Vote Yes on state question 744

[RecycleMichael]

I know that many of you have expressed reasons why you are voting no. I am also aware that the Governor, The Chamber of Commerce, and the daily newspaper are all opposed to this question.

I guess I am just a rebel because I am voting yes. I am also stubborn because I am starting another thread to try to convince at least someone else to vote yes.

http://www.yeson744.com/

We overfund higher ed, then underfund common ed. We hire prison guards instead of teachers. We pay our politicians the highest in the region and our teachers the lowest in the region.

This vote forces the state to fund one area equal to what is the average other state is doing. If it means that other state agencies, politicians, and corporate tax breaks have to get a little less this year, so be it.

I am embarrassed by what our state funds and so should you. Voting yes will give our children the support that they need. 49th in education spending has led us to be 49th in many other things.

Vote Yes.
 

[custosnox]

But it doesn't change the funding for anything else, just says we have to put more money into education.  I would like to see more accountability written into this than just "here is more money for education, spend it wisely".

[RecycleMichael]

At this point, I would support other state funding being linked to regional averages.

Maybe then we would cut back on building new prisons and state universities in every small town.

[BKDotCom]

We must close the spending gap!

[Red Arrow]

At this point, I would support other state funding being linked to regional averages.

I do NOT support any of our state funding based on regional averages.  We need to do what we need to do regardless of the states around us.  We probably need to toss our bums out and elect some representatives with the guts to do the right thing.

Tall order, I know.

[RecycleMichael]

We probably need to toss our bums out and elect some representatives with the guts to do the right thing.

We both know that ain't going to happen. These are the same legislators that are giving away billions in tax breaks and voting to cut taxes at the same time.

We can only vote on our representative. I get to vote for one state representative and one state senator. There are 147 others I can't influence at the ballot box. Colorado only has one third that amount of state officials. Our representatives are also the highest paid in the region. They will vote to give themselves higher pay but not vote to hire more teachers.

This state law helps take back our legislature.

[Red Arrow]

This state law helps take back our legislature.

No, it puts it in the hands of our neighboring states.

[Conan71]

Am I having deja vu all over again?  I thought we already had a thread on this.

RM, you will love this: DOC employees are saying they aren't getting enough funding now.

Prison employees want more funding, end furloughs

By AP Wire Service
Published: 10/18/2010  7:15 AM
Last Modified: 10/18/2010  7:15 AM

OKLAHOMA CITY — Oklahoma Department of Corrections employees plan a news conference to call for more funding for prisons and an end to furloughs for DOC employees.
The news conference is scheduled for 2 p.m. Monday at the Oklahoma state Capitol hosted by the union representing state employees — the Oklahoma Public Employees Association.

The prison employees want the Legislature to provide supplemental funding to prisons in order to end unpaid furloughs of employees. The furloughs were ordered because of state budget cuts due to the recession.

The regular session of the Legislature begins in February.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20101018_11_0_OKLAHO491196

One of the reasons our operating budgets are so high is because for years, legislators have supported a system of decentralizing governement services like prisons, colleges, and schools.  While it brings jobs to outlying rural areas and supports the construction trades it's incredibly inefficient and the people hired into corrections jobs, instead of being grateful for them grumble about being underpaid.  If you work in a prison, you know the working conditions suck before you take job and chances are, you aren't exactly a Rhoades Scholar.

[nathanm]

RM, you will love this: DOC employees are saying they aren't getting enough funding now.

They don't get enough funding for the number of prisoners we send them. If we'd stop sending people to prison for nonviolent offenses, that problem would be solved.

[Conan71]

They don't get enough funding for the number of prisoners we send them. If we'd stop sending people to prison for nonviolent offenses, that problem would be solved.

Read the comments section of the story, it gets better.  Someone suggested the tribes pay for it since their casinos are the reason for the uptick in crime.  No wonder our prisons are crowded: stupidity runs rampant in this state.

[Smokinokie]

Am I having deja vu all over again? 

That would be deja moo. The unmistakable feeling you have seen this bull before.

Why try keeping up with the Joneses when you should be trying to surpass them? 744 is a poorly thought out resolution. I would certainly support one that made sense. 744 does not.

[Conan71]

According to OCPA, someone is cooking the books to show we aren't spending enough on education.  Comparing the numbers for '07-'08, the "official" number was $7,615 while the "actual" figure should read more like $10,257.  I don't really see how depreciation of building and assets would amount to accountable costs as it relates to educating children.  Dollars spent per pupil is somewhat relevant until you consider Oklahoma has a very low cost of living.  We also need to know is the accounting the same on school funding the same from state-to-state?  Otherwise it's hardly a relevant point to show Oklahoma is 49th on the list.  Of which, I still can't find a list which shows us as 49th, closest I can get is 46th, which I realize is not vastly better.

"For approximately three times, OCPA research fellow Steve Anderson, a Certified Public Accountant and a former state-certified teacher with 17 teaching certifications, has attempted to calculate just how much money Oklahomans really pay for their schools.

Following generally accepted accounting principles, Mr. Anderson compiled the federal, state and local expenditures for Oklahoma's public schools. He discovered that Oklahoma's per-pupil expenditure for the 2007-08 school year -- the latest year for which data were available -- was not $7,615, the oft-cited "official" number. Rather, he estimated it was $10,257.

If the CEO or chief financial officer of any public company disseminated misleading financial data to the same extent as Oklahoma's education officials, they would be subject to criminal and civil prosecution. Indeed, according to Frederick Hess, a former public high school teacher and current director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, "school accounting guidelines would bring smiles to an Enron auditor."

How, you may ask, can the "official" reports be so far off the mark?

It's really quite simple. When computing expenditures, the government's school accounting systems simply exclude many significant costs. A few examples:

• depreciation of buildings and other capital assets;

• spending via "dedicated revenues," which are funneled directly to schools without going through the appropriations process;

• retirement benefits as a cost in the year incurred; and

• interest on unfunded pension obligations resulting from our repeated failure to fund benefits as they are earned.

Disturbingly, there are even more costs, which could have been included but were not. For example, there are many public-school costs that are carried on the budgets of other government agencies, such as the cost of remedial instruction borne by the higher education system."

http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A30628

[guido911]

I know that many of you have expressed reasons why you are voting no. I am also aware that the Governor, The Chamber of Commerce, and the daily newspaper are all opposed to this question.

I guess I am just a rebel because I am voting yes. I am also stubborn because I am starting another thread to try to convince at least someone else to vote yes.

http://www.yeson744.com/

We overfund higher ed, then underfund common ed. We hire prison guards instead of teachers. We pay our politicians the highest in the region and our teachers the lowest in the region.

This vote forces the state to fund one area equal to what is the average other state is doing. If it means that other state agencies, politicians, and corporate tax breaks have to get a little less this year, so be it.

I am embarrassed by what our state funds and so should you. Voting yes will give our children the support that they need. 49th in education spending has led us to be 49th in many other things.

Vote Yes.
 

I appreciate your passion on the issue, but now I think you really are:

[RecycleMichael]

The election is fifteen days away. This is still one of the most discussed issues in the state and clearly the most well funded campaigns for both sides.

Beat your own horse.

[guido911]

The election is fifteen days away. This is still one of the most discussed issues in the state and clearly the most well funded campaigns for both sides.

Beat your own horse.

Good grief RM, I have been accused of beating the dead horse on wanting stricter access to abortion laws, which in my opinion is far more contentious of an issue that this school funding bill could ever hope to be.

Who besides RM is in favor of 744 in this forum?