Without continuing to drivel on about my life story, as I'm sure I've already lost half of you to the "Next Blog" button or what you're going to eat for dinner, let me just say that recently my interests have shifted. Not a whole lot; I don't watch the nightly news or put tasteless signs for politicians in my yard, but I do care about the problems facing our country, and more importantly, our world.
Just to allow you, the reader, to form your prejudices and judgments concerning what I am about to say (if you are the prejudiced judgmental type), I am from the United States and no I don't have a job, I am a student. That being said, here's what I've been chewing on:
In my opinion, which is about 50% original, 40% a rehash of other peoples opinions and 10% bullshit (The numbers are just rough estimates and are subject to change depending on the day or my mood), in the United States, social security and education are problems. If you disagree with me on that one you probably won't be interested in the rest of what I have to say so feel free to leave now, that is if anyone is still listening after the convoluted attempt at an introduction to this topic. Like most concerned parents, I feel that there is not enough money in education and like most concerned taxpayers (I used to have a job, several actually) I feel that social security is a mess.
Before continuing I want to point out that obviously just throwing money at a problem won't make it go away (if you subscribe to such rhetoric) and the education problem is no different. I would also like to see a reform of the education system but that discussion must take place sometime else (preferably after I find out what the hell I'm talking about). Secondly, I have elderly grandparents who cannot work and have health issues. So I'm not at all unsympathetic to the elderly. Finally, like I said before I don't know anything about politics, I'm just a guy with some ideas.
That being said, I feel that proportionately social security receives too much federal money and education does not receive enough. According to usgovernmentspending.com, in the last complete fiscal year (2007) the U.S. Government spent 586.2 billion dollars on social security and only 38.4 billion on K-12 education. According to wikipedia.org, 27.4% of the U.S. population is under 19 years of age whereas only 12.6% of our population has a gold watch (over 65). So, half as many people are receiving cal 15.3 times more money. At the risk of sounding biased, my own opinion is that a few fishing trips, rounds of golf and miles travelled in the RV could be sacrificed for educating our youth for a fast changing world.
Assuming that you agree with me that social security benefits are too high and the education budget is too low (it's not lost on me that that is a big assumption) let me move on to my next point which concerns how to remedy the situation. Since those who receive social security benefits or soon will are a large voting force, out and out cutting of those benefits, as helpful as that may be to the crisis, is an untenable solution for politicians. Like I said before, given my own family history I am sympathetic to the fiscal needs of the elderly. However, not everyone who receives the benefits truly needs them (I can almost hear the exclamations from here). If you were to ask most grandparents if they would sacrifice some amount of their benefits so that the money would go directly to their grandchildren's education, my own estimate is that most all, excluding those with the first name Ebenezer, would.
The point is this, a bill that explicitly outlines a plan for taking money from the social security program and directly putting it into the education budget stands a much better chance of passing than one that just advocates tax-and-spend. I recognize that a bill of this nature does nothing to lower the cost of social security but it would be a way to get more money, potentially a significant amount of money, to the nation's youth.
P.S. As aforementioned I have little political aspiration or understanding of my own. I just like trying to come up with solutions to problems. So, Arnold Schwarzenegger (he's a politician right?) if you are listening (I guess reading) feel free run with that idea since you are in a position to do so. (and I probably won't)
1 comment:
OK, first of all those numbers you provided are pretty staggering! I certainly don't know as much about social security as I probably should (eh, more like next to nothing), but I do know something about education. I realize that the meat of your proposal requires work on how to move some of our tax dollars from social security (what programs get less, who specifically gets less?) to education. But, I'm going to skip that step, since it's too hard, and think about what it would mean for education to recieve a bigger portion of the federal budget. So, I guess I am introducing the discussion about educational reform...sorry if you're not ready, Brandon.
Aside from a few federally mandated programs such as the infamous No Child Left Behind Act, the majority of educational policy and fiscal decisions are made at the state and local levels. Right now, a lot of states have recently passed or are in the process of passing bills that dish out money to districts based on student performance (mostly measured by standardized tests) in order to reward schools that do the best job educating students and provide incentive for schools to rev-up their curriculums and get kids learning. This approach raises several concerns (why should we grant more money to districts that are already doing well? what about districts that serve families of lower socio-economic standing where some say students are at a disadvantage?), and I guess some time will have to pass before we see if achievement in better-funded districts continues to soar and if those districts whose students are floundering somehow manage to pull themselves up with less support.
There is an intersting new idea out there (actually being tried out in a few states like South Carolina and Ohio) called student-based budgeting that might work, too. Basically, the idea is that all students who are determined to have the same level of need recieve the same level of school funding. So then, a school's budget is tied to enrollment rather than student achievement. If a school can attractand retain a higher number of students, it will get more money. School officials are therefore motivated to be creative in keeping their schools competitive. No longer will simple test scores suffice to prove that a school is doing a quality job in educating kids. Now, the actual experience inside the classroom will determine whether students come and stay and whether the school has adequate funding.
I haven't really made up my mind about my feelings on charter schools and vouchers (student-based budgeting is similar in that it basically invokes free-market competition for "business"-attracting students); I think I need more time and experience before I understand them. That being said, this is one idea for a way that more federal money could be allocated to education (I assume need would be assessed on a national level).
I have really gotten away from your idea here Brandon. Of course, as long as all the old people are still OK, I think it's a great idea! Yeah for school!
Post a Comment