August 24, 2010 2:26 PM

Unions And Education: A Deficient System

By
CBSNews
(National Review Online)  This column was written by Michael Barone.

Education is not ordinarily thought to be in the purview of a Federal Reserve chairman. So it's striking when Alan Greenspan in his memoir, "The Age of Turbulence", raises the subject.

"Our primary and secondary education system," he writes, "is deeply deficient in providing homegrown talent to operate our increasingly complex infrastructure." The result: "Too many of our students languish at too low a level of skill upon graduation, adding to the supply of lesser-skilled labor in the face of an apparently declining demand."

So if you're concerned about widening disparities in income, Greenspan tells readers attracted to his book by its publicists' promise of criticism of George W. Bush, then what you need to do is to "harness better the forces of competition" in educating kids.

As Greenspan concedes, we have done that to some extent. Governors Republican and Democratic have worked to make public schools more accountable, charter schools provide some needed competition, and the bipartisan No Child Left Behind Act has further prodded states and localities in those directions. But except for a few cities, notably Milwaukee and Cleveland, we have not had school-choice programs with vouchers allowing parents to choose private as well as public schools.

Vouchers are adamantly opposed by the teacher unions, which spent millions persuading Utah voters last week to repeal a voucher law passed by the legislature. No one can say for sure how much vouchers would improve education. But they are "forces of competition," as Greenspan puts it, which we're almost entirely prevented from harnessing because of the power of teacher unions - the power, more specifically, that they wield in the Democratic party.

I was reminded of this by a recent exchange on theatlantic.com between libertarian blogger Megan McArdle and liberal bloggers Matt Yglesias and Kevin Drum. These are three of the most intellectually interesting and usually independent-minded young liberal bloggers, but on vouchers they advanced one lame argument after another. On this issue, they were playing team ball.

The teacher unions are an incredibly important source of money and volunteers for the Democratic party - about one in ten delegates or their spouses at recent Democratic national conventions have been teacher union members. When they snap their fingers, the Democrats jump. Vouchers threaten to dry up dues money, and that is that.

Teacher unions are not the only public employee unions important to the Democrats - nearly half the union members in the country are public employees. And you can see their power exerted as well in House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel's tax reform proposal.

Rangel, who deserves credit for raising the issue of broad tax changes, proposes vast tax increases in order to eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax. The AMT, originally designed to make sure that a few millionaires could not avoid paying income tax, has never been indexed for inflation, and threatens to engulf 20 million taxpayers next year unless Congress passes another one-year "patch" or, as Rangel wants, abolishes it.

The AMT has no deduction for state and local taxes, and tends to hit high earners in high-tax states like Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and California - heavily Democratic states, you'll notice. These states tend to have highly paid unionized public employees, and their union leaders surely understand that the AMT threatens to create political pressure to lower state and local taxes and therefore spending. If voters can't deduct their state and local taxes, their tax burden will go way up, and they may start a tax revolt. Better not let that happen! So eliminating the AMT is an imperative for Democrats.

Looking ahead to future fiscal burdens, many people understand that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid threaten to consume an ever-larger share of the economy over the years. But so do state and local governments if public employee unions get their way. And to get it, they rely on taxpayer's funds - all their dues income comes from the public fisc.

Their goals are to increase pay, which runs counter to taxpayers' interests, and to minimize accountability, which runs counter to citizens'. Republicans are not their reliable adversaries - union leaders get cozy with Republican legislators when they can, by letting them know they won't oppose them. But the Democrats are, with some few exceptions, their humble obedient servants - from the young liberal bloggers up to the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.
By Michael Barone
Reprinted with permission from National Review Online

National Review Online
Add a Comment See all 20 Comments
by ioweign November 14, 2007 11:04 AM EST
Unions And Education: A Deficient System
National Review Online: Teacher Unions And Their Democratic Party Ties Leave Children Behind

Who has been vetoing domestic spending for America''s children ?

Reply to this comment
by quatrops November 14, 2007 1:48 AM EST
The sad poster at 7:30 may misguidedly think the poor don''t want to get an education, but his english usage would seem to indicate that, at whatever grade level he managed to achieve, he wasn''t paying much attention in english class!

E.g.: " . . .the ones that refuses . . .". Tsk tsk! Try getting the verb that matches the plural noun.

Of serious concern, though, is his screwed-up lack of understanding of sociology and economics. If he ever took courses in either, they certainly weren''t taught by one of those "left-wing educators" that the right always insists our educational system is inundated with!

