2010 is here and with it comes Congressional elections. Much has been made of the potential for Republicans to make in-roads around the country in Democrat held seats given the partisan, liberal tenor currently in Washington D.C. Here in Southeast Mississippi, Gene Taylor (D-Bay St. Louis) has held the 4th District Congressional seat since 1989. Taylor, a former City Councilman and Mississippi State Senator, is well versed in what it takes to win in this district, which by the way is one of, if not the most conservative Republican districts in the nation (no Democrat Presidential candidate has carried the 4th since 1956). Political newcomer Joe Tegerdine hopes to unseat the incumbent Taylor and change that (D) to a (R) for South Mississippi.
For those who have yet to hear of Joe Tegerdine, you will soon as he has now filed his paperwork to run for the 4th District seat. He is an energetic man, someone I have come to enjoy speaking with on my radio show. He is grounded in the Constitution and has cast a broad vision of fiscal responsibility, new House leadership, strong national defense, and limited government. Here is a quick biography of the 4th Congressional District Republican candidate adapted from his website (www.joetegerdine.com).
Tegerdine was born in Portland, Oregon and grew up in the Northwest. He was raised by a single mother for most of his childhood and learned early on to work hard and hold true to the things he was taught. Shortly after graduating from high school, Tegerdine served as a missionary in Taiwan. After spending almost two years overseas, he headed home to the United States and attended college at Brigham Young University, earning a B.A. in Communications. While in college he met and married his wife and in 2002, they moved to Tallahassee, Florida where he earned a Juris Doctorate degree from the Florida State University College of Law. Tegerdine is currently employed as Senior Director of Business Development for WNC Satcom Group. He relocated to Hattiesburg, Mississippi in the spring of 2007 and settled in Petal where he currently lives with his wife and four children.
Given the previous elections in the 4th Congressional District since Taylor has held the seat, Tegerdine has an uphill challenge indeed. Taylor has won the last four elections by taking between 64-75% of the vote. His voting record in the House of Representatives is a mixed bag, however; he has walked the tight rope between party and populist for many years and thus far has mastered it with only the occasional wobble which he quickly balances. He is seemingly pro-life and pro-gun (anything else in this part of Mississippi and he would have been out a long time ago), yet he has supported his party and its leaders inconspicuously (voting for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker) knowing that if he carried too much of the party's water he would be on the proverbial hot seat come election time at home. He knows how to appear as if he is fighting for his constituents while not making too many waves in Washington D.C. His tenure and party connections landed him an important seat on the Armed Services Committee and the Shipbuilding Caucus, making him increasingly valuable to his 4th District constituents. Taylor's good ole boy persona coupled with his staff's superb PR work in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina make him a force that only the perfect storm or perhaps some truly informed, inspired, involved, and fed up voters could take down.
I believe that we in the 4th District can and should do better than Gene Taylor (hey, that almost rhymed...perhaps there's a campaign slogan in there for Tegerdine). Taylor is deeply entrenched and knows how to work the system, both locally, through ensuring that the proper spin is applied when needed, and nationally, by being content to sit on the sidelines and following the party line as necessary. Gene Taylor is not a bad guy; heck, he's not all that bad of a Congressman if you judge his body of work through a narrow lens and confine it to babies, bullets, and budgets. America and the future of our great nation are about something bigger than such narrow, spin driven, seat ensuring issues. Yes, those things do matter greatly to me as a conservative and should matter to us all but when our nation's debt is increasing at such a rapid pace, private business is being taken over by government, our Constitution is threatened daily, healthcare is on its way to being rationed in every sense of the word, and on and on I could go we don't need a pacifist Congressman representing our area here in Southeast Mississippi. We need a Congressman that will stand up and fight for the Constitution, for the freedoms we hold dear, to speak against the ills of the day and actively support a different direction than what is being proposed by those now in leadership - a leadership supported and encouraged by Taylor himself. We need a change in the 4th District and soon.
The real question, and the most disturbing part of this discussion to me, is this: How does Gene Taylor, a Democrat, keep getting elected in one of the most conservative Republican district in the nation? For the sake of time and space, I'll cut to the chase - Republicans put him there. There's no other answer. If you live in the 4th District I challenge you to ask your Republican friends that actually vote who they voted for in the last Congressional election. Check the campaign finance reports for Taylor, as well, and you'll find normally Republican donors sprinkled in among the typical Democrat patrons.
So how does Tegerdine reverse this trend in 2010? How can he topple this Goliath? The only way is for conservative Republicans to break out of their self-induced habit and vote Republican. Tegerdine must appeal to the true conservatives, creating a sense of urgency that now is the time for a change. He must work to unite a strong conservative base and educate them on the realities at hand. Twenty years is long enough for Mr. Taylor's trip to Washington.
