Taking from one pocket and putting in the other...

I ran across this blog entry at Blogging for Michigan. The system in Lansing is broke and this post attempts to explain why at the end.

Budget Savings From the Mythical "Other" Only Perpetuate the Partisan Divide
via Blogging For Michigan - Front Page by wizardkitten on 7/30/09

One of the most horrifying aspects of Andy Dillon's as yet unwritten plan to pool state employee heath insurance has been that it reinforces the notion that "someone else" needs to pay the bill for the government services that we all want. These employees are held up and singled out as being the answer to the problem. Just cut their benefits, make them pay more, and we can save the state, right? Even if that isn't really what is being said by Speaker Dillon, that is what the media projects, and that is what the people ultimately hear.

Never mind the details. Never mind that Dillon's plan would "take years" to produce savings. The myth being perpetrated is that if we do this right now, we don't have to make these budget cuts - and nothing could be further from the truth. Still, that is the general impression left on the public when the pundits and the press don't take the time to explain the reality of our current problem. The teachers/state employees are demonized as being greedy, and you have found your scapegoat for when the cuts do ultimately come down. Sad thing is, the legislators know this, for they have been the target of that sentiment themselves. "Just cut legislator pay!" is the frequent refrain, when it has been shown that they really cost us very little in the big picture of state expenditures.

Savings are always found somewhere else though. Those are just a couple of examples of how the "other" should be made to pay, and the concept of fairness or balance is never introduced into the equation. The race to the bottom for the "other" is cheered on from that point, and you have set up a situation where it becomes impossible to work on compromise.

And when people argue to save only certain parts of the budget? It makes the problem that much worse. One of the favorite editorial tricks is to argue for a particular piece of spending, and then leave the heavy lifting of finding the money to someone else. The GR Press is famous for this. "Don't cut spending on 'x', but don't raise taxes either!" is a familiar editorial stance. The Detroit News also plays this game, and they did it again today with tourism promotion. It has been suggested that taxes on car rentals and such be raised - an immediate answer to the problem - but the News opts to point once again to the vague government "reform" that will, of course, take decades to produce.

Meanwhile, advertising is an essential part of doing business, and that includes Michigan tourism. The Senate's plan could provide longer-term funding for it, but lawmakers should look for an alternative to the House-proposed rental vehicle tax as a more immediate money source. The long-overdue government restructuring and reordering of spending priorities would help determine where and how much money is available.

In other words, it's a non-answer to the problem. They do this all the time. They demand that spending continue without a way to pay for it.

This sort of non-solution comes from every corner. Even the wonderful Phil Power indulges in it today, making the very compelling case that we need early childhood education and that funding should be protected. He's right, just as the News is right about tourism, but even he takes the easy way out at the end of his plea.

The governor is negotiating with legislative leaders from both parties to find ways to plug the budget deficit. I suspect that in the rush to address this major financial crisis, they decided to cut early childhood programs without a full understanding of their astonishingly favorable cost-benefit results and the degree of public support. That's not surprising, given how complicated all this is.

But there is still time to do the right thing, which in this case is also economically sensible and politically smart thing. Find the savings elsewhere, and restore the funding to early childhood programs.

"Find the savings elsewhere", as if it were that easy. "Elsewhere" usually comes out of someone else's very important expenditure, and the myth of the "other" is reinforced again.
Jack Lessenberry does it today as well. We all love HAL, we all love the arts and history, we all agree that it is important to save those things. But Jack simply ignores the $2.71 billion dollar hole we are looking at as he takes the very low road of comparing apples to oranges as he reaches for the days Engler. We had the money back then, and that time could have just as easily have been characterized as "The Clinton Years", but that wouldn't serve Lessenberry's anti-Granholm bias. And then he simply punts at the end, just as the others before him.
"Where there is no vision, the people perish," the proverb says. Choosing to disregard our priceless past is about the best proof of that we can imagine. The Michigan Legislature should unite in a rare display of bipartisanship and reverse this poorly conceived idea.

Yes, they should. The Legisalture should also save tourism promotion and early childhood education. And, just as soon as the pundits stop making demands while they take a pass on the solutions, and start offering up tangible and immediate and fair ideas to our revenue problems, maybe the lawmakers will. Doubtful, but worth a shot, isn't it?

As of now, the complaints about specific spending cuts are simply advancing the notion that the answer always lies in the "other". It's no wonder the lawmakers and the public behave the way they do, and the race to the bottom will continue as we tear each other up over the dwindling pool of revenue.

Demand Speaker Dillon provide facts on his plan

By now, you are seeing all kinds of articles and stories about Speaker Dillon's proposed plan to place all public employee into a statewide health care plan. The results of this plan would slash your health coverage and strip your rights to bargain about them. His proposal is anti-union, anti-collective bargaining and anti-public school employee. He maintains his idea could save up to $900 million, but his numbers don’t add up and he won’t provide information or legislation to back up his claims.

This plan has gotten a lot of press – and MEA has been at the heart of this fight for the health care that keeps you and your family safe. But to win this debate, we continue to need your help in getting the facts out and ensure that your legislators in Lansing understand how strongly we oppose the Speaker’s scheme (which is nothing more than a PR stunt to fuel his run for governor).

What are the facts?

