Tag Archives: budget

California Throws Education Under the Bus

Written by: BlueDog89

California Gov. Jerry Brown recently proposed to cut more than $1 billion from higher education. Photo courtesy Associated Press.

Student activists and teachers unions in California are organizing statewide protests in opposition to Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposal to cut $1.4 billion from public colleges and universities.

Protesters at a demonstration at Modesto Junior College. Photo courtesy Turlock Journal.

California’s public education system is racked by threats of spending cuts due to the state’s fiscal crises, which include a deficit that has ballooned to more than $25 billion.

The California State University System is facing possible budget cuts of $500 million. The University of California would also face a $500 million cut under Brown’s budget proposal.

Brown has proposed cutting $400 million from the state’s community colleges, and raising tuition by 38 percent.

Modesto Junior College (MJC) administrators recently informed faculty members that jobs may be cut as the college attempts to shed $8 million from its budget.

MJC President Gaither Loewenstein answered questions about the budget cuts in a Q&A forum with students last week. He confirmed that the entire communications department, including majors in journalism, television and radio, would be cut in his budget reduction proposal.

Modesto Junior College President Gaither Loewensteinaddresses concerns over $8 million budget cut proposal. Photo courtesy Turlock Journal.

Other programs to end are culinary arts, communication graphics, architecture, engineering, industrial technology, dental assisting and all foreign languages, except Spanish and sign language.

The MJC West Campus library would close and be used as a learning resource center. Coach stipends would end, but competitive sports would continue.

Additional faculty and management employees would lose their jobs under Loewenstein’s budget proposal. Those layoffs would be effective June 30.
Reductions in salary or benefits for employees are not included in the proposal, which have yet to be negotiated.

Many students fear losing their favorite instructors, like anthropology professor James Todd. According to anthropology major and campus President of the Anthropology Club Priscilla Peralta, the department will be crippled with the layoff of Professor Todd. “Anthropology is a much needed discipline and should continue to be offered to the fullest extent,” said Peralta.

Loewenstein said that the decision to target specific programs rather than split the cuts across the board was intended to leave the college with fewer strong programs instead of making the entire college mediocre.

Californians need to step up, get involved with their schools, and reach out to school administrators and congressional representatives about this issue.

Ms. Peralta urges those who support her cause to send a personal message to Modesto Junior College President Gaither Loewenstein via email at loewensteing@mjc.edu.

In addition to getting personally involved with the schools in your community, education advocates encourage citizens to express their concerns to Gov. Brown. He may be reached via phone at 916.445.2841 or log on to his website to post a comment http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php.

Read more:

Read more:

Read more:

1 Comment

Filed under Anthropology, California, Civil Protest, Economy, Education, Governors, Students, Teachers, Unions, United States

President Obama Names Ann Fudge to Budget Panel

Posted by: Audiegrl

Ann Fudge

Ann Fudge

President Barack Obama named Ann Fudge, the former chief executive officer of Young & Rubicam Brands, to the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. David Cote, Alice Rivlin, and Andy Stern were also named to the committee, which will be co-chaired by former White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles and former Republican Senate Whip Alan Simpson.

The committee will make recommendations to Congress by Dec. 1 to put the budget in primary balance so that all operations and programs for the federal government are paid for by 2015 and to improve the long-term fiscal outlook, the White House said in a statement. The total federal debt next year is expected to exceed $14 trillion — about $47,000 for every U.S. resident.

Fudge, 58, was a Black Enterprise Women of Power Summit Legacy Award winner in 2008 and was named to the Black Enterprise 50 Most Powerful Black Women in Business list in 2006. As head of Y&R and Young and Rubicam Brands, Fudge managed a marketing powerhouse that included Y&R advertising, Burson-Marsteller public relations, Wunderman direct and database marketing, and Sudler & Hennessey healthcare communications. In previous jobs, she developed a 20-year track record of strengthening household brands such as Maxwell House Coffee, Kool-Aid, and Jell-O. Fudge serves on General Electric’s board of directors, the Harvard Board of Overseers, and as a trustee of the Brookings Institution. She has served on the boards of the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Boys and Girls Clubs of America.

More @

2 Comments

Filed under Economy, News, Pres. Barack Obama

President Obama’s Saturday YouTube Address 01/30/10

white house gov logo
WhiteHouse.govReining in Budget Deficits~~The President pledges to rein the deficit, citing three specific steps to this end. He praises the Senate for restoring the pay-as-you-go law, discusses his proposal for a freeze in discretionary spending, and calls for a bipartisan Fiscal Commission to hammer out further concrete deficit reduction proposals.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

3 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Change, Economics, Economy, Jobs, Law, Money, News, Politics, Pres. Barack Obama, Presidents, Senate, Uncategorized, Video/YouTube, Weekly YouTube Address

The First Lady Announces New Funding for Military Families

First Lady Michelle Obama attends the Joint Armed Forces Officers' Wives' Luncheon at Bolling Air Force Base January 26, 2010

First Lady Michelle Obama announces that the President’s 2011 budget will include a record $8.8 billion for military family support programs in remarks to the Joint Armed Forces Officers’ Wives’ Luncheon.