A few years ago this 4th District seat didn't seem all that important. Having one or two Democrat Congressmen wasn't a big deal most thought. They have tenure, clout among their peers. But now, with the make up of Congress, the Speaker of the House, the Senate in full control and the White House locked up, this Southeast Mississippi seat needs to symbolize and portray how we in this area truly believe to our core. Tegerdine must portray that in all he does over the coming months if he is to get within a stone's throw of Taylor.
As a side note, another Republican challenger, John McCay (which ran against Taylor in 2008 and lost by a margin of 75%-25%), told me recently he was planning to make another run for the seat as well. I'm not aware at this time if he has filed to run. McCay will have the same challenges as Tegerdine should he run and win the party nomination.
Truth is both Tegerdine and McCay are relative unknowns in the Mississippi political scene meaning that they must brand their name, ideals, and message in voters' minds quickly to have any chance at Taylor. Republicans will have to get on board with their party's candidate, not only here in the 4th District, but in the State Republican Party as well. Southeast Mississippi and the nation deserve better than Gene Taylor and his Democrat friends. I believe we can do better...but unless people wake up, get in the fight, and get engaged in the 4th Congressional District, history tells us we won't.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Monday, January 4, 2010
The Tax Masquerade
Most of you have heard the term "nanny state." Wikipedia defines "nanny state" as a term that refers to state protectionism, economic interventionism, or regulatory policies (of economic, social or other nature), and the perception that these policies are becoming institutionalized as common practice. Its usage varies by political context, but in general it is used in reference to policies where the state is characterized as being excessive in its desire to protect (as a nanny would protect a child), govern or control particular aspects of society. The term can refer to public health interventions and consumer protectionism that removes or controls otherwise free choices, as well as national economic and social policies (regulation and intervention) that affect large and state-favored businesses. Politically conservative groups (those that support free market principles and capitalism) object to excessive state action to protect people from the consequences of their actions by restricting citizen options and with good reason - it's unconstitutional and goes against the essence of the Founders' spirit.
The story below taken from WLOX, an ABC affiliate in Biloxi, is a perfect example of how we as a society have dumbed down our individual freedoms and reliance on the Constitution and are now allowing our state and federal government to act as a nanny who dictates what we eat, where we go, what products we use, what cars we buy, which doctor we see, and on and on. As you read the story, keep in mind the explanation above and see if you can see the nanny's hand at work. I have italicized and a few interesting parts of the story for your ease of understanding:
BILOXI, MS (WLOX) - If your list of must-have drinks include soda, it could cost you close to 50 cents more under a proposed soda tax bill. The tax would also apply to pre-sweetened drinks like certain juices, teas, and energy drinks.
As the bill is written now, only wholesalers of sodas and sugary drinks would be taxed. But, the bill's creator, Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, Mississippi, says he's aware that most or all of the cost could be handed down to consumers. The idea of the tax is stirring up mixed reactions among South Mississippians.
Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, the man behind the bill, says the Stennis Institute is currently conducting a study on the tax and estimates it could raise anywhere from $110 and $147 Million.
Mayo says the push behind the bill is two-fold. The representative says he hopes to encourage Mississippians to make smarter, healthier choices and to pay for programs teaching people how to make healthier food choices and live healthier lives.
The representative would like to see the money go to the Department of Health, Department of Education and the Mississippi Development Authority. Mayo says the hope is to get Mississippi thinking more in terms of preventative care as opposed to being in reactionary mode.
"I hope it passes this year. It's focusing attention on what are healthy choices and what are not; it's a start." He goes on to say, "If you choose to be fat by making unhealthy choices, why should those of us who choose to be healthy pay for your obesity."
Did you hear the nanny's voice in this story? In case you didn't notice, it was prevalent throughout. Perhaps you even found yourself asking these questions as you read the story: why only certain businesses, why only certain drinks, why does the state need to be so involved in my life, why should the state have a say in what I eat and drink, why is the government involved in the health care industry, and many more.
For decades now, our state and federal governments have eased into the role of nanny as they have taxed some businesses and products more than others to encourage the average consumer to use or not use said products as is deemed politically expedient for the whims of the day. The problem with such selective government endorsements is that all of the products are legal and hold equal standing under the law. Such "sin" taxes masquerade as concern, but is essentially legal product discrimination authorized by the government.
So why do we allow certain industries to be taxed more than others? Why is it acceptable to tax alcohol more than milk? Why is it fine to tax cigarettes more than chewing gum? Why should we tax sodas more than Grandma's fried chicken or Momma's chocolate pie? Heck, why don't we tax the dinner-on-the-grounds at the churches or the family holiday feast?
In 1961, Ronald Reagan made a recording aimed at speaking against socialized medicine. He said, "...back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program. One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it..."
