A pro-progress Democrat. Imagine that.
Governor Ed Rendell is offering the money a local school district to continue a popular program.
The Tribune-Review reports that Rendell wants to give money to the Upper St. Clair School District in an effort to keep International Baccalaureate Program.
” He is using state police power to sieze money from citizens to buy a program that the local school board did not want.”
Bush, seizing money from our grandchildren to keep his bankrupt
policies running until he’s out of office.
Sounds even worse that way, doesn’t it?
“The Tribune-Review reports that Rendell wants to give money to the Upper St. Clair School District in an effort to keep International Baccalaureate Program.”
I see no problem. Rendell should be able to spend his money however he wants. As long as it is not public tax dollars. Then, of course, he is not giving anybody anything, now is he? He is using state police power to sieze money from citizens to buy a program that the local school board did not want.
Dugger, Doesn’t Sound as good that way, does it
Is this Rendell’s personal money? Or the State’s?
Real “charitable” of him to offer to give state money from other taxpayers to a school district that apparently already did the cost/benefit analysis and decided to axe the program. How… progressive… of him.
Oh, and Rendell had better cut the check quickly, b/c Lynn Swann will be elminating his ability to be so “progressive” in the near future.
wooot!!!
Bush is relevant how? Oh, wait…I get it…you didn’t want to discuss the actual issue of locals deciding how to spend their tax money.
“Popular?”
MediaMatters will no doubt be lambasting this reporter for editorializing (with zero proof, no less) right in the middle of a straight-news story.
stwendler - I assume you don’t live in Pennsylvania? Swann’s campaign is a joke. It’s only right-wing wanker fantasy of a high order to imagine that he’ll come close to beating Rendell.
Uproar?!? According to Technorati, you’re the ONLY one banging this drum.
Wake me up when this “uproar” is over…
Bush is relevant because I don’t even get the option of voting on his big money giveaways to all his buddies, unlike the “locals”. It’s worth noting the other locals who were opposed to the abrupt halt of this program fighting to keep it. And BTW, Farris, considering the number of local people who were opposed to the cancellation of the program, I would say that makes the use of the word “popular” altogether fair and correct. I know, I know, it’s only bias to disagree with rightwing talking points, but I’m just saying.
The IB program is popular, that’s why there’s so much uproar about it. This is a statement of fact.
From the linked story:
Next school board election oughta be fun.
If I’m reading this right, some posters think that taxation to provide for a specialized education program is theft. Does that mean all taxation is theft?
I mean, if one really believes this, fine, you can come out and say it, and you’ll be perfectly consistent. Of course, the implication of that is that the government can’t do anything and would for all practical purposes cease to exist, but hey, it’s an outlook on government that is consistent.
I still don’t think it’s all that popular though.
That’s misleading, SaveFarris. You’re using a very narrow search term “Upper St. Clair School District”, so of course you’ll only get a few hits. If you search just “Upper St. Clair”, you’ll get more hits, and I checked, most of them are relevant.
I won’t make assumptions on whether you’re trying to be dense or if you just haven’t had much experience with search engines. I’m just sayin’ that there definitely is an uproar, and that other readers needn’t be persuaded otherwise.
Does that mean all taxation is theft? No, all taxation is extortion, except that the violence threatened is either financial hardship or prison.
A friend I worked with at the IRS used to say, “We go out on the financial battlefield, and bayonet the wounded.”
Thank you for pointing this out, sundown. I hereby retract the claim that “ONLY” Oliver is covering this.
But no matter what search terms you use, this is still one of the least-”uproar”-ious topics in politics today. (As compared to true “uproars”: V for Vendetta, the Katherine Harris Debacle, Dubai Ports World, Cindy Sheehan)
Farris, this is really a pet peeve of Oliver’s, because he went to one of these fancy shmancy schools in FL. It made him the the man he is today, which doesn’t necessarily argue for their continued existence ( =:-} ), but it does explain why he is exercized about it.
Yes, Boyd Anderson High, with its 89% black, low-to-middle income kids is the epitome of fancy shmancy. Gawd. And yes, there has been an uproar about this story in PA, where it’s happening.
My interest in it is because I know the curriculum intimately, and know the conservatives are bullshitting about it, and because I think it’s important for American kids to be hypereducated if we want to retain our position of leadership in the world.
Sundown,
“If I m reading this right, some posters think that taxation to provide for a specialized education program is theft. Does that mean all taxation is theft?”
Not to worry. You are reading it wrong. The government has the authority and power to confiscate wealth from working Americans. It needs to do that to run its programs. But it still uses its police power to seize wealth. So why does Rendell get props when in fact he is seizing more cash from working families to fund a program that the local community does not want.
And OW thinks this is a good idea!!
Dugger
The local community does want the program. The school board president does not represent the opinion of the majority.
“The government has the authority and power to confiscate wealth from working Americans.”
But if it touches one penny of inherited wealth, well, them’s fighting words.
More?
I missed the part where this would involve a tax increase.
Somehow, I’m not sure that the average individual Pennsylvania family will have to pay a significant more in taxes. The worst that could happen is that no additional taxes are needed, but the money will come out of some other program. Which could be bad, or it may make little difference at all to that program.
Working people-taxpayers, not Rendell, are paying for it - whether they raise taxes or not and it will cost more than if Rendell did not force it on them.
Dugger
It still is a case of the State overruling a community.
Poll 1:
Poll 2:
Poll 3:
Perhaps something more recent? How about 3/15?
Yes, the campaign is a joke, indeed….
My point is that the local school board (which was elected) has decided not to continue the program. local government is as close to “the people” as you can get. Rendell is using tax dollars from other citizens in other school districts to continue aprogram that the local school board doesn’t want.
I’m not judging the progam… that’s for the local, elected officials. I’m judging the process.
I think the Rendell-Swann contest will be close, but that Rendell will win. He is still popular in eastern PA and there is a general distaste for Republicans lately. As with most campaigns in PA it’s all about getting out the vote in Philly, and there is a good anti-Santorum sentiment to help out there.
Rheinhard is right- Lynn Swann is “popular” because he is remembered as an athlete. As the voters find out that he is an empty suit with no vision for Pennsylvania, they will vote for Rendell.
The same could be said of any expenditure by government. What good is the power to collect taxes without the authority to spend what’s collected?
The Rendell-Swann race, though immaterial to the merits of this issue, will be close because Swann is highly recognizable and is not running as a hardcore winger.
They dio have the authority to collect and spend tax dollars, Quaker. That isn’t the issue. And we can quibble about more all day (I say when a program is not going to be funded, and then it is funded, that is ‘more’ spending of taxpayers dollars). And it isn’t Rendell giving anybody money is it. Rendell will in effect take money from working families, putting thenm in jail if they fail to obey, and redirect to his pet political projects. Thats whats going on here.
Dugger, Progressives believe the problem is distributing the finished goods, not sweating to finish the goods
“Rendell will in effect take money from working families, putting thenm in jail if they fail to obey, and redirect to his pet political projects. ”
Substitute Bush for Rendell, noting that faith-based initiatives are among his “pet political projects”.
Somehow I don’t see the outrage on the right over that. I guess only a Republican is supposed to direct public funds to something he feels strongly about.
I can see the argument for not allowing any money for “pet projects”, or continuing the ability to earmark for “pet projects”, but at least be consistent.
As I wrote earlier, the very same could be said of any spending decision made by goverment.
Why does this one deserve your special disdain?
Why I didn’t say it does deserve disdain. What merits disdain is praising him for it: the purpose of this item.
Dugger