Free College

Free College

I have friends all over the political spectrum including Anarchists, Liberals, Progressives, Conservatives, Populists…I think you get the idea. I usually pick my friends because they are good, decent people, and totally fun to hang out with. That doesn’t mean they aren’t misguided when it comes to what they believe our government should, and should not, do.

In recent conversations with Progressive friends, they share a common belief that education beyond high school should either be completely free, or done at a greatly reduced price through government subsidies. I’ve traditionally disagreed with this premise, because I usually hear it from people I feel suffer from the “entitlement” syndrome.

They hide that sense of entitlement pretty well though, and speak with honest conviction born of what they see as the moral high ground, trumpeting their number one catchphrase, “Free education for everyone can only better us as a nation.” But, they’ve never given me any specifics on how it makes us a better nation. I believe that education does not make people or a nation “better”, whatever that means. I do believe what a person does with that education is important.

All that aside, I am nothing if not open minded, meaning I am capable of thinking through my personal prejudices and using reasoning to see the other side of an argument in an attempt to find validity in it.

History

During the colonial era literacy was necessary to promote religious orthodoxy. In the revolutionary era leaders were concerned with building an educated citizenry, though their vision was limited to White male property-holders. In the early industrial era the expansion of public education was a response to the transformation of society from rural and agricultural to industrial and urban. In this era and in the age of mass European immigration from 1880 to 1924 education was also about the assimilation and Americanization of new groups.

In each of these periods education was also about mechanisms for social control in a society undergoing cultural and demographic change. In the 1950s expanded educational funding and opportunity was part of the Cold War. Today educational “reform” is a major part of both the debate over how the United States should respond to globalization, computerization, and de-industrialization and also again over what to do about a new wave of both documented and undocumented immigrants.

It was less than 100 years ago (1918) when all 50 states finally required compulsory education for all, but it was only through grade six (elementary school), and 34 states required education only up to age 14. As recently as 1940, only 50% of young adults age 18-22 had a high school diploma.

What I’ve realized through reasoning and research is that our public education system is never an independent force in American society or a principle agent for social change. It is, however, an ever evolving entity, changing when needed to reflect the basic debates taking place in the broader society.

I’m fond of saying, “Change is inevitable. Growth is optional.” I now find myself open to the idea of changes to our education system beyond the 12^th grade. I am willing to compromise in making our education system better, but not without guidelines and limitations at first. I also see the need for serious help for our children in making wise choices when it comes to their education beyond high school.

Numbers

The average annual rate of inflation since 1975 is 3.78%. So when, I reference inflation in the following paragraphs, it’s limited to the 3.78% per year between 1975-2016. Additionally, the cost of education in the following paragraphs does not include the added costs of housing, meals, books, and miscellaneous expenses.

The average cost of a 4-year public college education in 1975 was about $7,200, or about $1,800 a year. Using inflation as a guide, the cost of a 4-year public college education today should be around $33,300, or $8,325 per year. The cost today for in-state students at the University of Texas (Austin) and Texas A&M (College Station) are $39,300 and $37,700 respectively. Both are higher than the rate of inflation, but not wildly so, costing only about $1,500 a year more than the rate of inflation.

Public universities across the country have varying levels of costs so using Texas schools tends to skew the numbers. The cost today for an in-state student, 4-year degree at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor) and the University of Virginia (Charlottesville) are $55,600 and $57,900 respectively, both near double the rate of inflation.

Out-of-state students at public universities pay 3-5 times as much as in-state students, so this is where rational, reasonable, intelligent thought is needed when parents and their high school children start making decisions about what’s next.

Private education costs have also outpaced the rate of inflation. You could even say they’ve lapped inflation two or three times. Exclusive private school tuitions on average were $20,000 for a 4-year degree in 1975. Today that amount won’t even cover one YEAR of tuition at the least expensive private schools in the country.

The biggest question for these universities is “Why?”

Other Problems

High school students do not have effective career counseling available to them. High school counselors are overwhelmed with work that prevents many of them from learning and knowing all they need to keep students and parents well informed about education options after high school.

High school counselors are college graduates, all with advanced college degrees, but this does not make them experts on college. A counselor’s knowledge about college admission strategies, standardized testing and scholarships is somewhat limited. Ironically, during this period of skyrocketing college costs, financial aid is often the subject that high school counselors know the least about.