I would add that most people are just as reluctant to oppose efforts to curtail the use of socially questionable products, i.e. cigarettes, alcohol, and now sodas and sugary foods, even when you raise taxes. It has become easy to disguise public health care and obesity concerns with the unconstitutional singling out of legal products and businesses while imposing big government taxation, essentially creating the nanny state. And once the nanny state becomes the norm, our American way of life as defined by the Constitution erodes and soon we will no longer recognize our American existence, that of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - freedom of individual choice.
It's time we unmask the debates of our day and see the realities at hand. Selectively taxing legal products under the guise of public health is a slippery slope that could result in the loss of much more than just a few cents here or there. We must be diligent to assess these and other issues as we continue to perfect our Republic.
The story below taken from WLOX, an ABC affiliate in Biloxi, is a perfect example of how we as a society have dumbed down our individual freedoms and reliance on the Constitution and are now allowing our state and federal government to act as a nanny who dictates what we eat, where we go, what products we use, what cars we buy, which doctor we see, and on and on. As you read the story, keep in mind the explanation above and see if you can see the nanny's hand at work. I have italicized and a few interesting parts of the story for your ease of understanding:
BILOXI, MS (WLOX) - If your list of must-have drinks include soda, it could cost you close to 50 cents more under a proposed soda tax bill. The tax would also apply to pre-sweetened drinks like certain juices, teas, and energy drinks.
As the bill is written now, only wholesalers of sodas and sugary drinks would be taxed. But, the bill's creator, Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, Mississippi, says he's aware that most or all of the cost could be handed down to consumers. The idea of the tax is stirring up mixed reactions among South Mississippians.
Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, the man behind the bill, says the Stennis Institute is currently conducting a study on the tax and estimates it could raise anywhere from $110 and $147 Million.
Mayo says the push behind the bill is two-fold. The representative says he hopes to encourage Mississippians to make smarter, healthier choices and to pay for programs teaching people how to make healthier food choices and live healthier lives.
The representative would like to see the money go to the Department of Health, Department of Education and the Mississippi Development Authority. Mayo says the hope is to get Mississippi thinking more in terms of preventative care as opposed to being in reactionary mode.
"I hope it passes this year. It's focusing attention on what are healthy choices and what are not; it's a start." He goes on to say, "If you choose to be fat by making unhealthy choices, why should those of us who choose to be healthy pay for your obesity."
Did you hear the nanny's voice in this story? In case you didn't notice, it was prevalent throughout. Perhaps you even found yourself asking these questions as you read the story: why only certain businesses, why only certain drinks, why does the state need to be so involved in my life, why should the state have a say in what I eat and drink, why is the government involved in the health care industry, and many more.
For decades now, our state and federal governments have eased into the role of nanny as they have taxed some businesses and products more than others to encourage the average consumer to use or not use said products as is deemed politically expedient for the whims of the day. The problem with such selective government endorsements is that all of the products are legal and hold equal standing under the law. Such "sin" taxes masquerade as concern, but is essentially legal product discrimination authorized by the government.
So why do we allow certain industries to be taxed more than others? Why is it acceptable to tax alcohol more than milk? Why is it fine to tax cigarettes more than chewing gum? Why should we tax sodas more than Grandma's fried chicken or Momma's chocolate pie? Heck, why don't we tax the dinner-on-the-grounds at the churches or the family holiday feast?
In 1961, Ronald Reagan made a recording aimed at speaking against socialized medicine. He said, "...back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program. One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it..."
I would add that most people are just as reluctant to oppose efforts to curtail the use of socially questionable products, i.e. cigarettes, alcohol, and now sodas and sugary foods, even when you raise taxes. It has become easy to disguise public health care and obesity concerns with the unconstitutional singling out of legal products and businesses while imposing big government taxation, essentially creating the nanny state. And once the nanny state becomes the norm, our American way of life as defined by the Constitution erodes and soon we will no longer recognize our American existence, that of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - freedom of individual choice.
It's time we unmask the debates of our day and see the realities at hand. Selectively taxing legal products under the guise of public health is a slippery slope that could result in the loss of much more than just a few cents here or there. We must be diligent to assess these and other issues as we continue to perfect our Republic.
The Politics of the Census
Soon the questionnaire will arrive in the mail and you'll hear that familiar once-every-ten-year knock at the door. Census version 2010 is coming. You've heard the Census is important for your city, county, and state and that we all should be diligent to participate; this is certainly true. While it does impact many factors from federal appropriations to emergency response to national perception to even how we're seen on the world stage, the most important result of the Census is the apportionment or redistricting of voting boundaries for local, state, and federal elections.
