In need of belt tightening
I've been out of town the last two weeks so I missed the Chairman Obey-edudrama. (He cut of $800 million worth of Obama Administration priorities from the Department of Education's purse in order to help offset his $10 billion school district bailout fund.) I know, from the dozens of emails clogging my in-box, that, as an education reformer, I'm supposed to scream bloody murder and view this budget scrum as the climax in an epic battle between good and evil.
To which my response is, whatever. When it comes to the $500 million cut for Race to the Top at least, I'm not the least bit bothered, because we already know that there's too much money in that program to begin with. Andy did the math two months ago and made a compelling case that, on the merits, there's about a billion dollars that should go back to the Treasury. If Arne Duncan spends his full allotment, he'll be funding states with mediocre proposals and lackluster reforms. If we want to reward states that have truly embraced reform, less is more.
Now, to be clear, I'm not a fan of Obey's edu-jobs bailout to begin with. States and districts are in this budget crisis because they spent like drunken sailors during the good times. They hired more staff than they needed, they made salary and pension promises they couldn't afford, and now the ?education bubble? has burst. Federal infusions of cash just kick the ?era of responsibility? down the road. We need to tighten belts, and we can do so without impacting kids negatively if we're willing to be adults about it. We need to freeze salaries, renegotiate pension promises, and let go of ineffective administrators, teachers, and aides. Those steps would immediately save many multiples of $10 billion, and with several positive side benefits, to boot.
But start World War III with a retiring Congressman over a cut to Race to the Top? I'm sorry but I'd rather go back to the beach.
-Mike Petrilli