Before counselors can begin working in a public high school, they must earn a master’s degree in counseling. Graduate school programs, however, rarely offer even one class in college planning. Consequently, the majority of counselors arrive at high schools not knowing about critical college issues even though for many families a bachelor’s degree represents the second biggest expense they will ever face. The topic of college admissions are simply not on the radar of graduate schools, which are more focused on mental health issues.

While this lack of training is common knowledge in the higher education world, I believe parents would be shocked to learn that most high school counselors are not college authorities. Parents typically believe that high school counselors could answer all their questions if they could only get some precious face time with them.

High school students also suffer due to a lack of training in real world skills. Ninety percent of high school seniors do not know how to properly keep or balance a checkbook. Our new system of education would require all seniors to take a mandatory class that teaches these skills, including how to develop and use a household budget, what to do when involved in an automobile accident, how to act when pulled over by law enforcement, and how to register and vote to name just a very few.

Where Does That Leave Us

As I said earlier, I’m willing to compromise with Progressives on their ideas of education beyond high school, but I have several rules to employ before I sign off on this. Of course, students who do not want and/or need to participate in this program, are always free to choose any school and degree they desire.

First – All current, traditional federal student aid stops under this program because it's no longer necessary. Individual states are free to do as they choose, but may work under this new federal program, contributing all their current state aid to the federal program education pool.

Second – Students in this program are eligible to receive any and all private aid available in the form of scholarships, grants, etc, but are not allowed to borrow any money to use for education.

Third – Government contribution to your education is based on a risk matrix similar to those used in business and industry. A simplistic example of this is how auto insurance companies base premiums on the risk of having to pay out a claim. The higher the odds it is believed you will complete your degree and find employment, the lower the cost of your education, which in many cases could be $0.

Fourth – A student’s high school academic performance, coupled with extra-curricular activities, community involvement and application essay determines how much they receive from the government towards your education. Our country wants and needs educated, motivated, determined individuals to move us forward, and we’re willing to invest in our young people.

Fifth – You must study at a public college or university, or an approved trade school.

Sixth – The school you wish to attend must be located either within your state, or within a state that offers in state tuition rates to students from your high school.

Seventh – You may choose your degree from a list of degrees built by a committee comprised of members from the Departments of Education, Labor, and Commerce. This list will be updated as often as deemed necessary by the committee, but not less than annually.

Eight – You have 54 months to complete your Bachelor’s degree. Teachers requiring additional time for classroom observation and student teaching have 66 months. Trade school time guidelines are based on the course of study chosen. Applications for extensions due to extenuating circumstances are accepted on a case by case basis.

Ninth – Careers traditionally requiring advanced degrees for entry level positions are included. There are time limits on completion of the graduate programs as well, and available funding is lower than that at the undergraduate level.

Tenth – If you want a career in ‘A’ but no openings exist, you may enter the most closely related degree program that has immediate opportunities. If an opening in ‘A’ occurs before the start of your third year, you may change programs and have an additional year (66 months) to complete your degree.

Summary

Like all hot topics, the truth always lies in the middle. It’s time to stop looking at education as a commodity to be bought and sold, but it’s also time to stop telling our children that everyone needs a four year college degree to be successful and enjoy their life. Lastly, it’s time to stop believing that you should be able to study what you want in an effort to be what you want while asking someone else to pay the bills for it. If you want our nation to be "better" seek out degrees and career paths in demand.

“You dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a f---ing education you coulda got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library.” – Will Hunting

Truer words were never spoken.

Free Speech and the Micro-Aggression Problem

Something on American college campuses today that very few are paying attention to is the issue of free speech. We now have this theory of “micro-aggressions”, which is simply an attempt to silence people. When I ask someone who is of Asian descent, “Where are you from?” what I mean is, “Where did you grow up?” or, “Where did you go to high school?” It’s an attempt to form a personal connection with that person, to see what we might have in common. It’s not a question related to their ethnicity.

College campuses used to be places where all sorts of ideas, both good and bad, took root. Content was the most important thing and students learned how to filter thought the WAY something was said to hear WHAT was said. Not so much anymore.

The only way for a person to convince others of an idea is through reason, and if the audience is more concerned with how something is said rather than what is said we might as well close up shop. When we don’t have free speech, when we can’t communicate, when we can’t defend ourselves with reason, all we’re left with is anger, guns, and stockpiles of ammunition.

Free speech is being attacked everywhere. Radical Muslims are attacking it with guns, and university professors are attacking it with this theory of micro-aggressions. What’s next from the professors, nano-aggressions? Where every single spoken syllable is an attack on women and minorities by straight white males? Yeah, there’s also that. No one cares about micro-aggressions when they’re said TO straight white males. They only care about them when said BY straight white males.

Why are they using the term aggression? It’s an attempt to obliterate the difference between physical action and speech, so that when you insult or offend someone, it’s as if you physically slapped them across the face. Ultimately it’s how they will destroy the first amendment because they will claim insulting someone is not speech; it’s action. The idea of free speech was purposefully and specifically designed to protect speech we don’t agree with.

In the minds of the purveyors of micro-aggression theory it comes down to a sensitivity issue, to the right of a person to not be offended. But, here’s the deal; the right to not be offended isn’t an actual right. Besides, there no universal set of things that offend people. What’s offensive to me may not be offensive to you. I’m half Jewish, and if I had a nickel for every time I heard someone say “the price was too high, so I Jew’d the guy down,” I’d be retired in Bora Bora by now. The real world is tough people; wear a cup.

I have a few questions for these students who believe in the micro-aggression theory and need safe spaces;

• Aren’t you embarrassed to be so conformist as to adopt the latest trendy idea your professors are telling you to adopt?
• Doesn’t it bother you how everyone is congratulating themselves over how moral they are because they’ve adopted this latest fashion?
• Don’t you want to be an independent person and think for yourself so you can value free speech?
• How can you live with yourself being just a follower?

We should never knuckle under to the real, hateful, physical aggression against this perceived problem of micro-aggressions. Their power rests in their belief that they hold the moral high ground and that when confronted, people will back down and knuckle under. There is no way for them to defend their position if someone stands up and says, “I don’t accept the idea of micro-aggressions. It is collectivist crap. People have no right to not be offended.”

Freedom of speech is the cornerstone of our defense against dictatorship and the ability to use our minds in the service of our own lives. Anyone who would dare to suggest that you don’t have the right to insult someone deserves to be rebuked in the strongest possible terms.

Kilgore ISD Board of Trustees

To the Board of Trustees

Kilgore Independent School District

Members of the Board,

I am writing today as both a taxpayer and a concerned parent of a KISD student. Kilgore needs positive things happening to insure continued economic growth and development. Recent events regarding our school district and the actions of the school board do not reflect well on the community, and can only impact Kilgore in a negative manner.

To have smart, steady, sustainable growth we must move away from old ideas to embrace new ones, and it’s possible to do this without compromising who we are as a community. The old-fashioned, “good old boy” way of doing things must end unless we wish to be left behind while other communities in our area experience positive growth.

One example of embracing new ideas can be found right here in town. Not too many years ago, Merritt Tool’s business model was one of ninety percent oil field and ten percent other industries. However, Merritt Tool’s leadership saw change coming and embraced it. Their business model changed to one of ten percent oil field and ninety percent other industries. This change in business their model brought Triumph Industries and new opportunities to Kilgore.

Quality educators do not want to work at a district in turmoil, a district where the board micromanages things, especially when it is something that effects friends of a board member or when a board member has a personal axe to grind. Quality people do not want to live in a community where they are considered outsiders because they weren’t born and raised there. Quality industries will not create jobs in a city where the citizens are at each other’s throats over something as trivial as a student not making a team.

Many Kilgore citizens have lost faith in the board’s ability to make rational, impartial, intelligent decisions regarding what is best for ALL the school children in our district. They’re just afraid to say so because they are people you grew up with, went to school with, go to church with, and even work with. They are your friends, but as board members they, like I, believe you’ve lost your way, and that you have forgotten that you are all elected public servants, with an emphasis on servant. The teachers, parents, and children of the school district DO NOT work for the school board, it’s supposed to be the other way around. If you believe otherwise then you are wrong person for the job.

Effective and respected leaders think of those they serve first and themselves last, if at all. I am not impressed. Many of you are on the board for the wrong reasons, and it’s time for you to go. So know this: change is inevitable, and it is on the way.

Public servants running unopposed in elections is not good for any community. Moving forward, I am dedicating myself to getting our citizens involved in helping to remake our school board to insure our students are capable of meeting the challenges of the 21^st century. I’ve read, and will read again, every document related to the board and its procedures, and I will scrutinize every single future decision you make. Every. Single. One.

