So today a bunch of states had primary elections. My state also had referendum questions. While the primaries were interesting, I found the questions more so.

I think there is a level of insanity among the people of my state. To simplify it for those who are from other states, here's the gist of it:

Last year, our state government passed a law which lowered some income tax brackets, but added sh!tloads of sales taxes. This was highly contested, and almost immediately got enough signatures to get it on a referendum ballot. The new law would have increased the cost of just about everything, and the income tax impact would have been minimal. The referendum to repeal it passed, but 4 other questions, which were about spending millions in everything from railway improvements to R&D for green energy, passed by similar margins.

I find it insane that people have spoken out to repeal what would have been a tax increase, in the face of major scare-tactic adds to vote no, but were easily swayed to vote for the spending measures. Note that every question included the phrase "and create jobs", which is a buzzword a majority of people tend to fall for, but it still amazes me that people can fall for that, but see through the scare tactics on the taxes.

I just figured I'd throw it out there for discussion. Anyone else have any significant ballot questions today?

so you find it odd that the people decided they wanted all this new stuff for there town or state but didnt want to pay for it? kinda seems thats how everyone thinks these days.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography

I, too, put too much faith in people thinking with their heads instead of their pocketbooks. Here in Indiana, a lot of school corporations have already held referendum voting. I live in a rural and tightly knit farm community, and of all the local school corp's that held votes, our school was one of the few that didn't get it passed. You'd think that people were smarter than that, given the common knowledge that strong schools are one of the corner stones of any community nice to live in.

Sadly, though I can see the other side of the argument too. My dad teaches at the local high school, and luckily his subject is considered a core class (plus he's the only one who was teaching the first year the building opened up in 1975). So he won't be one of the faculty getting canned, but a lot of his friends who he's taught with the last 20 years will be getting cut :-( Basically, if you teach art, foreign language, industrial tech, shop/welding, P.E./coach, or anything else that's not a basic diploma requirement, you're getting fired. We are a farming family, and the farmers are the ones who voted against it because increased property taxes suck when you've got so much land. So there was no winning for people like my dad, no matter what did or didn't get passed.

If your dad has been teaching since 1975, then he should retire. 35+ years on a teacher's pension = a decent living. If its for "love of teaching", then there should be no worries.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart

^^^ Yeah I know he should definately be retired by now, but he had to move the date back. My parents had a nasty divorce a while back, and though I don't know the details, he basically got the short end of the stick. Regardless, we aren't worried about him getting fired anyways.

My basic point was that it's just a shame that it came to this in the first place. Education, in my opinion, is one of the last things we should ever have to take money from in bad times, because it is so important to every part of a society, governement, community, etc... But I can also sympathize with people who have it hard enough the way it is, not wanting to pay more taxes for schools (especially if they don't have children of their own enrolled).

And the details make me even more fed up with the gov't tools, running this show. Sitting in at a school-board meeting last winter, when the referendum was originally proposed, I found out that (for atleast our corporation, anyways) a lot of the money they need is there but just tied up. We are $900,000 short in our general education fund, but there is a surplus in the transportation fund. Still, due to some bull@!#$, they aren't allowed to re-allocate that money from the surplus to help the other funds. Or even more frustrating, when 40+ faculty members are getting canned, that the super-intendant's car, gas, clothing, and other expenses are all paid for by the schools...

deuce_coupe_cavy wrote: We are $900,000 short in our general education fund, but there is a surplus in the transportation fund. Still, due to some bull@!#$, they aren't allowed to re-allocate that money from the surplus to help the other funds. Or even more frustrating, when 40+ faculty members are getting canned, that the super-intendant's car, gas, clothing, and other expenses are all paid for by the schools...

This is just one of the major idiocies in government beaurocracy. Hopefully they're at least smart enough to decrease the budget for the school next year and cut the transportation budget, as well as the foolish perks for the officials.

deuce_coupe_cavy wrote:And the details make me even more fed up with the gov't tools, running this show. Sitting in at a school-board meeting last winter, when the referendum was originally proposed, I found out that (for atleast our corporation, anyways) a lot of the money they need is there but just tied up. We are $900,000 short in our general education fund, but there is a surplus in the transportation fund. Still, due to some bull@!#$, they aren't allowed to re-allocate that money from the surplus to help the other funds. Or even more frustrating, when 40+ faculty members are getting canned, that the super-intendant's car, gas, clothing, and other expenses are all paid for by the schools...

I work at a public school, and this happens at the end of every fiscal year. It's generally because of multiple funding sources being for different uses. For instance, transportation costs may be covered by a State account, but salaries covered by a Federal account. From what I gather, not letting these monies cross is actually an effort to prevent abuse of the system (not letting a principle give himself a bonus by denying students field trips for example). Now, why there isn't some way to petition for cross-funding, I don't know, but it seems to me we should change some of the positions allotted to "auditors" (clearly more on our State level than the Fed level lol) to people who can oversee funding allocation changes so this doesn't continue to be the status quo...




fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster