With the upcoming discussions by the super committee on cutting, I’ve begun looking at areas in which we can ostensibly cut large chunks of money and not affect the nation in major ways.

This time, I’ll discuss the Dept of Education.  It was signed into law in 1979 by Jimmy Carter, and started the next year.  In the 31 years since it began, test scores do not show any significant movement for math, reading and science have remained flat.  Meanwhile federal education  spending has grown 375% (in inflation adjusted dollars) in the same time period.

What does that tell us? That states were performing the same as we do now, but with billions of dollars less.   It costs about $70 billion to run the Dept of Education, including all the moneys it sends to schools everywhere, No Child Left Behind program, etc.  When you include funds from other federal agencies (not including school lunches or the like), it jumps to well over $100 billion per year.

IOW, if we end most federal subsidies to education, we can easily save between $500 Billion and $1 Trillion over the next decade.  And given the flat test scores since the Dept of Ed was started, it shouldn’t affect children’s education scores.

Besides, there is no Constitutional mandate for the feds to be involved in education.  As FDR stated, it is a state responsibility.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/slate-com-vs-tea-partychristiansbachmann/

http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html

There are the Mormon Matters’ Niblets, and BCC has the Boggs-Doniphan Awards.

Isn’t it time for the M* to have its own awards to hand out?  We need something interesting, but definitely different than the other Mormon Awards that are out there.

Suggestions on what would make for a good and interesting Award(s) that M* could offer?  Should it be voted upon by the unwashed LDS masses, or be decided by the permabloggers here?  Should we seek to have an award we share with others on the Bloggernacle to develop?

Thoughts?

Almost four years ago a very powerful political commercial came into our homes:

It shows people asleep in bed. It is dark. The phone rings.

“It is 3:00 am, who do you want answering the emergency?”

It was a commercial comparing Democratic candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.  The concept was to outline who really had the experience to handle emergencies that would pop up in the middle of the night.

Given the almost three years of watching Pres Obama, my mind keeps going back to that commercial.  He has been called the Teleprompter in Chief, the President’s Press Adviser, Jimm Carter junior,  etc.  Rarely has anyone commended him on his leadership abilities.  In fact, most Americans rate him low. During both the Obamacare and Debt ceiling issues (that dragged on forever), people in Washington DC and around the country wondered where he was, or why he never submitted a useable plan.

Where do you think our country would be right now had we elected Hillary Clinton instead?  As both Senator and Secretary of State, I think she’s handled herself well (and I’m not a Democrat).  Perhaps the Democrats would be smart to give themselves another chance at putting her into the top spot.

What do you think?

<a href=”http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-politics/8692054/Democrats-doubt-Barack-Obamas-reelection-chances.html”> Dems doubt Obama’s reelection chances</a>

Lesson 33 on 1st Corinthians 1-6 is now available on my blog:

http://joelsmonastery.blogspot.com/2011/08/new-testament-gospel-doctrine-lesson-33.html

It discusses the history of Corinth and how its unique cosmopolitan offers caused major divisions and apostasy in the Christian church – and how Paul set out to straighten out the mess in this epistle.

Read it there / comment here!

A recent letter to the Washington Post by an 80 year old man explains how much he has received in benefits compared to what he has put in:

At 80, I am a “poster boy” for what is wrong with Medicare and Social Security. I worked full time from 1950 until 1993, when I retired. I paid the maximum amount annually required by law. My payment from Social Security in 1993 was $1,170 per month, and it now exceeds $1,500. I paid $47,377 into the fund and have so far received more than $288,000 from it.

As for Medicare I paid $14,350 into the fund from 1966 to 1993. I have been very healthy but had cancer several years ago and a craniotomy five years ago. The costs of those exceeded $1 million. Even minor surgery would far exceed what I paid to the fund.

Please tell me how such a system can be sustained. Both programs need to be overhauled now. No one should believe that he has paid for and earned the right to such payments.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2011/08/04/gIQAdI9C1I_story.html

Sadly, we have issues with many of our older folks and those preparing to retire. They want government cut down, but insist no one touches their entitlements.  AARP is a very powerful lobby, and knows that older people tend to vote.  Recently AARP has agreed to changes in Social Security, simply because it sees that boat is coming in, either with or without them. They refused to sign onto a coalition of 300 unions, women, and liberal groups to fight any changes.  But they still aren’t ready to change Medicare.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304186404576389760955403414.html

How can we afford such programs if a retiree has put in only a fraction of the amount we pay out?  As I explained recently to a 80 year old retiree I know, who was concerned because he wasn’t getting better benefits from Social Security and Medicare: we can’t afford the programs. We can either go bankrupt helping you, or have your children and grandchildren paying for decades to pay off the debt you now incur.

Yes, it seems heartless.  It seems unkind to tell the elderly they are going to have to “eat their peas” with the rest of us.  But do we spend $1 million on one older person’s heart procedure, or on improving grade schools for little ones who are just starting out in life?

A solution?  Turn Medicare into a voucher system useable at any insurance company, with a retired person’s patient bill of rights. Provide them with standard care. If they want more, they and their families are welcome to spend more in insurance for them.  But let’s not ask our little ones to be paying for this decades from now.

I find there is no shame in dying when someone is 65 or 70 years of age. I would rather die at 65 than have my nation go belly up in debt.

I am 51 years old. I am willing to do without Social Security and Medicare to save my children and grandchildren?  Who else will send such a message to Congress?