After listening to governor Palin speak on Wednesday night we got curious about just how her executive veto pen worked. Thanks to the Internet, we quickly came to find the OMB Budget from Governor Palin's own Alaskan Government's site. There are about 26 pages to this budget, so we'll try to break it down over the next few days and take a critical look because these are the kinds of executive decisions we can expect.
PART I
Governor Palin allocated 1/2 a million dollars for this project:
- Fawn Mountain Sports Field
Line Item #6: Completion of the Fawn Mountain Sports Field.
Total Cost: $500,000
- Taku Elementary School
Line Item #202: Purchase of emergency preparedness materials (Cost: $7,500)
Line Item #203: Main Office hallway roof repair (Cost: $10,000)
Line Item #206: Wireless internet hookup (Cost: $27,000)
Total Cost: $44,500 - Tudor Elementary School
Line Item #207: Flushometer replacement (Cost: $20,000)
Line Item #208: Technology, books and supplies (Cost: $20,000)
Total Cost: $40,000 - Rogers Park Elementary School
Line Item #200: Multi-purpose room retrofitting (Cost: $20,000)
Line Item #201: Technology, books and supplies (Cost: $25,000)
Total Cost: $45,000 - Polaris K-12 School
Line Item #198: Smartboards for secondary classrooms (Cost: $24,000)
Line Item #199: Textbooks and science equipment (Cost: $60,000)
Total Cost: $84,000 - West High School
Line Item #194: Library equipment and furniture (Cost: $2,500)
Line Item #195: Technologies and supplies (Cost: $25,000)
Total Cost: $27,500 - Central Middle School
Line Item #192: Technologies, books and supplies (Cost: $10,000)
Total Cost: $10,000 - Airport Heights Elementary School
Line Item #190: School furniture replacement (Cost: $15,000)
Total Cost: $15,000 - Wendler Middle School
Line Item #187: Furniture and computer replacement (Cost: $30,000)
Total Cost: $15,000
- Dimond High School
Line Item #234: Training Course for Teachers New to Advanced Placement Coursework
Total Cost: $15,000 - Bayshore Elementary School
Line Item #232: Printers and video camera for computer lab (Cost: $5000)
Line Item #233: LCD Projectors (Cost: 23,000)
Total Cost: $28,000
- Sand Lake Elementary School
Line Item #227: School materials and equipment for Japanese Immersion Program
Total Cost: $15,000 - Kincaid Elementary School
Line Item #222: New audio system for classrooms (Cost: $27,000)
Line Item #223: New computer and software for music (Cost: $40,000)
Line Item #224: New computers for teachers (Cost: $36,000)
Line Item #225: New media equipment for classrooms (Cost: $5,000)
Line Item #226: Smart boards for classrooms (Cost: $38,000)
Total Cost: $146,000
Again, this is certainly not to make the argument that every dollar of every item on this list is 100% necessary and that a sports park is a frivolous waste of money. What's more, I'm sure that there is more information that is hard to glean from a simple spreadsheet. However, what it does is provide some kind of equal comparison.
In my opinion (this is the opinion part of the article): If I were faced with the tough choice of cutting 1/2 a million dollars worth of "fat" from the budget- I don't think that these are the choices that I would have made. Seriously: Why waste money on things as frivolus as books and equipment, or emergency repairedness or flushing toilets - or a roof for our schools?
In my opinion (this is the opinion part of the article): If I were faced with the tough choice of cutting 1/2 a million dollars worth of "fat" from the budget- I don't think that these are the choices that I would have made. Seriously: Why waste money on things as frivolus as books and equipment, or emergency repairedness or flushing toilets - or a roof for our schools?
Posts
7 comments:
I didn't give the budget vetoes the line-by-line examination that you did, but just reading your post, I don't necessarily see any red flags. If she approved $500K in catered lunches that might raise some eyebrows, but completion of a sports field seems legit, and it's easy to imagine scenarios in which you might reasonably prioritize that over other items. For example, if the kids don't have anything to do and they're out getting into trouble, I'd probably be prepared to go with a sports field even if it meant making sacrifices in other areas. That's just how budgets work. You always have to cut things that you wish you didn't have to cut.
And if you look closely at the budget veto spreadsheet you reference, you'll see reasons associated with each one. For example:
202 Emergency preparedness materials. Vetoed. Reason: duplicate funding
203 Roof repair. Vetoed. Reason: Other funding options available
207 Flushometer replacement. Vetoed. Reason: Other funding options available
On the face of it, the three vetoes (especially 202) you mention at the end seem not only defensible but downright logical?
I'm not claiming that Palin's budgeting decisions are generally responsible--I'm almost entirely unfamiliar with her--but this post seems a bit unfair to her.
Willie Wheeler said...
"but completion of a sports field seems legit, and it's easy to imagine scenarios in which you might reasonably prioritize that over other items. "
A sports field seems like a logical choice over a roof for a school in ALASKA? It seems to me, that in a place that is cold and wet such as Alaska a roof might be VERY important for a school, and that a sports field will be unusable most of the year.
