Going the way of the Dodo

I've been amazed at simplistic--verging on facile--arguments that the editorial boards have been making against budget cuts.

The reality, of course is that the State is out of money, out of gimmicks and out of borrowing authority, so there will either have to be a massive tax increase, deep cuts or both.  Yet instead of offering real solutions, the editorial boards--which were eerily quiet while Governor Napolitiano got us into this mess--are offering simple bromides and tired metaphors.  Every program is an "investment" so don't kill the body by using an ax, chain saw, starvation etc.

Here's an example of an especially simplistic analysis  from the soon to be defunct Arizona Daily Star.

We call on parents, educators and business leaders to make sure lawmakers know how valuable public education is to our community. This investment must be protected. Starving our educational system will only make it that much harder for Arizona to pull out of this damaging economic downturn.

Starving our way out of the downturn?   Star editorials often read like they were written by high school students,* so I found this line to be especially funny.

We asked a high school student job-shadowing at the Star what she would worry about if state education funding is cut, and her list of possibilities is insightful and telling:

Wow, that's the in depth analysis we have come to expect from professionals.  Could they have at leased CALLED a high school student instead of asking the one who happened to be in the newsroom that day?

I'm not the only one who is frustrated by the lack of honest analysis, last week, Republic Columnist Bob Robb made the case as well as I could. 

Those advocating deep cuts in state spending are addressing the issue honesty and responsibly. Those protesting the cuts are not.

The only honest and responsible alternative is to raise taxes. Those who don't like the consequences of paring back spending to match revenues need to put a tax increase on the table large enough to support the state government they think Arizona should have.

Until then, they are avoiding rather confronting reality.

Then, right on schedule,  Robb's own editorial board uses a full Sunday editorial to serve up this analytical oatmeal.

Let's Use a Knife not an AX, on College Budgets

The editorial isn't on line yet, but the final paragraph will give you a flavor of the analysis

Arizonans need to take a thorough look at the true impact of reducing university budgets.  Legislators, regents and university officials need to set aside rhetoric and discuss what cuts are possible without slicing through arteries. 

Slicing through arteries...how clever.  

So much for honesty...or even creativity.  The amazing part is that they actually get PAID to write this stuff...well they get paid for now anyway.

*I'm serious when I say the editorials often look like they were written by high school students.  My son is a sophomore at Desert Mountain, so I have a rough idea what high school essays look like.  Take a moment and read the full Star editorial. It is shallow and trite; the analysis is simplistic and conventional, while the writing style is weak.  The mixed metaphor about "starving" the system making it harder to pull out of the "downturn" is inexcusable. 

 

Comments

[James Mason]

Excellent post. The Star's editorials read like preachy, condescending screeds. Often the word "must" appears in the title-as in "City must act". Then it uses an equally poorly written article as evidence of the horrible wrong that must be cured. They are predicable and thin. If education is off the table where should the State cut? No alternative is given because that would take effort.

[DGN]

Here's an idea:

If a local district is concerned about losing money from the state budget, what prevents them from calling a bond election?

That seems fair. If the people of a certain district want to ensure there are no cuts or minimal cuts to their local district's funding, they are free to impose a tax on themselves.

I'm not saying that's the best solution, but these administrators who are mad at the legislature do have alternatives at their disposal.

It's not law or rule, but did you know most districts won't hire a superintendent until he or she has demonstrated experience at running a bond election? Interesting, huh?

[Jim Torgeson]

I see the problem is simpler terms. If we consider AZ a family who is too deep in debt to pay it's bills, what would we advise that family to do?
1) Cut up it's credit cards
2) Consider bankruptcy
3) Sell any unnecessary assets
4) Get a second job for income
5) Stop any and all unnecessary spending

Since we can't afford our debt, we have to either bankrupt or sell land/buildings, cut budgets and increase revenue.

The Matriarch of our Family (J-No), put us in a hole no one likes. We will have to do everything possible to address the issue and, when the family finances are healthy, readjust our spending habits accordingly.

I just can't see how cutting the extras is the only answer. It's not like eating beanie weenies will fix our state. We will need an extra income to pay off J-Nos shopping habit (or at least sell the vacation homes).

[Reagan Republican]

You and Robert Robb are far and away the two most honest commentators I've read about the budget situation--keep it up!

[Phoenix Booster]

No one is arguing that spending cuts will not be necessary--however, here is the fundamental question beyond the hyperbole:

With the cuts currently proposed, Arizona would be losing two research I level universities (because let's face it, after this Arizona will have three NAUs at best, no offense intended.) Our labor market no longer would feature an abundance of graduates from what are functionally top 50 or at least top 100 programs in just about everything, not to mention the fact that if the Legislature privatizes our professional schools, they will inevitably fold.

So then here is the question; which is a bigger hit, the evaporation of the worth of the degrees of most of Arizona's workforce, or a tax increase? I agree that it's intellectually dishonest for those opposing these cuts to fail to mention that tax increases are the subtext to their demands, but that doesn't address the fundamental problem that at the end of the day, failing to raise taxes and save the system only incentivizes the collapse of Arizona's knowledge-based economy.

[Jean McGrath]

The writers of the Arizona Constitution had in mind K-12 when they wrote that education in Arizona should be free or as nearly free as possible. They did not intend for the taxpayers to bear the burden of university education and they especially did not envision taxpayers bearing the burden of graduate degrees. The universities, as one way to ease the funding cuts that are coming, should charge ALL graduate students the full cost of their self benefiting degree. We will probably never get out of university funding, but the state should be on the hook only for the number of hours required for a degree and the student should pay full cost for any additional hours.

[todd]

Jean McGrath,
Article 11, section 6 of the Arizona Constitution begins:
"The university and all other state educational institutions shall be open to students of both sexes, and the instruction furnished shall be as nearly free as possible. [...]"

Please explain how you interpret this to mean only k-12 education because it clearly says "the university and all other state educational institutions." I am really trying hard to see how there is any other possible meaning in the constitution.

[Thane Eichenauer]

The research folks! The reeeeessseeaaaaarchhh!!! Do none of you have a heart? The reseaaaaarchh!!!

[Retrorv]

"Our labor market no longer would feature an abundance of graduates from what are functionally top 50 or at least top 100 programs in just about everything, not to mention the fact that if the Legislature privatizes our professional schools, they will inevitably fold." What does that mean? And assuming it has some kind of substance, is there any authority to back it up?

[Jean McGrath]

Humble pie and apologies. I have not unpacked the box with my copy of the state constitution since moving. Perhaps my memory is just wishful thinking about things I feel are an unnecessary burden to the average taxpayer.

[Chad]

Democrats have a simple solution to every problem in the world: create a government program!

Their corollary: when the government program doesn't solve the problem, spend more money on that same program.

Their corollary to the corollary: blame Republicans for the program's failure because they won't spend even money.

I am lumping the MSM into the category of Democrats, so apologies to the 10% of media who are not D's.