Properly delineated voting districts ensure the concept of "one man, one vote," the equal protection clause. It is through these boundaries that all of the other aforementioned results of the Census and more take shape. In theory, every voting district, whether for city, county, state, or federal elections, should have an equal number of people located within each district thus ensuring equal representation. The only problem with that simple notion is that politicians are in charge of drawing these boundaries and when politicians are involved, the potential for gerrymandering exists.
By definition, gerrymandering is a form of redistricting where electoral districts are deliberately modified producing a contorted or unusual shape. Gerrymandering may be used to achieve desired electoral results for a particular party, or may be used to help or hinder a particular group of constituents, such as a political, racial, or other group. It is used most often in favor of ruling incumbents. This has been an evident result of the Democratic leadership in our state legislature for decades.
Take a look at the Jackson County House and Senate District maps and you'll see with your own eyes what I mean. Go to http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_house/jackson.pdf for the House map and http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_senate/jackson.pdf for the Senate map. On the House map, see District 111 (bottom, aqua color). It takes in South Pascagoula, grazes Gautier, and jumps in between Districts 112 and 113 to take in the outskirts of Ocean Springs. On the Senate map, District 47 (top left, blue color) dives in between Districts 51 and 52. What you don't see on the Senate map is that District 47 starts over in Pearl River County and meanders through Harrison and Stone counties before entering Jackson County. Oh, and if you keep reading, it'll be no surprise that Senate District 47 is held by a Democrat, Senator Ezell Lee.
According to the House and Senate reports from the 2000 Census, the ideal House District size is 23,317 with the ideal Senate District size being 54,705. Both reports allow for a maximum 5% deviation, with the highest deviation on the House side at 4.99% and 4.67% on the Senate. What's interesting about this is that the districts that traditionally vote for the more liberal candidate or are considered more independent (normally vote Democrat or a toss-up in the Presidential elections) see the most negative deviation which allows for an increased number of representatives from those areas.
Now, see the state House district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_house.html), the state Senate district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_senate.html), and a map showing traditional voting trends (http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/US_election/figs/MS.png) with Democrat in blue and Republican in red. Just for example, compare House Districts 5 (-4.8%), 9 (-4.9%), 11 (-4.9%), 26 (-4.9%), 29 (-4.9%) and 30 (-4.9%) to the trends map. There are others. Then compare Senate districts 11 (-3.9%), 16 (-4.6%), 24 (-4.4%), 26 (-3.2%), 32 (-3.9%), and 36 (-2.9%) to the trends map. See anything interesting? I would guess you do. And if you trend it throughout the state in both the House and Senate, it's interesting to note the deviation between regions (north, central, and south).
So what does all of this mean? With the Senate leadership having shown a willingness to work in a bipartisan spirit, the Senate Legislative Reapportionment Chairman Sen. Terry Burton(R) and Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant should seek to reverse the trends above and bring about more equalized representation. In the House, Speaker Billy McCoy (D) has shown no sign of working in a bipartisan spirit and as House Legislative Reapportionment Chair Rep. Tommy Reynolds (D) begins his work, you will see significant jockeying among Representatives and the House leadership in an effort to protect their perceived voting base and vulnerable Democrat members. This should be of no surprise given the way in which the House Speaker vote went down after the last election. It is widely known that one vote allowed Speaker McCoy to retain his chair, which brings us back to Jackson County.
Given the population shift from the coastal cities into the county since Hurricane Katrina, it's conceivable to believe that Senate District 47 could be taken out of Jackson County and Districts 51 and 52 could assume the electorate there. As for the House seats in Jackson County, it is plausible that the Democrat House leadership will seek to ensure that District 111, the seat that was a Republican stronghold for two decades and that was narrowly won by 11 votes by Democrat Rep. Brandon Jones (who cast that deciding Speaker vote mentioned earlier), remains in their corner, perhaps by significantly redistricting the boundaries to gain more like-minded voters. In addition, with the aforementioned population shift and the measures to protect Democrat members, the possibility of losing one House seat in Jackson County is a concern.
You've heard it said that all politics is local; that is indeed true here. As we look toward 2011 and the state elections, it is imperative that we participate in the 2010 Census and begin now to focus on continuing the progress we have made of putting true conservative leaders into state government, leaders that will be fiscally responsible, reduce our tax burden, protect our individual liberties, and advance Mississippi on the national and international stage through positive economic development. Republican in Mississippi hasn't always been the norm, but we're making strides to that end everyday.
And just for the record, I am of the opinion that the Census should only ask for the number in a household and if you are a legal American citizen, which means a little extra work for some but well worth the effort to get an accurate, legal accounting of our nation's citizens.
So make sure you get counted in the 2010 Census. No matter how frustrating it can be, stay involved in your government. After all, all politics is local.