She discussed new support for military spouses and children to be included in the upcoming budget:

  • Increasing funds for military family support programs
  • Reducing shortages in military child care
  • Increasing funds for youth programs for military children
  • Increasing funds for spousal career development
  • New funding for quality Coast Guard housing

The First Lady called for Americans to support military families and thanked the spouses and children for their service to their communities. “You put your own priorities aside. You take care of one another. You take care of America. And as First Lady, I can’t thank you all enough and I promise you that I will use every ounce of my being to make sure that America always takes care of you.”

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Leave a comment

Filed under Army, Barack Obama, Children, Culture, Economy, First Lady Michelle Obama, Government, Health, Marines, Media and Entertainment, Military, Money, Navy, News, Obama Administration, Presidents, Reserve, Uncategorized, US, Veterans, Video/YouTube, Women in the Military, Women's Issues

Why Progressives Are Batsh*t Crazy to Oppose the Senate Bill

Op-ed by Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight.com

blank
Pick your sub-headline:

a) It’s time to stop being polite and start getting real.
b) Here’s hoping a picture is worth 1,000 words.



Any questions?

OK, I imagine that there will be a few. Here’s how I came up with these numbers.

Senate Bill. These estimates are straightforward — they’re taken directly from the CBO’s report on premiums for people at different income levels. A family of four earning an income of $54,000 would pay $4,000 in premiums, and could expect to incur another $5,000 in out-of-pocket costs. The $4,000 premium represents a substantial discount, because the government is covering 72 percent of the premium — meaning that the gross cost of the premium is $14,286, some $10,286 of which the government pays.

One caution: this reflects the situation before the public option was removed from the bill. But, provided that the subsidy schedule isn’t changed as well, that shouldn’t change these numbers much.

Status Quo. In 2009, the average premium for a family in the individual market was $6,328, according to the insurance lobbying group AHIP. However, this figure paints an optimistic picture for two reasons. Firstly, the average family size in the AHIP dataset is 3.03 people; for a family of four, that number would scale upward to $7,925, by my calculations. Secondly, the CBO’s estimates are based on 2016 figures, not 2009, so to make an apples-to-apples comparison, we have to account for inflation. According to Kaiser, the average cost of health coverage has increased by about 8.7 percent annually over the past decade, and by 8.8 percent for family coverage. Let’s scale that down slightly, assuming 7.5 annual inflation in premiums from 2009 through 2016 inclusive. That would bring the cost of the family’s premium up by a nominal 66 percent, to $13,149. And remember: these are based on estimates of premiums provided by the insurance lobby. I have no particular reason to think that they’re biased, but if they are, it’s probably on the low side.

Not only, however, would this family paying a lot more under the status quo, but they’d be doing so for inferior insurance. According to the CBO, the amount of coverage in the individual market would improve by between 27 and 30 percent under the Senate’s bill. Taking the midpoint of those numbers (28.5 percent), we can infer that there would be about $1,427 in additional cost sharing to this family in the status quo as compared with the Senate bill; this would bring their cost sharing to $6,427 total.

Add the $6,247 to the $13,149 and you get an annual cost of $19,576 — for a family earning $54,000! Obviously, very few such families are going to be able to afford that unless they have a lot of money in the bank. So, some of these families will go without insurance, or they’ll by really crappy insurance, or they’ll pay the premiums but skimp on out-of-pocket costs, which will negatively impact their fiscal and physical health. But if this family were to want to obtain equivalent coverage to that which would be available to them for $9,000 in the Senate bill, it would cost them between $19,000 and $20,000, according to my estimates.

Status Quo with SCHIP. Fortunately, some families in this predicament do receive some relief via the SCHIP program. SCHIP eligibility varies from state to state; a family earning income at 225 percent of the poverty line, as this family does, is eligible for SCHIP in about half of the country.

Premiums are fairly cheap under SCHIP — for a family at 225 percent of poverty, generally on the order of about $60 per month to cover two children. We’ll assume that this will inflate slightly to $75 per month, or $900 per year, by 2016.

The two adults in the household will still have to buy insurance in the individual market, which will cost $7,684 by 2016. That makes the family’s total premium $8,584.

