• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing NC GOP debacle thread

You get what you vote for.
 
Straight shot at the judge who has been overseeing the leandro equal access to education case. NC conservatives don't like to be reminded that the NC constitution mandates an equal public education for all citizens.
 
Deacon923 said:
Straight shot at the judge who has been overseeing the leandro equal access to education case. NC conservatives don't like to be reminded that the NC constitution mandates an equal public education for all citizens.
Click to expand...

Or opposition. Like, at all.
 
Whatever happened to checks and balances? North Carolina continues to be an embarassment.
 
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/08/20/5118213/mccrorys-stock-disclosure-form.html#.U_dBXShVs6J

McCrory’s stock disclosure form is, in fact, confusing

From Charlotte attorney Russell Robinson II, in response to “McCrory’s mishandling of his Duke stock” (Aug. 17 editorial):

Your Sunday editorial charging Bob Stephens, Gov. McCrory’s general counsel, with “gross incompetence” in his interpretation of the April 15, 2014 form disclosing ownership of Duke Energy stock is wrong and unfair to a lawyer of exceedingly high character and ability, who has interrupted his 40 years of successful law practice to serve the state he loves in a very difficult role.

Addressing only this point, I have read with careful focus the 11-page form entitled “2014 Statement of Economic Interest” and have concluded that I would likely have interpreted it in exactly the same way that Bob Stephens did. The State Ethics Commission, with which the form is filed, recognizes the confusion in the language of the form and reports that many other filers have likewise applied that interpretation. Thus, your editorial comparison of that complex and confusing form with the simple and completely clear IRS Form 1040 and your assertions that “smaller teams of legal experts managed to read the instructions correctly” so that “t would be stunning for Stephens … to overlook something as basic” all constitute a distortion of facts that malign a devoted public servant.

Part I of the form, relating to $10,000 plus disclosures, says “please provide the requested information as of December 31st of the preceding year unless another time period is specified in the question“ (emphasis added). Accordingly, Question 3 in that Part makes it clear that December 31 is the information date by asking: “Within the preceding two years, have you…sold to or bought from the State personal property with a market value of $10,000 or more?” In clear contrast, though, Question 5(a) on the same page uses the present tense in asking the question answered by Gov. McCrory: “Do you ... own interests (generally stock) valued at $10,000 or more in a publicly owned company?” If you were asked that question, you would surely likewise answer it in the same present tense in which it was worded.

Characteristically, Bob Stephens has admitted his mistake without excusing himself by describing the form’s language cited above. It thus falls to the lot of his colleagues who know him well and admire him to defend his reputation against this kind of distortions that deter so many talented citizens from public service.



What should the take away from this be? Preeminent republican lawyers struggle with forms? (especially when politically beneficial?) Of course the forms are confusing, that is what people go to attorneys for. When you run into a confusing situation you don't just take your best guess, you look to the underlying statute or consult with a lawyer experienced in the area or ask for clarification from the agency whose form you are using.

If only there were somewhere to go where you could get advice about such a confusing form (http://www.ethicscommission.nc.gov/ao/default.aspx)

I wonder if Mr. Robinson would be so forgiving of attorneys in his firm just taking their best stab at things and subsequently screwing the "confusing" forms they need to fill out for their clients. I think he may expect a little more of his attorneys, even those who are not of such "exceedingly high character and ability".
 
Worthwhile fact checking story about the NC education budget.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...500-million-in-north-carolina-education-cuts/

As for the $500 million figure, close observers will note that every single ad attributes this figure to the same source — an editorial in Charlotte Observer that ran in 2013. “The Senate and House budget plan … cuts education spending by almost $500 million in the next two years, including a decrease in net spending for K-12 public schools,” the editorial said.

That’s right, this is a two-year number — and the second year is adjusted as circumstances warrant. Moreover, the $500 million figure is comparing the figures over two years against a “continuation budget” — what would be needed to maintain the same level of spending based on inflation, population growth and other factors. In Washington parlance, this is known as “the baseline.” It’s an important concept, but it is simply an illustration; it not does not reflect actual budget numbers.

On top of that, as the editorial acknowledged, this is a figure for all education spending. Only $117 million of these baseline reductions occurred in K-12 education in 2013-2014; the other cuts were in community colleges and university education. That amounts to a decrease of just 1.5 percent of the K-12 education budget.
Click to expand...

Philip Price, chief financial officer of the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, said that this continues a trend since 2009 in which salaries and benefits have been boosted, while funding for classroom services have decreased. The number of students in public schools has increased by 44,000, or nearly 3 percent, but he said the education budget has not quite kept pace.

That mismatch of better pay and benefits for educators and lower spending for classrooms, he said, has meant that since 2009, funding for textbooks has declined 78 percent, instructional supplies fell 51 percent, the number of teacher assistants dropped 23 percent and the number of classroom teachers declined 3.5 percent.

In other words, lawmakers have decided to alter the mix of education funding by increasing teacher pay and benefits while reducing classroom services. So there is some room for complaints about the legislature’s priorities, but that’s an entirely different matter than claiming “$500 million” in cuts.
Click to expand...
 
I think I posted a chart earlier in this thread that shows the "increase" ensures NC teacher pay remains well below average.
 
PhDeac said:
I think I posted a chart earlier in this thread that shows the "increase" ensures NC teacher pay remains well below average.
Click to expand...

Not to mention well below the pay scale that was in place in 2008, in many cases.

ETA: the issue about how to calculate the cuts is a fair issue. It is disingenuous when either political party makes claims about "cuts" that are actually just decreases in the rate of planned future spending, while often still actually spending more on a year over year basis. Republicans do this all the time to take credit for big "cuts" especially on the Federal level, but they want to run from that approach in NC this election year.

All of that gets in the way of an honest debate about education spending. The simple facts are that NC is a growing state, there's more kids in the buildings every year, and every year the buildings get older. Unfunded mandates from DC - No Child Left Behind, but also federal requirements to educate disabled students, for example - create spending challenges that were not present a generation ago. Even more important from a big picture standpoint, the current economy and the economy of the future is demanding much higher education levels in its workforce, which means that NC residents need more, not less, access to higher education.

In order to keep up with this, NC is either going to have to spend more or radically change the way education is delivered. There is little political appetite for the former, and even less for the latter, even among Republicans.
 
Last edited:
A hidden, drastic change in NC school funding

In a last-minute change that was taken with no hearings and no prior publicity, the Republican-controlled General Assembly has undermined the fundamental building block of school finance in North Carolina.

Ever since the state took over responsibility from the local districts for funding public schools during the Great Depression, state funding in North Carolina has been based on the number of students served. When a local district’s school rolls increased or decreased, the state would adjust the funding up or down accordingly, using a variety of formulas, all of them driven by the number of students.

Under legislation enacted last month, the legislature has scrapped this system. From now on, every spring the state will make an initial commitment of state funds to districts for the following year based on the number of students currently enrolled rather than, as in the past, on their projected enrollments. In other words, districts with growing enrollments will no longer be guaranteed an increase in per pupil funds to cover the costs of educating the additional students.

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/09...stic-change-in-school.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy
 
Looks like part of the ongoing war of GOP rural base (shrinking student population=more spending per student) vs dem-leaning urban areas (growing student population=we'll give you more money if we feel like it). To bad the rural areas are not going to be the economic future of NC. But who cares, got elected in my gerrymandered district.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top