a shame if all the people who flee to America, to escape from socialist decay and totalitarian repression, found the very things they fled awaiting them on our shores.  It pays to take a moment and see our exceptional nation through the eyes of those tired, poor, huddled masses, as Marco Rubio has done.

You can listen to an MP3 of the speech here. (12 Mb)

He’s only 40 years old. We have a deep, deep bullpen.

Filed under: Videos, 2012, Conservatism, Conservative, Conservative Political Action Conference, CPAC, D.C., Florida, Marco Rubio, Republican, Republican Party, Senator, Speech, Washington

Josh Mandel wants to create jobs in Ohio with more oil drilling

Josh Mandel is pushing for energy development and more jobs in Ohio.

Excerpt:

Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel, a candidate for the U.S. Senate, was in Tuscarawas County this week touting the potential benefits the oil and gas industry could bring to Ohio, including the possibility of 200,000 additional jobs.

Mandel is stepping into the debate over whether Ohio’s federal lands should be used for oil and gas exploration.

“I believe responsible exploration for oil and gas will be a win-win-win for families and senior citizens in Tuscarawas County,” Mandel told The Times-Reporter during a telephone interview Monday, hours before he held a meet-and-greet in Bolivar.

“It will create jobs, bring down utility bills, and it will contribute to the national security of our country. With more energy produced here in America, we will be safer as a nation.”

Mandel, a Republican from Lyndhurst, near Cleveland, is running for the seat in the Senate held by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Avon.

[...]The oil and gas boom in eastern Ohio will benefit not only the men and women working on the rigs, but also construction workers, truck drivers and service industry employees, Mandel contends. He said it will help waiters and waitresses, who will serve more customers, owners of hotels and motels and people who own businesses up and down the supplier’s chain.

But Mandel says he does see a threat to the industry.

“There are bureaucrats in Washington and in the state who are trying to block responsible oil and gas exploration,” Mandel said. “I will do everything in my power to combat the Washington bureaucrats who are trying to block new jobs and affordable energy in Ohio.”

[...]Mandel served two terms in the Ohio House of Representatives before ousting incumbent state Treasurer Kevin Boyce in 2010. He is a Marine Corps veteran who served two tours of duty in Anbar Province, Iraq.

Josh has a stellar record to run on.

Excerpt:

Amidst this week’s news of of Fitch downgrading the United States’ outlook from stable to negative, Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel has announced that Fitch has given the highest possible short term rating of F1+ for Ohio’s general obligation (GO) bonds.  Fitch credited Treasurer Mandel’s conservative investment strategy and cautious management of our tax dollars as key factors in making their rating determination:

“The rating reflects the strength of the state’s general obligation credit, the ample liquidity provided by investments in the state treasurer’s liquidity account, and the procedures in place to insure timely payment of optional tenders of bonds that have not been remarketed.”

They also noted:

“The investment profile is conservative as the fund is invested in U.S. Treasury and agency securities, highly rated commercial paper, and money market funds.”

Amidst a struggling economy and sluggish national growth, Fitch spoke of notable increases in the state treasurer’s liquidity account, as well as the state’s bolstering of its rainy day fund.

Fitch also noted Ohio’s improved budget stabilization fund balance in their rating. Ohio’s budget stabilization fund reached a low point in 2009 under previous administrations when the fund had been depleted down to just $0.89. In July, Ohio’s AA+ credit rating outlook was raised by Standard & Poor’s from “negative” to “stable,” in part because of conservative management of debt in the Treasurer’s office.

Since being elected, Treasurer Mandel has focused on reining in state budget costs by streamlining operations, eliminating waste, and serving as a steadfast fiscal watchdog for Ohio taxpayers’ hard-earned money.

The Republican-led General Assembly and Governor Kasich tackled Ohio’s $8 billion budget shortfall and spending imbalances head on, thus improving our state’s credit ratings.

Josh is going to be running for the Senate seat current occupied by left-wing radical Sherrod Brown in 2012.

Filed under: News, Employment, Energy, Environmentalism, Josh Mandel, Ohio, Oil, Senate, Sherrod Brown, Unemployment, Washington

Supreme Court narrowly sides with private schools against government

From the Wall Street Journal.

Excerpt:

The Supreme Court’s big school choice decision yesterday is notable mainly for its insight into the progressive mind. To wit, no fewer than four Justices seem to believe that all wealth belongs to the government, and then government allows citizens to keep some of it by declining to tax it.

At issue in Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn was a state tax credit for donations to organizations that offer scholarships for private schools, including (but not exclusively) religious schools. A group of taxpayers sued, claiming that religion was being subsidized on their dime, in violation of the First Amendment’s establishment clause.

The district court tossed out this novel church-state theory, only to have it revived by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Yesterday’s 5-4 decision was another well-deserved rebuke to the nation’s leading judicial activists who dominate that appellate court.

[...]And what do you know, four Justices assume precisely that. Both of President Obama’s nominees joined the four dissenters, and newcomer Elena Kagan delivered a fiery 24-page apologia for that position, claiming that “the distinction” between appropriations and tax credits “is one in search of a difference.” There’s a good debate to be had about tax credits (see below), but one question for Justice Kagan: Is the government also establishing religion by not imposing a 100% tax rate on churches, mosques and synagogues?With one more vote, the current Court’s liberal minority would surely ban school choice involving any religious schools. The Arizona decision shows again that the Court is only a single vote away from many decisions not all that far removed from those of the Ninth Circuit.

