State legislative results from last night

[ABC]

Along with the Governors, the number of Republicans elected to state legislatures appears to be historic.

It will have an enourmous impact for a lots of policy reasons (lower taxes and spending) but also b/c it is the state legislatures that draw Congressional maps and legislative maps.

Also, it appears that most of the Republicans winning were not squishy moderates but solid conservatives

Here are some highlghts:

The Kansas GOP picked up at least 16 seats, making the margin 92-33. Mods and Dems teamed up last year to pass a tax increase. Conservatives are now a majority of the Kansas House. The mods in the House and Kansas Senate can't be pleased.

The New Hampshire Senate went from 10-14 Democrat to 21-3 GOP.

The Montana House went from 50-50 to 68-32. Montana has seven districts intended to elect Native Americans. Three of those seven seats went GOP for the first time ever in Montana history.

The North Carolina GOP controls both legislative chambers for the first time in 122 years.

The GOP in Maine controls both chambers for the first time in 35 years and they have all statewide offices.

That's just for starters.

[SubGod22]

You promise that the conservatives in this state now have a majority? :) I remember reading a number of stories the last couple years about a number of Republicans joining Democrats to raise taxes and/or increase spending. It was rather depressing.

[ABC]

Promise and guarantee.

It has been a long time coming.

[engrshock]

Are you saying that now we will see the tax cuts and spending cuts that have been promised for 20 years? That will be fantastic, but I will believe it when I see it. I am very disillusioned when it comes to Republicans promises. Where are the cuts in spending going to be? How low will my taxes go or am I just going to see the same taxes just called something different? My property taxes try to go up every year even if the mil levy does not. If there are not significant cuts in spending then the same taxes and costs in one form or another will still be needed. How is the state pension program going to be cut? Are we going to get a flat tax so that everyone pays the same percentage of their wages? I am all for someone making $19,000/year paying some taxes rather than none if it means that my taxes will be lower.

[ShockBand]

At the state level, the big monkey of spending is education - K-12 and higher education.

If the state legislature decides to cut spending on both, I would forsee local school boards having to look at raising property tax levies to try and maintain current budgetary levels or make further cuts than have happened over the past couple of years. Is anyone ready to completely defund all extracurricular activities and athletics? Or increase class sizes so you can reduce the number of teachers?

The only way you can quickly cut significant dollars in a school district is to cut personnel, and the largest share of personnel are classroom teachers. Yes, there are non-teaching positions here and there that could be sacrificed (and many already have been), but not as many as one might think in most districts.

As for higher ed, more cuts would simply mean higher tuition and fees, which have already climbed astronomically in the past decade.

Disclaimer: All this said from a public school teacher who has to have many cost-benefit analysis discussions in his head between his taxpayer side and his professional educator side. It isn't easy to vote for candidates that might well end up negatively affecting my pay, benefits, and professional environment, though I sometimes do. I will also say it is easy to be conservative and for smaller government when you already belong to the "haves" of our society, and easy to be liberal and for bigger government when your belong to the "have nots" of our society. IMHO, appropriate, not big or small, government lands somewhere in the middle. Finding where that middle lands is the challenge, again IMHO.

[BOBB]

At the state level, the big monkey of spending is education - K-12 and higher education.

If the state legislature decides to cut spending on both, I would forsee local school boards having to look at raising property tax levies to try and maintain current budgetary levels or make further cuts than have happened over the past couple of years. Is anyone ready to completely defund all extracurricular activities and athletics? Or increase class sizes so you can reduce the number of teachers?

The only way you can quickly cut significant dollars in a school district is to cut personnel, and the largest share of personnel are classroom teachers. Yes, there are non-teaching positions here and there that could be sacrificed (and many already have been), but not as many as one might think in most districts.

As for higher ed, more cuts would simply mean higher tuition and fees, which have already climbed astronomically in the past decade.

Disclaimer: All this said from a public school teacher who has to have many cost-benefit analysis discussions in his head between his taxpayer side and his professional educator side. It isn't easy to vote for candidates that might well end up negatively affecting my pay, benefits, and professional environment, though I sometimes do. I will also say it is easy to be conservative and for smaller government when you already belong to the "haves" of our society, and easy to be liberal and for bigger government when your belong to the "have nots" of our society. IMHO, appropriate, not big or small, government lands somewhere in the middle. Finding where that middle lands is the challenge, again IMHO.

Please take your measured and well thought-out opinion somewhere else. It has no place on this board. ;-)

[wufan]

I think these types of tax cuts are exactly what is needed (sorry). I'm okay with high taxes, but on the smallest local level possible. If you want good schools, roads, parks, etc., raise local taxes and reap the benefits first hand. No giant federal slush fund for me thank you.

[WuDrWu]

Again, rational thought out opinions and ideas are going to give this board a bad name.

Let's stop this nonsense before it gets totally out of hand.

[ShockBand]

Does this also rule me out for a political future? Or just being a cable media pundit?

[SubGod22]

Many schools are also full of wasteful and unnecesasry spending. I know for a fact there's a local school that's gotten itself in financial difficulties because they keep buying new stuff that even the teachers don't want or use. Or use rarely in some cases. I have a family member who is involved with this school as a teacher and is on whatever board has looked over this stuff.