Now just like the writers of this blog I wasn't there to hear the arguments, but where it says other funding options available I would presume (based on the three states I have lived in) that that means either federal funding, local taxes or fundraising by the communities themselves. This will make it appear that in fact like a cut budget for the state, but those costs still have to be covered by the people of the state or by the people of the nation. In effect this would make the people poorer wouldn't it, all for the appearance of a slashed budget and bragging rights.
Plus, if you really look at the spread sheet she gives partial moneys to almost every request for sporting facilities and zero funding to schools, fire departments, and health care facilities.
The budget spreadsheet clearly shows a bias towards firing ranges and against education, municipal services and social services..... self serving for Palin who home schools her children and is a life long member of the NRA.
Unfair to Palin? How unfair is it to the public that we have no real understanding of how she governs? Anything that helps clarify her approach should be welcomed at this point. We need a clearer picture of her ethics, and since nothing but anti-media vitriol is coming from the GOP when points like this are raised, we really have no choice but to explore the records of her past. Sports fields are hardly essential. They're societal fluff, at best, and they come with their own heavy maintenance costs. But which would have more traction during a reelection bid? Routine maintenance of schools or a state-of-the-art sports facility for the children? That's why postings like this are important. It is the GOP's responsibility to be fair to the public, and not the other way around.
Certainly I agree with you dtj that it makes sense to explore the record, and I like the author's approach of moving the conversation in that direction. And indeed I think it's a legitimate concern that there really isn't that much information about the candidate yet. I myself have other concerns as well.
Whether the sports field should be prioritized over other items is hard to judge in a vacuum. I was talking with the blog author last night and I related a case where I could see it being a good thing to fund. (And I alluded to it above.) My friend's younger brother was trying to escape a bad environment so he moved away to another town where it was actually a lot worse for him, because the kids in the community didn't have much to do other than get into trouble. In a case like that I could see somebody saying, "You know, this has been a problem for our community for years. We really need to fund this sports field for the sake of our kids, even if it means we have to make certain sacrifices, such as asking people to look to alternative funding sources for other necessities where such sources seem reasonably likely to pan out."
Am I saying that's what happened here? Not at all. For all I know it could be that the sports park simply looks better on the record than the roof repair. But the post merely insinuates that without giving any reason to believe it's actually true. Actually it's exactly the reverse; the post points to the spreadsheet and neglects to notice (I'm giving the most charible explanation here) that the derided emergency preparedness materials veto has a good reason.
Anyway, I do like the fact that the post attempts to address something substantive here, and agree with dtj that such explorations are absolutely to be welcomed.
Glad to see I'm not the only one asking some questions about Sarah Palin. In fact, I recently blogged about her -- you can check this entry out at my LiveJournal. If we're talking about the same sports complex, one of the things I want to mention is that she used eminent domain to establish this facility. Note that I'm ignoring the budget issue for the moment and focusing on the use of eminent domain.
I grew up in Connecticut, and so the use of eminent domain to seize land from a home owner or a business owner is a sensitive topic for me. There was a famous recent case in New London, CT, which garnered national attention because it got all the way to the Supreme Court. Historically, eminent domain was used to deal with the problem of urban blight, but in the New London case, this was a well kept historical neighborhood.
Because of this precedent, we're seeing mroe and more abuse of eminent domain. What this says about property ownership is troubling... essentially, you don't really own what you think you own, and anything you have can be seized from you if some wealthy interest covets your property. (It's worth noting that the dissenting opinion for the SCOTUS was written by Sandra Day O'Connor and was joined by, among others, Clarence Thomas. There's an alliance you don't see every day! Thomas apparently wrote his own dissent as well.)
I'm not saying the use of eminent domain in this case was necessarily unjustified, but as one other commentator pointed out sarcastically, isn't there plenty of other land to be had? This is Alaska, after all. I'd like to know details about what structures/parcels were condemned, and on what grounds, to make room for this sporting complex.
My blog entry also contains links to a blistering critique written by a Wasilla resident (the town where Palin was mayor) which mentions other facts about this same contentious sport complex, among many other details of Palin's political legacy there. Despite its partisan tone, it's an interesting read, and it contains facts that are tough to dispute, being that they were compiled by someone with direct access and first-hand knowledge of local politics and events.
I am looking at the spread sheet and I noticed that Palin isn't blindly for sports facilities and against other educational costs.
Note #267 -- Anchorage - Service High School -
Repair Bleachers
Cost 125,000
Reason -- Other funding
options
available
Ahh... but that is a school request :) Seriously though - it is not my intent to make the case that Palin is blindly against one and for the other. Truth be told, it sounds like she also might have done some good things for education. What it is really is an examination and a discussion. Let's put it this way: Say that I have $70 and food to feed my family costs $10 per night. I feed my kids for 5 nights and then give $20 to charity. Asking the question, "shouldn't feeding your own children come first?" doesn't imply that you did nothing for your family or criticize the idea of giving to charity - does it?
Post a Comment