One of my concerns with the board in general has to do with Section IX of board procedures. As I understand this paragraph, the goals for the board are set by the board, and evaluation of completion of the board’s goals are determined in an assessment…completed by the board. The circular logic of this item is quite dizzying. The combination of a lack of independent oversight, and nowhere to go when one is unhappy with board decisions does not seem healthy, for either the citizens of the district or for the board itself. Are a list of the board’s goals and the results of the self-assessment ever made available to the public?

Below are some excerpts from the code of conduct you all signed when taking office, along with a couple other items I found in school board documents.

·        Always strive to put the needs of children above the wants of adults and make decisions in terms of the educational welfare of ALL children in the District regardless of ability, race, creed, ethnicity, social standings.

·        Accept criticism without getting defensive or angry.

·        Be open-minded and listen to the opinions of others.

·        Express personal views in a positive and constructive manner.

·        Disagree without being disagreeable.

·        Do not harbor grudges from past issues or events.

·        Do not let personal pride, ego, grudges, friendships, or other personal considerations influence decision making. (My personal favorite)

·        No Board member or officer has authority outside of a Board meeting.

·        No Board member can direct district employees in regard to performance of duties.

·        The Board sets district policies, and supports the superintendent in his/her job of managing the district and directing employees in district and campus matters.

Regarding the Hi-Stepper drill team last fall, you failed horribly when measured against several of the items on the list above. When questioned, the board stated at their April 2016 meeting that the Hi-Stepper parents did not hear the testimony the board heard regarding the case. What was that testimony? Did you receive testimony from everyone, or just the family who complained? Has the board turned into a modern day version of a Star Chamber, engaging in strict, arbitrary rulings and secretive proceedings that benefit only the limited few who are “in” with the board?

In my opinion and the opinion of many others, you did a great disservice to this young lady. You taught her that she doesn’t have to deal with disappointments in life, because there is always someone who can fix it. You taught her that rather than accept the decision of the judges and hold herself high with dignity and grace, she can simply run away.

There are times when the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many, but this was not one of those times. Some of you are good friends of the young lady's family, so you felt it was your place to “help.” Some of you simply don’t care for the current drill team director and took this opportunity to make life difficult for her. Either way, it was the wrong thing to do.

Regarding individual board member behavior in monthly meetings, it is childish and improper to try intimidating citizens by staring them down when they say something you don’t care for. Behavior like this is beneath you all. It is not proper for an elected public servant to behave in this manner, and it goes against your code of conduct.

School board members reaching out to parents in an honest attempt to solve a problem is a good thing, and these efforts should be applauded. However, it is inappropriate to speak with a parent privately on a heated topic once it becomes a public issue, unless there is a record of the meeting.

Lastly, it appears some board members don’t understand the fine art of detachment. By that I mean keeping the roles of parent and board member distinctly separate, because crossing that line is a conflict of interest. Parents have every right to be disappointed and want changes when circumstances at school don’t always work in their child’s favor. However, the code of conduct states that school board members DO NOT have that luxury.

I am planning to run for the school board next year in an attempt to affect positive change and stop the board from the day-to-day meddling it is known for. While it has done some good for the district, the present board has done far more than their fair share of damage, and I am tired of it dividing our community. To paraphrase words from someone far more intelligent and eloquent than I; “You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency gentlemen, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

Our community is in my prayers daily, as are our community leaders, including all KISD board members. I will continue to pray, but until you all realize that you work for the district and the community rather than the other way around, we have a very, very long way to go.

Income Inequality

In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a controversial Rochester, NY, talk radio personality had a response to President Obama’s December 4, 2013, speech on Economic Mobility. I’ve used almost all of Mr. Lonsberry’s ideas, and a lot of his original text, making changes where I wanted to, and adding some of my own ideas and thoughts as well. 

“We’ve never begrudged success in America.  We aspire to it.  We admire folks who start new businesses, create jobs, and invent the products that enrich our lives.  And we expect them to be rewarded handsomely for it.  In fact, we've often accepted more income inequality than many other nations for one big reason -- because we were convinced that America is a place where even if you’re born with nothing, with a little hard work you can improve your own situation over time and build something better to leave your kids.  As Lincoln once said, “While we do not propose any war upon capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else.” 

The problem is that alongside increased inequality, we’ve seen diminished levels of upward mobility in recent years.  A child born in the top 20 percent has about a 66% chance of staying at or near the top.  A child born into the bottom 20 percent has a less than 5% shot at making it to the top. The idea that a child may never be able to escape that poverty because she lacks a decent education or health care, or a community that views her future as their own, that should offend all of us and it should compel us to action.  We are a better country than this.”  -- Barack Obama 

Yes Mr. President, we are a better country than this, but only because of the original American dream, our work ethic, and our dogged determination and persistence. Calvin Coolidge is credited with saying “Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not: nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not: the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.” 