Reply to this comment
by libsluvsuvs November 13, 2007 10:30 PM EST
The milking of the treasury by the likes of Halliburton and Blackwater is coming to an end, so don''''t expect much progress in any area until Inaugeration Day, January 2009.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Quatrops at 06:33 AM : Nov 13, 2007
+ report abuse


*************

in this country poverty afflicts only the ones that refuses to go to school, refuse to work hard, refuse to earn any rewards and depends on pity and handouts.

btw...poverty will prevail as long as people like you would give these ''poor'' people justification to stay poor..and will prevail past the predicted event you mentioned..

a great liberal (Goldof and bono) once said that poverty ends right after live8..well did it?
Reply to this comment
by sanfelz November 13, 2007 6:06 PM EST
As if paying teachers less would attract more and better teachers. Sure, have tax funds pay for parochials schools and enrich the coffers of a Walton heir.The brilliance of privatization as found in banks, insurance companies and car manufacturers.
Reply to this comment
by eskieville1 November 13, 2007 3:07 PM EST
It''s not all the teachers and administrators fault. There are too many parents who believe in tough and rigorous standards for everyone except THEIR KID! This is why teachers unions exist - to protect from ARBITRARY DISMISSAL CAUSED BY A WACKO PARENT.Teachers do need to police their own ranks better however!
Reply to this comment
by runningralph November 13, 2007 12:07 PM EST
If tenure agreements have tied the hands of the taxpayers, taxpayers should demand that teacher unions
police their own ranks. School administrators should not be given contracts longer than 1 or 2 years. Taxpayers should pay attention and attend school board meetings.
Education programs should be designed to teach the majority of students and cull the minority. Students should not be allowed to pass if they can''t perform to standards set by the taxpayers through the school boards. This way the whole will move ahead. Liberal grading policies will cause the whole system to collapse.
Reply to this comment
by quatrops November 13, 2007 9:33 AM EST
A post at 7:19 suggests that the main problem is poverty. And have you noticed how much attention the neocon administration has paid to poverty in America over the past 7 years?

Addressing poverty didn''t look nearly as lucrative as invading Iraq when it came to lining their pockets and those of their corporate sponsors with tax $.

The failure of the Bush administration to plan for post-invasion Iraq (and the many other examples of their failure to plan for the future) is that THEY NEVER EXPECTED TO BE IN POWER THIS LONG. THEY EXPECTED THEIR SHELL GAME TO BE UNCOVERED LONG BEFORE THIS!

The milking of the treasury by the likes of Halliburton and Blackwater is coming to an end, so don''t expect much progress in any area until Inaugeration Day, January 2009.
Reply to this comment
by bluestardad November 13, 2007 8:16 AM EST
THE MAJORITY OF TENURED TEACHERS LEAVE THE EDUCATION OF THE STUDENTS TO THEMSELVES...I HAVE SEEN THEM WALK INTO A CLASS AND SAY READ CHAPTER 12 AND THEN WALK OUT TO THE TEACHERS LOBBY AND SET UNTIL THE END OF THE CLASS...

THERE SHOULD BE NO TENURE FOR TEACHERS AND THEY SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AS THEIR ADMINISTRATORS FOR THE GRADES THE STUDENTS MAKE...

HOWEVER WHEN WE ARE GIVING MILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO FIGHT WARS FOR THE OIL COMPANIES AND ISRAEL IT IS A SHAME THAT OUR KIDS AND STUDENTS HAVE TO HAVE BAKE SALES AND CAR WASHES FOR BAND UNIFORMS AND SCHOOL SUPPLIES...OUR OWN GOVERNMENT MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE ALSO!
Reply to this comment
by cfin5 November 13, 2007 12:41 AM EST
The republicans would like to do away with public education all togather. Vouchers allow a set of population to go to private schools at public expense. The real purpose of vouchers is to undermine the public schools.

If unions did not exsits the schools would get more politized then they already are.

Posted by IMNHO at 09:30 PM : Nov 12, 2007
After your spelling display here, I can''t blame them......Spell checker is what you need to get. :)
Reply to this comment
by imnho November 13, 2007 12:30 AM EST
The republicans would like to do away with public education all togather. Vouchers allow a set of population to go to private schools at public expense. The real purpose of vouchers is to undermine the public schools.

If unions did not exsits the schools would get more politized then they already are.
Reply to this comment
See all 20 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook