taxpayers

NV Higher Ed Chancellor Rogers Thinks You’re a Child Abuser

“Our schools deserve parents’ support” was the scintillating headline of Nevada System of Higher Education chancellor Jim Rogers’ op-ed in the Las Vegas Sun on Tuesday.  Rogers kicks his column off by equating Nevada’s per-pupil funding levels to child abuse and neglect.  (Read it to believe it!)

Rogers then goes on to criticize Nevadans for not paying enough taxes to adequately fund education in Nevada. 

FACT ONE:  Based on U.S. Census data on K-12 spending and doing a little quick math, Nevada spent $8,926 per student in 2006 which, at an average classroom size of, say, 30, works out to $267,780 per classroom year.

FACT TWO:  43% of Nevada’s fourth graders are functionally illiterate, according to the National Assessment in Education Progress reading test.

Even allowing for the 3 to 18% of Nevada’s students who are ELLs (English Language Learners, meaning those who speak only or primarily Spanish) and who naturally cannot be expected to test as fully literate in English, that 43% is a pretty dismal number.

How is it that over a quarter of a million dollars of spending PER CLASSROOM is not enough money to ensure that by fourth grade our students have learned to read with basic competency?

And Rogers wants to lecture the taxpayers about ABUSE and NEGLECT…?

You can reach Rogers by email at chancellor@unlv.edu or call his office at (702) 889-8426.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

You Can’t Handle the Muth

Posted by E!! on August 06, 2008
Balanced Budgets, Blogs of Nevada, GOP, LOL, Taxation / No Comments

I missed posting at noon-ish today; it’s been a long, hard sun cycle; and my creative juices are dry.  So, I’m going to do what all great bloggers do and post someone else’s clever riff in order to fill blogspace.  This is from Chuck Muth’s News & Views:

DO YOU, MR. CANDIDATE, TAKE MS. VOTER…?

I ran into another [Nevada] Republican candidate today who has yet to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.  His objection is one I hear quite often from candidates who simply don’t want to take a firm position on a critically important philosophical, as well as fiscal, issue. “I’ve learned over the years never to say never,” this candidate told me this afternoon.

Really?  I wonder exactly when he learned that lesson?

I suppose it was sometime AFTER promising Mrs. Candidate on their wedding day that he was taking her “to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, forsaking all others, ’til death do us part.”

I mean, if your philosophy is to “never say never,” then shouldn’t those old marriage vows be made a bit more flexible?  I mean, shouldn’t we take out the part about “til death do us part” and insert some kind of escape clause which acknowledges that when it comes to being faithful, “everything is on the table”? I mean, it’s just not right to never say never, right?

You see, when you really, really, really, really, REALLY believe in something at the very core of your being, it’s not hard to say “never.”  Then again, if you really, really, really, really, really DON’T believe that raising taxes is a bad thing, then you come up with all kinds of excuses for not making such a firm promise.

So, Mr. & Mrs. Taxpayer, when a candidate who refuses to give you a firm promise not to raise your taxes comes to you asking for your vote, remember…it’s just a one-night stand.  There’s no commitment involved.  Just hope he or she at least leaves you enough money for cab fare home.

Clicky Web Analytics

Tags: , , , , ,