The state’s $48 billion budget includes about $14.2 billion for education, another $1.5 billion for higher education, including two new trooper schools that will bring many cops into the city of Detroit.

WWJ Lansing Bureau Chief Tim Skubick says the party reactions are not surprising.

Senate Democrat Gretchen Whitmer gave the budget a rating of two-out-of-ten, saying it’s a “two” if you care about education, kids and economic development in Michigan. “It’s another massive disinvestment of education in Michigan,” she said.

Republican Randy Richardville gives the new budget a nine-plus.

Skubick says that the Republican are ‘geeked’ about the budget, the Democrats are not impressed.

Democrats decried the increases in education funding as “paltry,” saying the budget doesn’t do enough to make up for cuts last year.

“It continues a deeply damaging approach to funding Michigan’s educational system,” said Westland Democratic Sen. Glenn Anderson. “Our higher education institutions endured some of the most severe budget cuts in history. This year … doesn’t even come close to making them whole again.”

Current university funding is down 15 percent from a year ago. Many institutions raised tuition nearly 7 percent to make up for the lost state support.

Under the new deal, universities would receive an overall 3 percent increase in funding. The education package would require universities to hold tuition and fee increases to no more than 4 percent or lose part of their state funding. The budget includes a $36 million increase for public universities, to $1.4 billion, as well as $200 million more for public schools, which will get $12.9 billion overall. Community colleges will get $10.3 million more, for a total of $294 million.

All three must meet performance requirements to qualify for much of the extra money. Some of the new funding will go to the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System to cover pension and retiree health care costs.

Increases for individual universities would range from less than 1 percent at Wayne State University in Detroit to 8.2 percent for Saginaw Valley State University.

The budget now moves on to the Governor for his signature.

(TM and © Copyright 2012 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2012 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)

The President has been talking about college and debt a lot lately. Many of us who have been talking about this for years welcome him to the conversation. I, for one, hope that we can eventually stop nibbling around the edges of the issue of education as a profit center and finally talk about the rightness of that construct.

But, today is not that day. Today we’re talking about a series of speeches and legislation designed to protect military families from predatory for-profit colleges and universities.

This connection between the military and for-profits isn’t new. Where there is federally guaranteed education money you will generally find for-profit colleges.

credit: AP

Online technology and accelerated courses were partially developed on models used to accommodate soldiers who often need to start and stop school several times before completing a degree.

President Obama issued a broad range of missives, that include:

• A new requirement that schools participating in the Department of Defense’s tuition assistance program disseminate a “Know Before You Owe” form to help prospective students better understand “critical information about tuition and fees.”

• Better control over which schools are given access to members of the military to prevent the “aggressively and inappropriately targeting military students.”

• A requirement that the Department of Veterans Affairs trademark the term “GI Bill,” preventing outside websites from using the term at will to market to prospective students.

(source: PBS Frontline)

It’s an interesting hodgepodge that shows, one, the difficulties the federal government has with regulating state-bound institutions and that, two, shows that it IS possible to do so.

And that is fascinating because neo-liberalists will lead you to believe that education being a state issue cripples the federal government from regulating higher education and profit. I have always disagreed. First, I come from a people who were chess pieces in the civil war. I have no illusions about the limits of our government. Second, the federal government may not be able to control state chartered institutions but, as these actions show, they CAN control many of the sources of legitimacy in which these institutions trade.

There are some interesting connections to be made to another source of legitimacy I’ve long questioned: EduCause. You may not know them but, I bet, you intuitively trust their product. EduCause administeres and controls the issuance of “.edu” domains to colleges. Have you not ever glanced at a college website to make sure you are at Harvard.edu and not Harvard.com or, God forbid, Harvard.net? You are likely not alone. I’ve witnessed professors teaching undergraduates to sort for such .edu domains when vetting the quality of their online sources and I have done the same thing myself in research.

EduCause is a non-profit like another source of educational legitimacy:  accreditation agencies. By trademarking “G.I. Bill” I suspect the White House is trying to exert influence over the use of such public good concepts in the secondary education legitimacy market. It’s an interesting move with the potential for expanded inquiry into how and why so many tertiary agencies have so much authority in higher education. It’s a loophole for-profits have exploited mightily.

All of this leads me to ask: if the United States military needs such far-ranging protection from for-profit colleges why don’t the rest of us?

Further reading:

EduCause

Internet Domain to Continue Under EduCause Management

How Accreditation Works

 She is funny. She is loving. She is obnoxious. She tells  it as it is. She can spank you to show whose boss and kiss you and loving you at the same time. She can create any unusual dish from scratch for a meal. She meets our needs if it’s a must. She can fight my battle if I am right regardless. She can create some ungodly home remedies to make us well if we’re sick. She is quickly to forgive regardless whatever circumstances may be. She pretends she doesn’t see what you’ll doing until you do it again. She always have an answer for every questions. I never heard her complain once in my entire life about anything. She never given up on us.

She is always there for us! She is the wisdom of I-Ching! She is my lucky charm! She is my MOM!

We, all grew up now and we ranged from 68 to 39 years-old, with lots of children and grandchildren. Many things she did through out our lifetime that we are trying to re-construct or re-create just like mom and we couldn’t get it exactly like mom. Isn’t that a pity!

But I realize now…all because everything she did…was done…out of love! She raised a huge family that takes talent, patience, expertise, caring, counselling, education, money, love, support, etc., but she didn’t regret her decision to stick with the task because she loves us!

When my husband and I were having marriage issues, I asked my mom why were they (mom and dad) fighting and arguing about when we were little. My mom said…they were always argued and foght about two things:  “Money and You kids”. My mom explained that money was practically the top subject of every fights or arguments they had.

Why is money? My mother said…it is the lack of it…is the problem! Money pays for your uniforms, puts food on the table, pays the bills, pays your school supplies, church stuff, women’s club stuff, men’s club stuff, youth group stuff, choir stuff, Sunday school stuff, household stuff, your shoes and clothes, hospital bills and etc. She said the fights and the arguments was 99% about money and 1% was because one of us did something and she the cover up for whomever did the no no! Since than I look at my mother differently and appreciate her so much to this day.

Getting involved with Empower Network is my way of giving back to my mother. You see, she’s going to be 85 years-old next June. She is getting older and older that she’ll need extra hands to help her at home.  My mother needs me and I need her. One of my sister is caring for my mother now, but my sister expressed her needs  this last June on mom’s birthday that she needs help taking care of mom.

My wish and my dream of working Empower Network is to be able to stay home and help my sister takes care of our elderly mother. Empower Network is that vehicle to accomplish that dream. Empower Network has a system already in place to benefit all of us…you and me. All we have to do…is to plug-in!

My friend, if you are looking and ended up here on my page…there is a reason why! We are all here for each other one way or another. If you’ve read my story and is sort of similar to what you’re going thru…please take at look at Empower Network. It is an awesome money making opportunity on the internet. There’s room for everyone and lots of money to be made with this Empower Network system.

My friend, there is nothing stand between you and your success…except YOU! Do something different this year…for you…or for your love ones! God Bless! Until next time!

Ms. Avau Watson

]]> http://miami.cbslocal.com/2011/12/06/gov-scott-set-to-increase-education-spending/ Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:55:04 +0000 cbs4kephart http://miami.cbslocal.com/2011/12/06/gov-scott-set-to-increase-education-spending/ TALLAHASSEE (CBSMiami.com/NSF) – Gov. Rick Scott is set to propose a $1 billion increase in education spending over this year, planning to call Wednesday for a boost to per-student spending despite a state revenue shortfall and lower local school tax dollars.

In a conference call with state school superintendents Tuesday, Scott, who will be proposing his second budget since getting elected in 2010, said he plans to call for lawmakers to increase per-pupil spending from $6,262 to $6,372, even after factoring in expected growth of about 30,000 more students over the current school year, according to the News Service of Florida.

A spokesman for the governor said late Tuesday that officials in the governor’s office believe it would be one of the largest increases in K-12 spending in recent history if lawmakers were to go along.

Scott plans to make public his proposed budget for the fiscal year that starts July 1 on Wednesday afternoon, the News Service of Florida reported.

His spokesman, Lane Wright, declined to say Tuesday where the governor will propose to cut spending to be able to afford the proposed boost in education spending – a cut that will need to be even larger because of revenue projections that are off by nearly $2 billion over what legislators earmarked this year.