Properly delineated voting districts ensure the concept of "one man, one vote," the equal protection clause. It is through these boundaries that all of the other aforementioned results of the Census and more take shape. In theory, every voting district, whether for city, county, state, or federal elections, should have an equal number of people located within each district thus ensuring equal representation. The only problem with that simple notion is that politicians are in charge of drawing these boundaries and when politicians are involved, the potential for gerrymandering exists.
By definition, gerrymandering is a form of redistricting where electoral districts are deliberately modified producing a contorted or unusual shape. Gerrymandering may be used to achieve desired electoral results for a particular party, or may be used to help or hinder a particular group of constituents, such as a political, racial, or other group. It is used most often in favor of ruling incumbents. This has been an evident result of the Democratic leadership in our state legislature for decades.
Take a look at the Jackson County House and Senate District maps and you'll see with your own eyes what I mean. Go to http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_house/jackson.pdf for the House map and http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_senate/jackson.pdf for the Senate map. On the House map, see District 111 (bottom, aqua color). It takes in South Pascagoula, grazes Gautier, and jumps in between Districts 112 and 113 to take in the outskirts of Ocean Springs. On the Senate map, District 47 (top left, blue color) dives in between Districts 51 and 52. What you don't see on the Senate map is that District 47 starts over in Pearl River County and meanders through Harrison and Stone counties before entering Jackson County. Oh, and if you keep reading, it'll be no surprise that Senate District 47 is held by a Democrat, Senator Ezell Lee.
According to the House and Senate reports from the 2000 Census, the ideal House District size is 23,317 with the ideal Senate District size being 54,705. Both reports allow for a maximum 5% deviation, with the highest deviation on the House side at 4.99% and 4.67% on the Senate. What's interesting about this is that the districts that traditionally vote for the more liberal candidate or are considered more independent (normally vote Democrat or a toss-up in the Presidential elections) see the most negative deviation which allows for an increased number of representatives from those areas.
Now, see the state House district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_house.html), the state Senate district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_senate.html), and a map showing traditional voting trends (http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/US_election/figs/MS.png) with Democrat in blue and Republican in red. Just for example, compare House Districts 5 (-4.8%), 9 (-4.9%), 11 (-4.9%), 26 (-4.9%), 29 (-4.9%) and 30 (-4.9%) to the trends map. There are others. Then compare Senate districts 11 (-3.9%), 16 (-4.6%), 24 (-4.4%), 26 (-3.2%), 32 (-3.9%), and 36 (-2.9%) to the trends map. See anything interesting? I would guess you do. And if you trend it throughout the state in both the House and Senate, it's interesting to note the deviation between regions (north, central, and south).
So what does all of this mean? With the Senate leadership having shown a willingness to work in a bipartisan spirit, the Senate Legislative Reapportionment Chairman Sen. Terry Burton(R) and Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant should seek to reverse the trends above and bring about more equalized representation. In the House, Speaker Billy McCoy (D) has shown no sign of working in a bipartisan spirit and as House Legislative Reapportionment Chair Rep. Tommy Reynolds (D) begins his work, you will see significant jockeying among Representatives and the House leadership in an effort to protect their perceived voting base and vulnerable Democrat members. This should be of no surprise given the way in which the House Speaker vote went down after the last election. It is widely known that one vote allowed Speaker McCoy to retain his chair, which brings us back to Jackson County.
Given the population shift from the coastal cities into the county since Hurricane Katrina, it's conceivable to believe that Senate District 47 could be taken out of Jackson County and Districts 51 and 52 could assume the electorate there. As for the House seats in Jackson County, it is plausible that the Democrat House leadership will seek to ensure that District 111, the seat that was a Republican stronghold for two decades and that was narrowly won by 11 votes by Democrat Rep. Brandon Jones (who cast that deciding Speaker vote mentioned earlier), remains in their corner, perhaps by significantly redistricting the boundaries to gain more like-minded voters. In addition, with the aforementioned population shift and the measures to protect Democrat members, the possibility of losing one House seat in Jackson County is a concern.
You've heard it said that all politics is local; that is indeed true here. As we look toward 2011 and the state elections, it is imperative that we participate in the 2010 Census and begin now to focus on continuing the progress we have made of putting true conservative leaders into state government, leaders that will be fiscally responsible, reduce our tax burden, protect our individual liberties, and advance Mississippi on the national and international stage through positive economic development. Republican in Mississippi hasn't always been the norm, but we're making strides to that end everyday.
And just for the record, I am of the opinion that the Census should only ask for the number in a household and if you are a legal American citizen, which means a little extra work for some but well worth the effort to get an accurate, legal accounting of our nation's citizens.
So make sure you get counted in the 2010 Census. No matter how frustrating it can be, stay involved in your government. After all, all politics is local.
Mississippi and Education in 2010
Much has already been said and written regarding the possibility of school consolidation since Gov. Haley Barbour released his FY 2011 budget recommendations. The Commission on Mississippi Education Structure has even been formed and appointed by the Governor, with its goal being to outline how to best achieve consolidation, capitalize on cost savings, and identify a process by which the 152 school districts can be paired down. The Governor's vision is to merge the 152 districts in Mississippi's 82 counties into close to 100 districts saying that "by consolidating districts, we can make sure state and local tax dollars are spent on educating our students and increase the quality of educational opportunities for Mississippi's children."
I would agree that there would seem to be a duplication of services (primarily in administration) in our current school district format, especially when you consider the number of students being served in some of the more rural, sparsely populated areas in our state versus the denser, urban regions. It would seem obvious to contend that some level of cost savings would be gained by consolidating school districts given the amount that is spent on hiring highly educated, experienced superintendents and other administrative staff. At first blush, such an idea as consolidation has merit. It is only until you begin to talk through the practicality and impact of the issue that the subject takes a turn.
I have seen the idea of school district consolidation work all of my life. Here along the coast, where most cities enjoy their own school district, the children in the cities of Pascagoula and Gautier have for decades been guided by one school district, the Pascagoula Municipal Separate School District. While there are some obvious factions of rivalry that exist between the two citizenry, the students, parents, and school staffs all have allowed this system to work and work well. What other school district can tout not one, but two national Blue Ribbon high schools?
When you talk school district consolidation, there are more than just dollars and cents to figure; you have to account for the communities you are affecting. The elected leaders and the general public of the cities and counties must be willing to enter into school consolidation, or it will never work. While cross town or county rivalry is all in good fun, there must be an overarching sense that such merging is beneficial to all involved and doesn't adversely impact one area more than another. Believe me, people keep score even in the best of environments.
Along a similar vein, school districts are their own taxing districts. The citizens, businesses, and industries located within those districts all make up the tax base for the area schools. We all choose to live in or relocate to an area for a reason, i.e. schools, employment, quality of life, etc. Redrawing these districts will greatly impact the level of funding schools obtain thus impacting the level of service they will be able to provide putting the quality of education enjoyed now by some areas at risk while increasing the viability of others.
Take the Pascagoula School District for example. The Pascagoula School District has a total current enrollment of approximately 7,100 students with 70% eligible for free or reduced lunch. The demographics are 43% white, 47% black, and 10% Hispanic, Asian, etc. The estimated local per pupil expenditure for Pascagoula is $4,765 as compared to the Mississippi local average expenditure of $2,476. Redrawing the school taxing district or mandating consolidation with a neighboring school district would significantly impact Pascagoula schools and the students currently residing in the area.
Of course, playing Robin Hood with school taxing districts is not a new idea. Going on three years ago, then-State Senator Tommy Robertson, at the urging of county officials, authored legislation and attached it to a bill allowing for Jackson County, Moss Point, and Ocean Springs school districts to essentially rob the Pascagoula School District of its tax dollars from the Chevron Refinery, saying that the industry was located in the county, not the City of Pascagoula and that the taxes collected should be shared by all county school districts. While the refinery has always been in the Pascagoula district since its inception and school taxing districts are not held to municipal boundaries, nor have they ever been state-wide, the legislation passed and attempts to repeal the unconstitutional law has yet to be approved by the state legislature. The law is now being challenged and is scheduled to be heard sometime in the spring of 2010.
In theory, Robin Hood is a great children's story, robbing from the oppressive rich to give to the belittled poor, but such action is terrible economic and taxing policy. The term "fairness" has been thrown around for such efforts, saying it is only "fair" for all to benefit, at least to some percent, from the wealth enjoyed by some. No slice of the proverbial pie is adequate when you are entitled by law to the full pie. I contend that rewriting law and robbing taxing districts to simply meet the whims of the day is damaging not only to an area but to the core beliefs of this country and to the Constitution. But I digress.
When talking school consolidation, it would seem prudent to further discuss local funding. For my friends around the state, this will not be an easy pill to swallow, but local communities should be funding themselves at an appropriate level so as not to depend so heavily on the state for assistance. I am not a fan nor a proponent of tax increases; we pay too much, too often now. However, if we as a state are to ever advance our education system, local school districts must begin to tax their local residents at a level so they can pay the bills, and yes, that includes my own. Relying on the state to subsidize local school districts is a disease we must cure. The Mississippi Adequate Education Program (MAEP) has been a politically charged joke for too long. Education funding is the number one burden on the backs of taxpayers in our state and it's high time the state change its course and encourage local school districts to adequately fund their own districts. Please don't misunderstand me; our state's children are worth the investment but if you want to talk school consolidation, then separate the wheat from the tares and require all districts to fund themselves at an appropriate level. It will be quickly seen as to what districts need consolidation.