For the adults, we assume that the cost sharing component runs proportional to premiums, and totals $3,756. For the children, this calculation is a little bit more ambiguous. Out-of-pocket costs under SCHIP are capped at 5 percent of family income, which would be $2,700 for this family. But that’s a cap and not an average — we’ll assume that the average is half of the cap, or $1,350. Total cost-sharing, therefore, is $5,106 between the adults and the children.

This means that premiums plus out of pocket costs will equal $13,690 for this family. I estimate the subsidy by subtracting this figure from the cost of unsubsidized insurance in the individual market; the difference is $5,885.

Caveat/Disclaimer. There are, obviously, some simplifying assumptions here, especially with regard to SCHIP. The only thing I can promise you is that I’m “showing my work“. I would actively encourage people to pick apart these numbers and come up with their own, more robust estimates. One thing that should probably be accounted for is that the families in both the status quo and the status quo + SCHIP cases will frequently be able to deduct their health care expenses from their taxable income, especially if they’ve incurred substantial out-of-pocket costs. That means that the difference in net costs is slightly exaggerated by my figures.

blank
Read the rest @

blank
The closing…

Nate SilverI understand that most of the liberal skepticism over the Senate bill is well intentioned. But it has become way, way off the mark. Where do you think the $800 billion goes? It goes to low-income families just like these. Where do you think it comes from? We won’t know for sure until the Senate and House produce their conference bill, but it comes substantially from corporations and high-income earners, plus some efficiency gains.

Because this is primarily a political analysis blog, I think people tend to assume that I’m lost in the political forest and not seeing the policy trees. In fact, the opposite is true. For any “progressive” who is concerned about the inequality of wealth, income and opportunity in America, this bill would be an absolutely monumental achievement. The more compelling critique, rather, is that the bill would fail to significantly “bend the cost curve“. I don’t dismiss that criticism at all, and certainly the insertion of a public option would have helped at the margins. But fundamentally, that is a critique that would traditionally be associated with the conservative side of the debate, as it ultimately goes to mounting deficits in the wake of expanded government entitlements.

And please do pick apart my numbers: I’m sure that you will find some questionable assumptions and possibly some outright errors. But if you found a persuasive, progressive policy rationale against the bill, I’d be stunned.~~Nate Silver

4 Comments

Filed under (Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid, Government, Health, Health Care Reform, Media and Entertainment, Medicine, Nate Silver, Obama Administration, Politics, Pres. Barack Obama, Public Option, Senate, Uncategorized, United States

The Politics Don’t Add Up

ogenic posted by Ogenec
(editors note: Coming Soon from 44-D’s Ogenec: “Health Care: A Diatribe in Three Acts– Act TWO”)


Why health care reform will cost more than Congress and Obama say it will.
By John Dickerson– Slate.com

President Obama has said he will not sign a health care reform bill unless it’s paid for. If it doesn’t lower costs, he will suggest spending cuts to make sure the deficit doesn’t grow. That’s a promise he says he will keep. But what about future presidents and members of Congress?

The question is not exactly a hypothetical: Today’s rush to send money to seniors gives us a pretty good idea of the answer. For the first time since 1975, the Social Security Administration has announced, seniors will not receive an annual cost-of-living adjustment in their Social Security benefits. The move makes good policy sense—the formula used by the SSA shows the cost of living has not increased in the past year. But it’s also politically unpopular. That’s why members of Congress and the president are trying to give seniors more money.

When the Congressional Budget Office determined that the Senate finance committee’s health care legislation would not add to the deficit, reform supporters heralded the news. Further, said the CBO, the bill would meet another important Obama priority: It would start to chip away at long-term health care costs. Budget watchdogs were skeptical, though.

Former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin was even more so. “What they’re saying is: ‘Your fantasies add up. I could say to CBO: ‘Hi, I’d like to make 5 million a year and live in a 125-room mansion. Does it work?’ And CBO says ‘yes,’ but that isn’t going to happen.”

The former policy director for the McCain campaign, now with the Manhattan Institute, wasn’t quibbling with the CBO’s math. He just didn’t think future politicians would keep the promises the bill was holding them to. According to one proposal, for example, if health care savings don’t materialize in the coming years, automatic cuts in health care funding will kick in. Holtz-Eakin, not unreasonably, sees this as unlikely. Budget experts also worry that Congress will not reduce payments to providers as scheduled or follow through with planned Medicare cuts.

Read the full story@:


Former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin appeared today on MSNBC discussing these issues:

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about "msnbc.com Video Player", posted with vodpod

Coming Soon from 44-D’s Ogenec: “Health Care: A Diatribe in Three Acts– Act TWO”
Read Act One Here: Health Care: A Diatribe in Three Acts– Act One


Related Story: Growing Approval Of Health Plan – CBS News Video

3 Comments

Filed under Banking, Capitalism, Democrats, Economics, Economy, Money, Uncategorized