Scott has also made it clear that he agrees with Republican legislative leadership’s anti-tax viewpoint, and has said publicly a few times that he won’t call for any tax increases.

The governor’s recommendations are merely the first formal step in a months-long process and the final budget will eventually be written by the Legislature, though Scott has line item veto power.

Senate budget committees are expected to receive presentations on Thursday about Scott’s recommendations.

“Education pays, and we clearly must find a way to increase our investment in Florida’s students,” Scott said in a recorded radio address distributed to stations on Tuesday.

But he acknowledged the difficulty of finding the extra money, noting the student increase, which will mean it will cost $191 million more over current year spending just to keep per-pupil funding flat.

“Florida’s growing student population comes at a time when we also estimate a loss of local revenue,” Scott said in his radio address. “This means Florida school districts will have over $200 million less to spend. In spite of this bleak budget picture, I am committed to increasing Florida’s investment in the education of our young people.”

As Scott leaked small details of his budget to various outlets on Tuesday, Democrats quickly pointed out that the Republican-dominated Legislature has cut education spending as the economy has tanked – meaning that any increase only serves to get Florida back to where it was a few years ago. The current year budget, for example, cut more than $1.3 billion from education, Democrats said, arguing that even a $1 billion increase still leaves education coffers lighter than they were before Scott took office. Per-student spending dropped by more than $500 last year.

“The current state education funding levels are at the lowest levels since FY 2005-06,” House Democrats said in a statement sent out late Tuesday.

Per-student spending peaked at more than $7,100 per child during the 2007-2008 fiscal year, just before the economic downturn.

Regardless, Scott told a Jacksonville TV station that it was time to put the money back into education.

“I’m going to tell the Legislature, ‘I’m not signing the budget unless we substantially increase state funding for education,’ because that’s what our hard-working Floridians want,” Scott told WJXT. “We’ve got to put this money into education.”

(TM and © Copyright 2011 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2010 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The News Service Of Florida contributed to this report.)

The competitive grant could provide Florida with up to $100 million to improve school readiness among Florida’s youngest learners.

In order to apply, however, the Florida Legislature will need to sign off on accepting funds for a home visitation grant it previously rejected.

Studies have shown that children from disadvantaged backgrounds often enter school already behind their more affluent peers.

Advocates say early learning programs can help narrow the achievement gap.

Florida was awarded $700 million in the last round of the Race to the Top education reform competition.

(TM and © Copyright 2011 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2010 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)

“For me it’s been a dream come true,” Notter said on being appointed superintendent in 2007. “I can exit proudly. I’ve achieved the dream to be a superintendent in a major public school system.”

But, while he achieved his dream, Notter fears the desire to cut budgets across the state to the bone may keep many of the students from achieving their dreams.

“If you look at the reduction of money, we are back at 2006 funding. The last time I checked the calendar it was 2011,” said Notter. “I believe we are on the verge of losing traditional public education. Schools are punished for not meeting a certain benchmark. I believe in positive reinforcement, more incentives for schools to succeed.”

Notter also admitted he had a very rocky relationship with the Broward Teacher’s Union.

“Out of 37 years in education I spent ten as a classroom teacher.” He said he’s been frustrated with the inflexibility on raises. “Look at the ‘Race to the Top’ dollars. The union has dug their heels in and said ‘no raise, no Race to the Top’ and we’re going to lose $30 million, and the majority of that goes to teachers!”

As for the scathing Grand Jury report that was released in February accusing the school board of squandering millions of tax dollars and criticizing Notter for tolerating meddling, Notter said flatly, “I thought it was an attack on Broward County. I believe we were an easy target, because of the arrest and conviction of a school board member,” he said referring to disgraced ex board member Beverly Gallagher. “I knew when I wanted this job I am not going to please everyone.”

So how will he spend his first day in retirement, this Friday, July 1st?

“I will get up at 4:30 a.m., grind my own coffee beans, and walk two blocks to the beach and watch the sun come up.”
Notter said he is looking forward to the time he will spend with his four grandchildren; and he says though he is retiring from the district, he is not retiring from the work force.

“I’m waiting for the phone to ring,” he said. “I guarantee you that whatever I do it will be something in education and something to do with children.”

