NC Conservative Agenda: Point 4

Continuing the discussion regarding the 7-point NC Conservative Agenda. Today is Point 4:

Help Communities Build Schools

Once again, feel free to weigh in either for or against this idea for North Carolina (even if you're not from North Carolina).

The lottery is a fact. It was named “The Education Lottery” and sold that it would be new money to help improve education. Now Governor Easley has admitted that the largest portion of lottery proceeds for lower class sizes and “More at Four” will be used to replace the money budgeted for these categories.

Both lower class sizes and More at Four will require additional classrooms, but the lottery proceeds barely address the problem of providing new classrooms. Conservatives should amend the lottery law establishing the distribution of lottery funds and designate more money for school construction. More at Four and lower classroom sizes will not be affected because they are already funded in the budget while school construction is not.

Local school districts that are experiencing phenomenal growth should receive preference in the distribution of funds, instead of the present formula that gives extra lottery dollars to counties with declining school populations.

In case you've never read this site before, I'll let you know my position on so-called "public" schools: they stink. It's a government-run monopoly that is interested in promoting itself and expanding, with zero emphasis on education.

Now I do realize that these agenda items are items that people have a hope of getting through the General Assembly THIS YEAR, so they can't put up there "Removal of the public school system" -- even if they should. This agenda items suggests that conservatives modify the lottery law to distribute funds differently. I disagree.

If you want to modify the lottery law, just remove the damn thing. It's state-sponsored, monopolistic gambling. If you want gambling in North Carolina, just legalize gambling and be done with it. You would get much better establishments than just the "lottery" if you did -- and there'd be competition and much less blatant lying if you did that.

This item also doesn't mention much about these "smaller class sizes" and "more at four" programs. Those are governor Easley's pet projects that he loves -- because they give him more power, more control, and more money -- not because they actually DO anything, because they DON'T.

After years of reducing class sizes and years of Easley's trademark "more at four" programs, there is absolutely ZERO correlation between participating in those programs and educational process. In other words, reducing the class size from 30 to 18 has NO effect on education -- other than making it cost more because more teachers are required.

There's supposedly a teacher shortage in North Carolina -- yet no one seems to make the connection that it's because of smaller class sizes -- which, once again, has NO EFFECT on the actual education received. NONE. Same with the "more at four" programs -- they're supposed to give "more opportunity" to "disadvantaged" youths. While there may be evidence of very short-term benefits, over the long run (into middle- and high-school) there's NO effect when comparing those who participated and those who didn't.

Of course, this fits into Easley and the Democrat's plans -- they WANT education to cost more. They WANT more money and more power for education -- and they don't care in the least that their ideas and programs don't actually educate. In their mind, the education system exists so they can spend money and spread power around, and for no other reason.

So no, I don't support "rewriting" the lottery to build more schools. If we want to change school funding at the state level, how about completely eliminating any funding for "English as a Second Language?" Seriously! There's BILLIONS being spent on that, and we shouldn't be spending a dime. If you can't figure what amounts are being used there, it's even easier -- if a school district even HAS an "English as a Second Language" program, that district gets no state money. Can anyone give me a reason why not?

Will this pass? It's hard to say. The lottery is such a hot topic up there, I'm thinking the Democrats will be afraid to touch it at ALL.

Previously:
Introduction
Point 1
Point 2
Point 3

Posted by: Ogre at 03:07 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 730 words, total size 5 kb.