Virginiana - 4/27/2006: Local Heros
posted by Protagonist | 3:25 PM 
From the April 26-May 9, 2006 Issue of New Kent - Charles City Chronicle:
Here's some background on the rather oddly-named Charles City County. Bascially, it's the location of some of the first Anglo-American settlements in our country's history. Not much has happened there since. With a population of about 7,000 people, I couldn't imagine spending $5.7 million on anything down there. The high school has a student body of 250. And 30 teachers.
Note that the state contribution to the county school budget will be another $6 Million.
For most local governments in Virginia and the U.S., public schooling makes up most of the budget. Thus, if a local government wants to trim its budget, the natural response is to trim the school budget. And rightly so. Aside from the moral problems of kidnapping children for 35-40 hours a week to learn what the government wants them to learn, to the exclusion of what individual parents think is best for their individual children, paid for by money involuntarily confiscated through taxes, the system is also woefully inefficient. For example, my county--Henrico County, Virginia--at last count spends a base amount of $7,768 per student. Yet most private schools in the area spend less. And other counties nationwide can easily double or triple the per student amount of Henrico's schools. The "spread" between these two amounts represents the "administrative overhead" discussed above spent by government bureaucracy perpetuating itself. And even this conventional debate of private vs. public schooling doesn't account for (1) the virtually free amount of unlimited learning now available in every household through the internet, and (2) the dubious proposition of spending money to make children smarter, as if we can buy a 12 oz can of smartness for our kids from Walmart each week. (Though I would like to see what would happen if you promised a kid $7,768 in toys and videogames if he'd hit the books and passed his tests.)
But mention all of this to the general public, and the reaction is hysterics on the line of "We can't cut education spending! Our children are our future! We can't shortchange our children!" Spend a penny less on education than 10% more than last year, and you're accused of being a mean-spirited rabid conservative who wants to see children working in sweatshops. Customarily in the education spending debate, emotion trumps logic, "civic duty" trumps individual rights, and good intentions trump bad results.
The Board of Supervisors' spending cuts are extremely rare for just this reason, but nonetheless admirable. In this small county where America began, we see the spirit of prudence and restraint which may help it begin anew.
Here's some background on the rather oddly-named Charles City County. Bascially, it's the location of some of the first Anglo-American settlements in our country's history. Not much has happened there since. With a population of about 7,000 people, I couldn't imagine spending $5.7 million on anything down there. The high school has a student body of 250. And 30 teachers.
Note that the state contribution to the county school budget will be another $6 Million.
For most local governments in Virginia and the U.S., public schooling makes up most of the budget. Thus, if a local government wants to trim its budget, the natural response is to trim the school budget. And rightly so. Aside from the moral problems of kidnapping children for 35-40 hours a week to learn what the government wants them to learn, to the exclusion of what individual parents think is best for their individual children, paid for by money involuntarily confiscated through taxes, the system is also woefully inefficient. For example, my county--Henrico County, Virginia--at last count spends a base amount of $7,768 per student. Yet most private schools in the area spend less. And other counties nationwide can easily double or triple the per student amount of Henrico's schools. The "spread" between these two amounts represents the "administrative overhead" discussed above spent by government bureaucracy perpetuating itself. And even this conventional debate of private vs. public schooling doesn't account for (1) the virtually free amount of unlimited learning now available in every household through the internet, and (2) the dubious proposition of spending money to make children smarter, as if we can buy a 12 oz can of smartness for our kids from Walmart each week. (Though I would like to see what would happen if you promised a kid $7,768 in toys and videogames if he'd hit the books and passed his tests.)
But mention all of this to the general public, and the reaction is hysterics on the line of "We can't cut education spending! Our children are our future! We can't shortchange our children!" Spend a penny less on education than 10% more than last year, and you're accused of being a mean-spirited rabid conservative who wants to see children working in sweatshops. Customarily in the education spending debate, emotion trumps logic, "civic duty" trumps individual rights, and good intentions trump bad results.
The Board of Supervisors' spending cuts are extremely rare for just this reason, but nonetheless admirable. In this small county where America began, we see the spirit of prudence and restraint which may help it begin anew.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home