Why? Because the federal government has “barbed” the deal.  If the state decides NOT to take the money, the federal government can – and undoubtedly will – give the money directly to individual school districts. The legislature can have some control over where the money goes or they can have no control. The legislature is also very tightly bound by where they can spend the money. It can’t go for brick and mortar – it must go for personnel. So, for those states who couldn’t – or wouldn’t – balance their budget, it’s a reward for bad behavior. A bailout for irresponsibility. It punishes those responsible states who have balanced their budgets by giving them one-time money for on-going needs. They’ll also take it because more legislators want it than oppose it.

So – the special session will convene, the speeches in opposition will be given, enough people will vote no to prove their point – and the majority will vote to take the money. The biggest drawback? The lashing that will come from the far right for every legislator not “pure” enough to vote no.

Twin Cities based Target corporation says it will give the bulk of its 5 percent donation program over the next five years to early childhood education. That comes to about 500 million dollars. The money will go mostly toward efforts to help children read by the third grade. The company says studies show one in four U-S children fails to graduate from high school and nearly 40 percent of Black and Hispanic students drop out. Oprah Winfrey also is involved in the education effort. She helped launch the Target campaign by asking adults to pledge to read to children.

All three of these rightwingers hail from red states and, as such, do well in the polls if they are seen standing up to Washington. The fact that real people are being hurt by their actions means nothing at all to them. Ideology is more important than the effect that ideology has on their populace. They are counting on voters to remember that they are republicans and not much else come election time. They will spin their refusal to accept some of the stimulus as “state’s rights” and garner the remnant of the racist vote that is crucial for their continued re-elections. But mostly, they are counting on the furor to die down by the time election day rolls around, throw up the boogyman scenario of electing a Democrat, and another trumped up issue or two to escape responsibility for not looking after the needs of the electorate by turning down this money.

I seem to recall Ms Palin remarking during the most recent campaign that if she was elected VP that parents of disadvantaged children would have a friend in the White House. If that’s the case, wouldn’t it logically follow that she would be a friend while still in the statehouse as well? Well, we are not asserting that NeoCons like Palin are ever being logical because it appears that a lot of the money she is turning down would help put additional money into the state’s paltry education budget and some of that is going to help those same disadvantaged children she claims to hold so dear. Since it means that some more people would be employed (and therefore increase the size of government) Palin is refusing to take the money. That’s NeoCon logic for you.

She is also going to refuse millions for other parts of the Alaskan economy and government functions on these same bogus principles. In addition to the $160 million for education that she is tossing back to DC there is $17 million for the Alaska Department of Labor which would help fund additional vocational rehabilitation services and unemployment services among other things, $9 million for Health and Social Services and about $7 million for Public Safety. Only in the convoluted mind of a person running for the presidency who wants to make sure that her conservative NeoCon base understands she will stand up to Washington bureaucrats would turn down money designed to help the people of her state and put her ideology ahead of the needs of the state.

Bobby Jindal uses similar NeoCon logic (meaning no real logic at all) in turning down stimulus money that would have helped the unemployed in his state. Even though the state could phase out the new program when the money runs out in three years, Jindal won’t even start the program up even though his state isn’t paying for it, the feds are. The unemployed in Louisiana suffer thanks to the brilliant NeoCon logic of prospective presidential candidates.

Mark Sanford is willing to let more than 4,000 teachers get the axe in South Carolina rather than take the stimulus money. He wants to pay down South Carolina’s debt or pay off school bonds before he will look to the needs of real people in his bass ackward state: elementary school teachers. That’s some real NeoCon logic for you.

I think that the most sense about all of this crap was made by another republican governor who legally has no ambition to be president. Arnold Schwartenegger said that if those other governors don’t want stimulus money that he would take it to help California. There is the difference between a NeoCon running for president and a republican who understands what it means to look out for his people when it is crunch time. There is no overlap between the two unfortunately.

links: http://community.adn.com/adn/node/139409

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/20/jindal-unemployed/

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20090317/NEWS01/

303170003/1001/NEWS01

Well indeed it should not take a brain surgeon to know the importance of paying high salaries to important careers.  Careers that not only save the lives of human-beings but also prevent future crimes through contributing to society a mind that makes good decision based on cause and effect.

- Lamb