Schools could get by with less money if they were willing to be a little more responsible with thier funds. I know this school isn't the only one that had done things like this to try and stay at the top of everything. Money also doesn't equal better education. There have been a number of studies I've seen that have shown a major increase in funds to schools over the last 20 years or so and there's been no real increase in results.

I'm not saying we should completely cut funding or anything, but the schools have been getting plenty of support and we don't really see a lot of positive results from that. They need to show they can spend money more wisely before they have a leg to stand on in this argument in my opinion.

[Maggie]

I am not an educator like ShockBand, but my sister is one (now in Kansas City) and my in-laws were both teachers (recently retired) in the New Jersey system. So I can appreciate the quandary ShockBand often finds himself in.

Generally speaking, everybody who acts like we can tinker with the state monopoly on education and get radically better results is working to ensure that our present system survives to inflict its dysfunctional results on another generation of Americans who cannot afford its failures. SubGod is correct – money is not the solution. They spend more in DC, per student, than almost anywhere in the country and they didn’t start getting results until Michele Rhee turned the system upside down or at least tried to. Sorry, ShockBand but it is the contractual relationship between the teachers, administrators, etc. and the government that is a huge part of the budgetary problem in many school districts across the country. The pension, health-benefits, the difficulty getting rid of poor teachers, etc. has created a black hole. There are many good teachers, and I am confident that ShockBand is one, but their efforts and commitment to education often falls on tin ears when it comes to their Union.

As for higher education, I think there is a correlation between federal loans, etc. and the rise in tuition. Why is college so expensive? Why does federal aid never really succeed in making college more affordable? These shouldn't be deep mysteries. More “easy money” for students, means the institution can get away with charging more. By increasing demand for higher education (everyone is told that they must have a college degree) without increasing the supply, the subsidies have driven tuition skyward.

[engrshock]

Education is a big item for sure but the state pension fund is a big problem.
Hopefully the recovery of the stock market has alleviated the problem somewhat but how can one reduce taxes with these problems. Also I do not want to see "taxes reduced" and shifted to other fees and taxes.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124847793

The Problem With Kansas

At the beginning of last year, the pension fund was more than $8 billion in the hole, less than 60 percent funded and losing ground.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-15/-death-spiral-awaits-state-worker-pensions-as-illinois-leads-underfunding.html

The $11 billion Kansas Public Employees Retirement System had the seventh-lowest funded ratio in Bloomberg’s ranking at 63.7 percent in 2009. It paid out benefits equal to 10 percent of its assets in the fiscal year, double the rate of 2007, fund records show.

The pension’s funded ratio fell from 70.8 percent two years earlier and is projected to drop to 41 percent by 2015, according to a February report to state lawmakers. Another market decline could jeopardize the fund, the report said.

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Kansas_state_budget

[WuDrWu]

The KPERS fund is a joke, and I have no idea how it ever passed.

No rational person could ever in a million years expect this to fiscally work out. It is a perfect example of kicking the can down the road and letting the problem be the next guys problem.

Well guess what?

We're the next guy.

My wife has KPERS. Just tell me now that the payout is going to be diminished. I might not like it, but it gives us the chance to adjust, and if it means my daughter's children don't have to pay for it, great! The further out, the bigger the adjustment and then FIX it going forward. Stop promising things that cannot happen!

The sooner everyone realizes the fixes aren't going to be easy, the more likely we are to actually fix them.

[ShockBand]

Not saying you're incorrect Sub, but without naming the school district, what are the purchases being made that seem unnecessary? Just curious, because we had many in my district (not Wichita BTW) saying that putting FieldTurf on the football field was a frivolous expenditure, though putting it in does mean it can be used as much as is desired (unlike a grass field) and has reduced annual maintenance costs. I suspect you're referring to in classroom items, and most likely technology purchases, for which I could spout on for days about poor implementation and too hurried adoption of things.

That is coming from one (me) who has recently completed a master's in educational technology and knows all too well that too many districts purchase hardware and software without giving sufficient thought to how it will be used within the curriculum and often with too little training and support. It becomes a bright and shiny thing to boast about in brochures and media clips, but when push comes to shove it is far too often used to do the same old things, just more expensively. Needless to say I believe ICT (Instructional Computer Technology) has great potential to be a powerful educational tool, but too many districts just buy the new toys to keep up with the Joneses (look at all our Smartboards!) and the actual teaching practices just march on as always, much like what we all had 10, 20, 30 or more years ago.

I could go on forever, but I only get 30 minutes for lunch. BTW, I wrote this on my lunch break, so all you tax penny watchers out there can rest assured this was on my nickel, not mine, yours, and ours! :)

[SubGod22]

You're correct that the district I'm referring to is/was buying new tech that even the tech teachers didn't want or ask for. My family member said that the district would just spend and buy things just so they didn't lose any funding down the road. Much of the stuff just sits there or the teachers have to try and find a way to utilize it even if they don't need to.

And these new techs were replacing new techs that had been purchased a year or two before and things that really weren't outdated.

Maybe some sort of school audit needs to be done or something. I don't know. But if I felt that the funds were being used wisely I'd be fine with the funding. But right now, I don't have that confidence.