Another line of thought being promoted locally and in the Capitol is the expansion of the charter schools law. By definition, charter schools are public, nonsectarian schools created through a contract or charter with a state approved granting agency, usually a school district but at times a for-profit organization. They are publicly funded but operate outside some of the traditional school policies and regulations. Supporters of charter schools contend that these schools create competition within the public school system and serve to improve the education for all children. Opponents of charter schools contend that such schools drain the traditional public schools of motivated, involved families and create a competition of funding resources and community perception, essentially creating a publically funded "private" school.
Many in my own political party, even some local state elected officials, are pushing to broaden charter school legislation. I am not here to debate the pros and cons of charter schools, however, I am of the opinion that charter schools may be of some merit in a number of areas around our state at some point in the future, just not now given our state's financial situation. Promoting charter schools while pushing school district consolidation would by definition be an oxymoron. On one hand the state is compelled to reduce non-essential education spending through consolidation while on the other hand the state would authorize the expansion and implementation of more schools which would require more tax dollars and only for a specific, select few students. Such talk at this juncture given our financial condition would be unwise indeed.
The issue of school consolidation is sure to be one storyline worth tracking over the next few months, with the state legislature gaveling in next week and the Commission on Mississippi Education Structure slated to issue a report by April 1, 2010. Below are a few quotes from others on this issue you might find interesting:
"It's been my observation everybody wants to consolidate everybody else's district, but not their own," said House Education Committee Chair Cecil Brown, D-Jackson.
"I think I might disappear if consolidation happened in some of my school districts," said Senate Education Chair Videt Carmichael, R-Meridian.
"I'm being told by people who study these numbers that because of their financial situations, the state could be looking at taking over 30 districts, maybe more..If the state of Mississippi is taking them over, that could be justifiable reason for merging those districts," said State Senator Doug Davis, R-Hernando.
"I don't think anyone can show the governor where there's any great savings by consolidating. I don't really see consolidating schools being a huge topic in the legislature this session," said Dr. John Jordan, interim state superintendent of Mississippi schools.
While I for one am not opposed to school district consolidation in theory especially given our financial circumstances, I believe much needs to be considered and carefully worked through if our state is going to take up this mantle. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as has been done with the Congressional health care reform debate, isn't prudent. Gov. Barbour has served our state well thus far and I am sure he will guide this ship just as diligently. The team he's enlisted on the Commission will be facing an enormous task. I only hope that at the end of the day sound Constitutional principles will be upheld (especially in terms of taxing districts) while thinking first of the students that will be impacted, the affect on and the responsibility of the local communities, and the application of sound fiscal guidelines that will buoy our state now and in the future.
I would agree that there would seem to be a duplication of services (primarily in administration) in our current school district format, especially when you consider the number of students being served in some of the more rural, sparsely populated areas in our state versus the denser, urban regions. It would seem obvious to contend that some level of cost savings would be gained by consolidating school districts given the amount that is spent on hiring highly educated, experienced superintendents and other administrative staff. At first blush, such an idea as consolidation has merit. It is only until you begin to talk through the practicality and impact of the issue that the subject takes a turn.
I have seen the idea of school district consolidation work all of my life. Here along the coast, where most cities enjoy their own school district, the children in the cities of Pascagoula and Gautier have for decades been guided by one school district, the Pascagoula Municipal Separate School District. While there are some obvious factions of rivalry that exist between the two citizenry, the students, parents, and school staffs all have allowed this system to work and work well. What other school district can tout not one, but two national Blue Ribbon high schools?
When you talk school district consolidation, there are more than just dollars and cents to figure; you have to account for the communities you are affecting. The elected leaders and the general public of the cities and counties must be willing to enter into school consolidation, or it will never work. While cross town or county rivalry is all in good fun, there must be an overarching sense that such merging is beneficial to all involved and doesn't adversely impact one area more than another. Believe me, people keep score even in the best of environments.
Along a similar vein, school districts are their own taxing districts. The citizens, businesses, and industries located within those districts all make up the tax base for the area schools. We all choose to live in or relocate to an area for a reason, i.e. schools, employment, quality of life, etc. Redrawing these districts will greatly impact the level of funding schools obtain thus impacting the level of service they will be able to provide putting the quality of education enjoyed now by some areas at risk while increasing the viability of others.
Take the Pascagoula School District for example. The Pascagoula School District has a total current enrollment of approximately 7,100 students with 70% eligible for free or reduced lunch. The demographics are 43% white, 47% black, and 10% Hispanic, Asian, etc. The estimated local per pupil expenditure for Pascagoula is $4,765 as compared to the Mississippi local average expenditure of $2,476. Redrawing the school taxing district or mandating consolidation with a neighboring school district would significantly impact Pascagoula schools and the students currently residing in the area.