So when you say that “a child may never escape poverty because she lacks a decent education or healthcare,” I don’t buy it. People who want to succeed, do succeed, because it’s in their DNA and upbringing; they ALWAYS find a way. If you and your party continue to tell them they can’t, they won’t. Your message to them should be “get out there and make it happen for yourself. Dig in and never, never quit.” Your statement that you can be “born with nothing...but with a little hard work you can improve your own situation over time,” is incorrect. It takes a lot of hard work sir, a lot. 

My paternal grandparents were immigrants, making my father the first generation of his family born in the U.S. My grandfather knew that many doors to opportunity were closed to him because he was an immigrant, but he knew that his hard work and sacrifice would open many, if not all, of those doors for his children. The American dream has been perverted from “I want to insure my children have opportunities to succeed that were not available to me” to “I want my children to have it easier that I had it.” 

It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility. It’s about a political party telling poor people that it’s not their fault and making them into victims to win elective office. The rationale is to vote Democrat because they are the party that will take from those who make more and give to those who make less. It is a philosophy that deviates from American values and common sense because it ends up benefiting the people who support it, but don’t contribute to it. You have not empowered your followers and supporters; you have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope. 

Your premise on income seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of theirs.  Because, by and large, income variations in society are the result of different choices leading to different consequences.  Those who choose wisely and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.  Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. 

If you choose to drop out of high school or to skip college then you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education and/or employment. If you have your children when you are too young to support them, your life, and the lives of your children, are apt to take one course; if you wait until you have the financial stability to have children, your life is apt to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by the choices we make which determines the course we take. 

My oldest son and his wife are both doctors, and both of them make far more than I do so there is significant income inequality between us.  Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an inequality of effort.  While my son and daughter-in-law both invested 12 years of their lives to undergraduate studies, medical school and internships and waited to have children. I joined the military at 18, and had my children very young. Neither choice was “right” or “wrong”, they were simply choices with different paths and outcomes. 

They made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. And, while I am doing well financially, their outcome still pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean they cheated and it is your job to take away their wealth?  No, it means we are all free people in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes. 

The motivation to work hard is being bred out of our society because you either a) work hard and enjoy success, but face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than others, or b) do little or nothing and make a lifetime of shortsighted decisions, in which case the government will take from others to give you what you need. 

Equality of outcome is not a right, because it completely ignores inequality of effort.  The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get.”  You and your party would turn that upside down; those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. 

You are seeking to replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society by treating the symptoms, but not dealing with the root cause of the illness. You are continuing down the path of your predecessors, both Democrat and Republican, in creating government programs that address the exceptions, or squeaky wheels, rather than the majority. In doing so, you are killing off their desire to work as hard as needed, for as long as needed, to join the rest of us in the meaty portion of the bell curve. 

America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts.  It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization. The Democrats do not offer a fair solution, only separatism. They foment division and strife, pitting one set of Americans against another for their own political benefit. 

Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

Tell Me What You Want To Hear

Thank You to Time Magazine and reporters Alex Altman and Alex Rogers for the idea and some content.

Tell Me What You Want To Hear

When it comes to politics, believing is seeing. Partisan Republicans see Barack Obama as dishonest; partisan Democrats see Mitt Romney the same way. Voters see candidates they support as truth tellers; they regard candidates they oppose as shadier

Conservative friends of mine who believe the government is in a desperate, non-stop spiral into socialism, read material from authors who believe the same way. Similarly, most liberal friends believe our government is strictly a “board of directors” for corporate America, and they lean towards authors who consistently reinforce their views.

We are suffering from a national case of confirmation bias – the idea that we lend credence to information that confirms our opinions and ignore evidence that doesn’t – even in the face of facts.

The most disturbing truth here is not about the falsehoods of any one candidate, but the scientific studies showing that voters with more information are likely to be more biased than those who know less. That is worrisome in a country where government derives its’ powers from the consent of the governed.

Voters in the US have shown less and less interest in punishing candidates who deceive, because those who feel a deeper affinity for one side or another have developed a tendency to forgive the home team’s fibs. No matter their ideology, many voters increasingly inhabit information bubbles in which they are LESS likely to hear their view of the world contradicted.

