Like this:

Last week the NC House completed its work on the FY 2011-2012 budget.   It passes to the Senate this week.  Staff writer Mark Binker of the Greensboro News and Record reported on their actions today.

We can talk about ideologies and perspectives, philosophy and theory but let’s see where the rubber meets the road.  This from Senator Jerry Tillman, chairman of two education committees.

“Yes, there’s going to be unmet needs. Yes, it would be nice to have that $800 million or $1 billion. But it would also be nice to keep our word … We believe that billion-plus-dollars we’re going to let the taxpayers keep is going to spur the economy,” he said.

Okay.  So what do we have here?  At issue is a 1 cent temporary sales tax set to expire in July.  Some say extend it, providing about a billion dollars for educational needs.  Others say that extension would be tantamount to a new tax and the Republicans that swept into office paraphrased ‘read my lips, no new taxes.’  The latter stands on the moral ground of ‘thou shalt not lie.  This is a promise and our word is good.’  This, as well as the$230 million in tax cuts, is supposed enable North Carolinians to create new jobs thereby saving our economy.

At what cost?  A 9% reduction in K-12 and a whopping 15% cut in the public university system.   This is where I have a problem.  I have heard a lot about pork and luxuries and special interests.  Fine, there could be some tightening of the budget.  After all, there are expenses (109K) and there are expenses  ($3M). The lines may blur when getting close to the bone but I think we pretty much understand the difference between a need and a luxury.  What our house representative is talking about is not luxury.  He clearly specified that needs (as opposed to extracurricular activities, trophies or pizza parties) will not be met.  And who does public education serve?  Children.

So what is it called when a child’s needs are not met in a caregiving setting?  Child abuse in the form of neglect.

According to federal guidelines, neglect is the failure of a parent, guardian, or other caregiver to provide for a child’s basic needs.  “Neglect may be…educational (e.g., failure to educate a child or attend to special education needs).”

But who would be culpable here?  Read the child abuse policies. It mentions parents, guardians and caregivers.  Are schools caregivers?  Does the government have a role as a caregiver?  Hey, they write the stuff so I’m guessing they are exempt.  So ultimately, if parents send their children to public school (that free and appropriate education thingy) and the public has been informed by our representatives that the education provided there will not meet the children’s needs then it is the parent/guardian/caregiver that is culpable.  Wouldn’t that make all parents of children receiving the guaranteed service of inadequate public education guilty of abuse?

Let’s just hope all those new jobs that are created require no academic skills.

Advertisement