Posted on 01/03/2008 9:36:25 PM PST by NormsRevenge
Setting the stage for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's "Year of Education," a panel he appointed has proposed a sweeping set of reforms that will help define the debate, including performance-based pay for teachers, universal preschool and full-day kindergarten.
A blueprint of the recommendations obtained by the Mercury News also calls for:
• Billions more to be spent each year to educate English learners and other low-income students who are lagging behind more affluent peers.
• A sophisticated new data system to better track students' successes and failures.
• A school "inspection system" similar to those used in New York City and several European countries. To increase the accountability of schools, the results of the inspections would immediately be made available to the public.
Critics - and even supporters of the ideas - immediately pointed to the obvious obstacle in ushering in a major change to how California educates its children: a state budget crisis and a budget deficit now looming at $14 billion.
The proposals from the Governor's Committee on Education Excellence would cost an estimated $6.1 billion annually, but the panel maintains they could be paid for with anticipated school-funding increases in the coming years.
Based on recent projections, the report said, the state's education budget will grow by $6 to $7 billion in the next six years under Proposition 98, the state's minimum-funding guarantee for schools.
The governor has not yet signed off on the 40-page report, which he is expected to release in two weeks. Schwarzenegger will preview the recommendations during his annual state-of-the-state address on Tuesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Arnold.. Tax when you wake up, tax when you go to the bathroom, tax, tax, tax, tax.
Is there any way to put his campaign on a 24/7 repeat that follows him around everywhere?
Ack. I think Arnie’s missing the point of starving it and drowning it in a bathtub.
The proposals from the Governor’s Committee on Education Excellence would cost an estimated $6.1 billion annually, but the panel maintains they could be paid for with anticipated school-funding increases in the coming years.
Based on recent projections, the report said, the state’s education budget will grow by $6 to $7 billion in the next six years under Proposition 98, the state’s minimum-funding guarantee for schools.
LOL! This is too damn funny not to laugh at.
Where will the money come from for the minimun funding guarentee?
Who is getting thrown under the bus?
This looks like blood in the halls carnage in the State Assembly chambers without massive tax hikes.
More money, more taxes, more nanny statism. I hope the former Freeper supporters of aRINOld have awakened to their mistake and are no longer supporting some new RINO. But something tells me this hope is misplaced.
bump
Partly yes. It was a mistake for me to support Arnold.
But partly no. He campaigned on a platform that was 170 degrees opposite of this socialist $hit. He ran against a government that did nothing but “tax, tax, tax,” yet that is what he is fostering himself.
If I made a mistake, it was believing his promises — and the endorsements of such groups as the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, among many others.
.
I live and work in California and oddly enough, I actually proposed this idea to some very liberal coworkers of mine. They thought it was a brilliant idea.
This state is in serious trouble.
.
comment:
Arnuld billions more for the debt but not one damn dollar for tribute to cut the budget.
Well let that be a lesson to you. They sell their endorsement to the highest bidder, ideology means nothing. It's been that way for years.
We were right to support the true conservative against the hollywood hopeful back then, and we are right to do so now.
Thompson supporters are asking Hunterites to care about polls when they obviously don’t care that much about polls, and they’re asking Hucksterites to care about conservatism when it’s obvious that isn’t high on the Huck followers’ radar. Thompson is asking for both camps to care about the things they don’t care about.
Thompson’s promise was that by this time in the race he’d be kicking tootyfruityrudy to the curb, but instead he’s whining about Huckabee and barely beats McCain in Iowa. The bible says something about “to whom much is given, much is required” and the parable of the talents shows that bigger results are expected from those to whom more is given. Thompson was given name recognition and money and the result is dropping polls and losing 30 points at Intrade. Time to give those resources to someone who has been much more frugal with what’s been given to him: Hunter.
I will vote for Thompson if he gets the nomination, but Hunter would make a better president. That’s what primaries are supposed to be about.
I agree that Arnold was a mistake, but Arnold: McClintock is NOT Thompson: Hunter. Big difference. Thompson has already proven he is a conservative, unlike previously-untried Arnold. Your attempt to make them equivalent because of “Hollywood” is simply moronic, with all due respect.
But I’m glad you will support Thompson if he gets the nomination — as I will support Hunter if he does.
Well enough said, except for the moronic part...
Did Thompson meet or beat expectations tonight in Iowa?
Thompson: “I Need to Come in Second”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1946065/posts
Basically, it’s a wide open race, with the lead changing on a weekly basis. Might as well support the truest conservative, Hunter.
I do not know Duncan Hunter’s strategy. However, he may yet surprise us even before New Hampshire. Because he has campaigned in Wyoming, which has a race before New Hampshire, and no one else is campaigning there.
Wyoming to Hold Overlooked GOP Caucus Before New Hampshire
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1947693/posts
Then there’s New Hampshire. Hunter’s already there while everyone else wraps up in Iowa.
What is moronic, again with all due respect, is to equate Thompson with Schwarzenegger based on the fact they both were actors.
So was Reagan, ass.
Added to my ignore list.
No, I equated them because of hollywood values, harking back to what you said was your mistake — trusting them at their word. Mostly over 2 things, immigration and HLA, but whatever. Good luck with your candidate. I guess I got the answer to my question by the tone of your response.
And disbelieving the warnings of those more familiar with him.
The state will take your kid at 2, and return it, fully edumucated, at 25.
Same.
This is why you carry very little weight with me: You guessed correctly, and I did not, but in retrospect, given then array of conservatives aligned behind Arnold, I would have to make the same decision again without benefit of seeing the last four years.
You’re very much on top of legislative and gubernatorial matters in California, but your diplomatic and debating skills are terrible.
You were right about Arnold’s path, but it was a correct guess, not a decision based on some superior IQ, some greater wisdom. And even if it was (based on greater wisdom), you are unwise to rub the fact in the faces of conservatives who were duped. It simply makes them less willing to listen to you in the future. “You stupid others! I told you that you should have hewed to my outlying 2003 prediction!” Even if that is correct, it isn’t the way to get people to listen to you next time.
With that, you’re returned to my ignore list. Please show a little dignity by not responding, for once. Ta ta, oh superior one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.