With almost instant access to any information on the planet, why do we only seek out the information that reinforces our own belief system?

My paternal grandfather’s politics leaned a little left, but he read things from all over the spectrum. He said, “to make an intelligent decision you have to have perspective, and to have perspective, you have to know what EVERYONE is up to.” Not anymore.

We’ve become a country of people who choose our media based on its’ ability to reinforce our foundation of beliefs. We’ve stopped collecting news that informs us, and collecting only news that affirms us. It used to be that we disagreed on the solution but at least agreed on the problem. Now we don’t even agree on the problem.

All of this contributes to an environment in which voters simply filter out unwanted facts, and political discourse is reduced to screaming loudly at each other across the street.

Poor U.S. Math Skills and a Balanced U.S. Budget

Poor U.S. math skills allow frantic hyperbole by politicians...film at 11 (or maybe 12?).

Lately, the republican and democratic parties have played political badminton with two items each thinks should be cut from the annual federal budget. The democrats want the $4 billion tax breaks to the big oil companies stopped, and the republicans want the money to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting stopped. Everyone is screaming about a balanced budget, but no one seems to be able to figure it out. Well, I'm no genius, but I'm going to give it a shot.

Here are the official numbers for the United States 2012 Federal Budget

CATEGORY                      REQUESTED       ENACTED
Total Revenue                 $2.627 trillion     $2.469 trillion
Total Expenditures           $3.729 trillion     $3.796 trillion
Deficit                            $1.101 trillion     $1.327 trillion

The $445 million to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is 0.01175 percent of Total Expenditures.

The $4 billion in tax breaks to big oil is 0.1055 percent of Total Expenditures.

Some context:
Defense budget: $676 billion
State Department budget for Afghanistan: $2.3 billion
State Department budget for Iraq: $1.0 billion
Amtrak federal capital grants and operating subsidies: $1.4 billion
Federal office space acquisition budget: $864 million

For you math weenies, here’s what should have happened...

The government should have taken the amount of Total Revenue Enacted and divided it by the amount of Total Expenditures Enacted. This gives us a percentage of 65%. Then, they should have then reduced EACH AND EVERY single line item in the budget by 40%, which would have given us a balanced budget for 2012, and left over 5% ($123.5 B) to begin reducing the national debt.

This would result in...
Defense budget: $405.6 billion
State Department budget for Afghanistan: $1.38 billion
State Department budget for Iraq: $600 million
Amtrak federal capital grants and operating subsidies: $840 million
Federal office space acquisition budget: $518.4 million

and...
Corporation for Public Broadcasting: $267 million
Tax breaks to big oil: $2.4 billion

Seems really simple to me. How about you?

Death Of A Saint

I lost my mother on Tuesday, June 26, 2012, at 9:31 PM.

Mom was 73½ years old, but was a very "young" 73½. I was with her when she left us, and now realize one very important thing; there is never enough time to say all you want to say - ever. We could all have lifetimes measured in millenniums rather than decades, but even then, it would not be enough time.

With a father that traveled for his work, my mom was the glue that held the family together. She was an anachronism in today's society; a life-long housewife who kept an immaculate home, and could make a three-course meal out of nothing.

After I left home many years ago, we used to talk on Tuesdays. She would call and start the conversation with “Guess what? It’s Tuesday, and you’re loved extra special on Tuesdays!” It became our thing. It was a contest to see who would call who first, because the person who called got to say it. The proper response was “I know!” What I realized long ago was that my mother loved me extra special every day.

My sadness at her bedside in the hospital was nothing more than selfishness on my part, because I will miss her sweet glowing face, her cheerful encouraging voice, and hugging her very squeezable body.

I celebrate her life as one that was lived properly, and will always remember all the things, good and bad, that made my mother who she was. She would not want her death to make me to lay down and wrap myself in a sadness that would prevent me from moving on with my life.

She would say the same thing to me she used to say to one of my brother-in-laws when he would tell her over early morning coffee how worried he was about getting his day’s work done; “Well what are you doing still sitting here? You should have been gone before daylight!”

I realize that it's okay to be a little selfish in my sadness that she is no longer physically with me, but I won’t let that last very long. Instead, I will use her life as an example of how to better lead mine; as a champion for her children, in service to others and as a messenger of encouragement.

I am thankful I had a mother who cared enough to whip me when I needed it, and I am a better person because of her.

I love you mom.