You can also listen to a 5-minute podcast on the decision from the Hugh Hewitt show right here.

Note that Obama’s two new appointees sided against Christian schools and private schools. Yet some brain-damaged Christians actually vote for Democrats, and claim to be Christians. (And they claim to want to get married and to raise children who will presumably be Christians, too!). School choice is as central an issue to informed Christians as is opposition to no-fault divorce, same-sex marriage and abortion.

Must-see videos on education policy

• MUST-SEE: John Stossel’s documentary about public schools and school choice
• MUST-SEE: Cato Institute lady explains why competition is better than monopoly

Related posts

• Republicans in Florida, Indiana and Pennsylvania push school choice
• Do public school teachers want to give children a quality education?
• Sex-education video prompts mother to transfer out 7-year old daughter
• 10% of US students are subject to sexual misconduct by school staff
• How Obama’s new 2011 budget fails the poorest children in two ways
• How teacher unions lobby government to block educational reform
• What helps kids to learn? Parents, teacher unions or education bureaucrats?
• New study reveals how school choice benefits the poorest students
• Eleven schools teaching children to praise and worship Obama
• Do teacher unions care about providing high quality education?
• Does the education system discriminate against boys?
• NEA lawyer explains the real goals of teacher unions: money and power
• Are teacher unions interested in helping your children to succeed in life?
• Economist Walter Williams evaluates whether teachers are earning their huge salaries
• How teacher’s unions make war on charter schools

Filed under: News, Barack Obama, Charter School, Choice, Choice and Competition, Competition, Consumer, Consumer-Driven, Consumer-Friendly, D.C., Democrat, Democrat Party, Education, Education Reform, Free Market, Free Market Capitalism, Freedom, Government, Government School, Homeschool, Homeschooling, Liberty, Monopolies, Monopoly, Obama, Private School, Public School, Quality, Republican, Republican Party, School Choice, Supreme Court, Teacher Unions, Vouchers, Washington

Republicans introduce national right-to-work legislation

Sen. James Demint

From the Hill.

Excerpt:

Eight Republican Senators introduced a bill Tuesday giving workers a choice as to whether to join labor unions, which they argue will boost the nation’s economy and provide an increase in wages.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), introduced the National Right to Work Act to “reduce workplace discrimination by protecting the free choice of individuals to form, join, or assist labor organizations, or to refrain from such activities,” according to a statement.

Seven other Republicans signed onto the effort: Sens. Tom Coburn (Okla.), Orrin Hatch (Utah), Mike Lee (Utah), Rand Paul (Ky.), James Risch (Idaho), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and David Vitter (La.).

“Facing a steady decline in membership, unions have turned to strong-arm political tactics to make forced unionization the default position of every American worker, even if they don’t want it,” Hatch said. “This is simply unacceptable. At the very least, it should be the policy of the U.S. government to ensure that no employee will be forced to join a union in order to get or keep their job.

“Republicans cited a recent poll they said shows that 80 percent of union members support having their policy and that “Right to Work” states outperform “forced-union” states in factors that affect worker well being.

From 2000 to 2008, about 4.7 million Americans moved from forced-union to right to work states and a recent study found that there is “a very strong and highly statistically significant relationship between right-to-work laws and economic growth,” and that from 1977 to 2007, right-to-work states experienced a 23 percent faster growth in per capita income than states with forced unionization.

“To see the negative impacts of forced unionization, look no further than the struggling businesses in states whose laws allow it,” Vitter said. “It can’t be a coincidence that right-to-work states have on balance grown in population over the last 10 years, arguably at the expense of heavy union-favoring states.”

DeMint blamed the problems faced by U.S. automakers on the unions.

“Forced-unionism helped lead to GM and Chrysler’s near bankruptcy and their requests for government bailouts as they struggled to compete in a global marketplace,” he said. “When American businesses suffer because of these anti-worker laws, jobs and investment are driven overseas.”

If you want to attract businesses, then you need to have pro-business laws. That’s where jobs come from – businesses.

Here’s an article about states who are trying to pass these laws to attract more employers.

Excerpt:

Currently 14 states beyond Indiana and Wisconsin are considering legislation that would limit union benefits and/or collective bargaining power. They are: Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington (state) and West Virginia. In any number of these states, supporters have planned or held rallies against the measures. But public support might be less than deep. According to a Rasmussen Poll conducted late last week and released Monday, 48 percent of likely U.S. voters sided with Wisconsin Governor Walker whereas only 38 percent sided with his union opponents; the other 14 percent were undecided. And 50 percent of the respondents favored reducing their home state’s government payroll by one percent a year for 10 years either by reducing the work force or reducing their pay. Only 28 percent opposed such action.

This is how we are going to turn the recession around. Cut off the spending on left-wing special interests – NPR, PBS, ACORN, Planned Parenthood, Unions. They all will have to pay their own way, just like the grown-ups do.

Filed under: News, Alaska, Benefits, Bill, Business, Corporation, David Vitter, Economics, Economy, Employment, Greed, Growth, Hawaii, Jim Demint, Jobs, Law, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania, Rand paul, Republican, Republican Party, Right to Work, Salaries, Salary, Spending, Tea Party, Tom Coburn, Union, Virginia, Wages, Washington, West Virginia