• During the past three years, Michigan’s school employees have already saved taxpayers more than $700 million in health insurance costs by accepting lower cost health coverage or paying more out of pocket for copays and premiums.
• Through salary and wage concessions during the past three years, Michigan school employees have saved taxpayers an additional $200 million. That’s almost a billion dollars in savings for Michigan taxpayers paid for by public school employees alone. And state and municipal employees are giving in huge numbers as well.
• In order to save $900 million, Speaker Dillon's plan would have to massively cut school employee health care premiums – some by as much as half. That's not efficiency or a small trim – that's gutting the health insurance of thousands of Michigan workers and their families.
• Savings can’t come from efficiency alone. In fact, research shows that once you get more than 20,000 people in a health care pool, there are no more cost savings to be gained – and virtually all public employees are already in pools bigger than that.
• As taxpayers, this isn’t a savings to you – it’s simply a cost shift that attempts, yet again, to balance the budget on your back.
• Dillon’s plan will eliminate any local control over costs and benefits. Why should we strip local school districts and local governments of the ability to collectively bargain with employees to make decisions that are right for their communities?
• Health care is a national problem that requires a national solution – one that our leaders in Washington are working on right now. For the first time, Washington is on the verge of actually controlling the cost of health care and expanding coverage to all Americans. Speaker Dillon’s plan does neither.

Your legislators in Lansing need to hear these facts. They need to stand up and demand that the Speaker provide details and legislation to back up his claims. They need to defend the health care and bargaining rights of half a million Michigan public workers and their families.

Take time to contact your legislators and communicate the points above.

Tell your Rep NO to Dillon's health proposals

It is critical that you contact (i.e, call) your Representative to tell them NO to Speaker Dillon's proposal on health insurance for public employees.

Here is a sample script that you could use when calling your Reps office

"I am a public school employee. I strongly urge you to oppose Speaker Dillon's health care proposal for all public employees. It is anti-employee, anti-collective bargaining and anti-union."

To find your representative, use this link to get you to the Michigan Legislative contact page

http://michigan.gov/som/0,1607,7-192-29701_29704---,00.html

Speaker Dillon's Health Plan: No winners, only losers

Speaker Dillon released a plan last week to create a statewide health care plan for all public employees. It promises savings through the creation of a health care system managed by the state that eliminates the ability of local school districts and school employees to bargain these benefits.

Who loses under this plan?

• Public school employees have already delivered millions in savings by accepting lower salaries, cuts to their benefits and sharing in the cost of health care. In the 9G/H office, many locals have already shifted their insurance from 5/10 prescription copays to 10/20 prescription copays. This change in prescription copays saved the districts almost 10% in health care premiums.
• Public employees have taken reductions in pay and benefits, just like every other taxpayer. State mandated financial reports show that the portion of school revenue that goes to employee compensation has been decreasing.
• Public employees are taxpayers. This does not save them anything. It merely shifts the costs and burdens to them.
• This plan attempts to shift control over schools from the local communities to the politicians in Lansing. If Lansing assumes control over health care benefits, it will be another example of how local school districts have lost control over another portion of their operations. If Lansing continues to take control from school districts, there will be no need for local school boards and many administrators.

So who wins? Not taxpayers, public employees, or local communities. Is this political maneuvering by Speaker Dillon in an attempt to run for Governor in 2010? Should the health care benefits of 400,00 public employees be sacrificed for the political aspirations of one person?

Speaker Dillon's plan is a distraction from what should be the focus: passing a budget that moves Michigan in a positive direction. Let our national leaders focus on health care reform.

Secretary Duncan at NEA RA

Found this at Politico.com What are your thoughts on Secretary Duncan's ideas on merit pay?


Education Secretary Arne Duncan borrowed the Obama campaign theme Thursday in a tough-love speech to the nation’s largest teachers union, telling educators that they must be willing to change their ways, specifically around the issue of merit pay.

“It’s not enough to focus only on issues like job security, tenure, compensation and evaluation. You must become full partners and leaders in education reform. You and I must be willing to change,” Duncan said at the annual meeting of the National Education Association in San Diego. “I ask you to join President Obama and me in a new commitment to results that recognizes and rewards success in the classroom and is rooted in our common obligation to children.”

Duncan, former head of Chicago schools, said that the administration is working with Congress to ask for more money to develop teacher compensation programs tied to test scores, teacher evaluations, and extra work. The administration has allotted $100 billion in stimulus funds to prevent teacher layoffs and support education reform initiatives, such as innovative teaching, charter schools, and merit pay programs.

Unions have been vocal opponents of linking teacher pay to test scores, saying that the work of a teacher can’t be reduced to tests, which can sometimes be biased.

Duncan acknowledged this position, yet said that student performance must be a part of the equation when measuring teacher effectiveness.

“I understand that tests are far from perfect and that it is unfair to reduce the complex, nuanced work of teaching to a simple multiple choice exam. Test scores alone should never drive evaluation, compensation or tenure decisions,” he said. “But to remove student achievement entirely from evaluation is illogical and indefensible.”

The NEA, which has over 3 million members, backs linking teacher pay to extra work and acquiring extra skills but Duncan said that while he believes in increased credentialing for teachers, it does, “very little to improve the quality of teaching.”

Duncan, known for working with unions while pushing reform in Chicago, said that unions are at a crossroads and they must be willing to change tenure rules, root out bad teachers and focus on turning around poorly performing schools.

“The key to making progress on education reform begins with respect for the labor-management relationship…I salute union-management partnerships all across America that are working together to develop better hiring, compensation, evaluation and turnaround strategies,” he said. “But we need to move faster and we need to go further.”http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24447.html#ixzz0K8dYw9Ta&D