Of course, playing Robin Hood with school taxing districts is not a new idea. Going on three years ago, then-State Senator Tommy Robertson, at the urging of county officials, authored legislation and attached it to a bill allowing for Jackson County, Moss Point, and Ocean Springs school districts to essentially rob the Pascagoula School District of its tax dollars from the Chevron Refinery, saying that the industry was located in the county, not the City of Pascagoula and that the taxes collected should be shared by all county school districts. While the refinery has always been in the Pascagoula district since its inception and school taxing districts are not held to municipal boundaries, nor have they ever been state-wide, the legislation passed and attempts to repeal the unconstitutional law has yet to be approved by the state legislature. The law is now being challenged and is scheduled to be heard sometime in the spring of 2010.
In theory, Robin Hood is a great children's story, robbing from the oppressive rich to give to the belittled poor, but such action is terrible economic and taxing policy. The term "fairness" has been thrown around for such efforts, saying it is only "fair" for all to benefit, at least to some percent, from the wealth enjoyed by some. No slice of the proverbial pie is adequate when you are entitled by law to the full pie. I contend that rewriting law and robbing taxing districts to simply meet the whims of the day is damaging not only to an area but to the core beliefs of this country and to the Constitution. But I digress.
When talking school consolidation, it would seem prudent to further discuss local funding. For my friends around the state, this will not be an easy pill to swallow, but local communities should be funding themselves at an appropriate level so as not to depend so heavily on the state for assistance. I am not a fan nor a proponent of tax increases; we pay too much, too often now. However, if we as a state are to ever advance our education system, local school districts must begin to tax their local residents at a level so they can pay the bills, and yes, that includes my own. Relying on the state to subsidize local school districts is a disease we must cure. The Mississippi Adequate Education Program (MAEP) has been a politically charged joke for too long. Education funding is the number one burden on the backs of taxpayers in our state and it's high time the state change its course and encourage local school districts to adequately fund their own districts. Please don't misunderstand me; our state's children are worth the investment but if you want to talk school consolidation, then separate the wheat from the tares and require all districts to fund themselves at an appropriate level. It will be quickly seen as to what districts need consolidation.
Another line of thought being promoted locally and in the Capitol is the expansion of the charter schools law. By definition, charter schools are public, nonsectarian schools created through a contract or charter with a state approved granting agency, usually a school district but at times a for-profit organization. They are publicly funded but operate outside some of the traditional school policies and regulations. Supporters of charter schools contend that these schools create competition within the public school system and serve to improve the education for all children. Opponents of charter schools contend that such schools drain the traditional public schools of motivated, involved families and create a competition of funding resources and community perception, essentially creating a publically funded "private" school.
Many in my own political party, even some local state elected officials, are pushing to broaden charter school legislation. I am not here to debate the pros and cons of charter schools, however, I am of the opinion that charter schools may be of some merit in a number of areas around our state at some point in the future, just not now given our state's financial situation. Promoting charter schools while pushing school district consolidation would by definition be an oxymoron. On one hand the state is compelled to reduce non-essential education spending through consolidation while on the other hand the state would authorize the expansion and implementation of more schools which would require more tax dollars and only for a specific, select few students. Such talk at this juncture given our financial condition would be unwise indeed.
The issue of school consolidation is sure to be one storyline worth tracking over the next few months, with the state legislature gaveling in next week and the Commission on Mississippi Education Structure slated to issue a report by April 1, 2010. Below are a few quotes from others on this issue you might find interesting:
"It's been my observation everybody wants to consolidate everybody else's district, but not their own," said House Education Committee Chair Cecil Brown, D-Jackson.
"I think I might disappear if consolidation happened in some of my school districts," said Senate Education Chair Videt Carmichael, R-Meridian.
"I'm being told by people who study these numbers that because of their financial situations, the state could be looking at taking over 30 districts, maybe more..If the state of Mississippi is taking them over, that could be justifiable reason for merging those districts," said State Senator Doug Davis, R-Hernando.
"I don't think anyone can show the governor where there's any great savings by consolidating. I don't really see consolidating schools being a huge topic in the legislature this session," said Dr. John Jordan, interim state superintendent of Mississippi schools.
While I for one am not opposed to school district consolidation in theory especially given our financial circumstances, I believe much needs to be considered and carefully worked through if our state is going to take up this mantle. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as has been done with the Congressional health care reform debate, isn't prudent. Gov. Barbour has served our state well thus far and I am sure he will guide this ship just as diligently. The team he's enlisted on the Commission will be facing an enormous task. I only hope that at the end of the day sound Constitutional principles will be upheld (especially in terms of taxing districts) while thinking first of the students that will be impacted, the affect on and the responsibility of the local communities, and the application of sound fiscal guidelines that will buoy our state now and in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
