Lower the cost of Government as long as it is not in my back yard, is that how it works Carroll.
We need reform state wide on every level from the Scholl system all the way to the Govs. office.

DD,

The strong regionalization being proposed by Sen. Alves/Rep. Segal isn't a plan to cut the cost of government. It's a plan to shift funds away from smaller communities and into larger ones.

Propose something that actually reduces costs, and then we can talk again.

Andrew - I think your argument is disingenuous because a school district that is economically disadvantaged AND has 73 languages being spoken at home (parents need to be involved say family values advocates) needs much more per pupil expenditures. Obviously, a school district like Barrington doesn't have the same ESL and Special Ed. needs. By the way, regionalization makes sense in so many ways and in so many areas in RI government - not just education.

Matt,

According to the most recent data from RI DOE, even after you take generous special-ed and “Limited English Proficiency” subisides out of the mix, Providence still spends more than the state average per-pupil on general education. Neither big spending on special programs nor big spending on standard educational programs is working for Providence.

The real problem is that urban political machines have no clue how to manage education programs, and expanding the reach of those machines through a regional education authority would be a disaster for education statewide.

I know I’m not going to convince you to support vouchers anytime soon, but why can’t you at least get behind the idea of choice within the public system, where funds can quickly be directed to the schools that have figured out how to make things work, and fewer students will be trapped in bad schools simply because they live at the wrong address? Given the choice of...

• Giving students the freedom to go to a school system that works, or
• Reducing support to school systems that work, thereby forcing more students to go to school systems that don’t,

And one other thing, while you're accusing me of being disingenuous: how do you reconcile the fact that you've just associated ESL learners with higher education costs for lesser results with your non-acceptance of the idea that mass immigration imposes large costs on society? (I'm assuming here, of course, that most ESL learners are recent immigrants, and not fourth-generation Americans who have forgotten English.)

andrew,

most immigrant students in the providence school system - from my experience - are documented (legal) immigrants. however, i admit that assimiliation of immigrants imposes a cost on our society - in fact, a cost that is too low (we should be spending MORE on youth and adult ESL programs!).

HOWEVER...

i join with alan greenspan in standing by the assertion that undocumented people in the USA pay more in taxes than they receive in services (thus, while there is a cost, it is still small in comparison to the money that undocumented workers pay in state and federal taxes, not to mention keeping our SS system flush). it's simple math that I know your side ignores because it takes away your ability to scapegoat immigrants for your 'high taxes.'

>>i join with alan greenspan in standing by the assertion that undocumented people in the USA pay more in taxes than they receive in services (thus, while there is a cost, it is still small in comparison to the money that undocumented workers pay in state and federal taxes, not to mention keeping our SS system flush). it's simple math that I know your side ignores because it takes away your ability to scapegoat immigrants for your 'high taxes.'

That assertion is ridiculous on its face.

Even when illegals work above the table, a janitor (or whatever) doesn't even GROSS what they (and their progeny) consume in taxpayer-financed services: RIteCare / emergency room care, education for their anchor babies, etc.

We're not stupid Matt. Illegals, e.g., in New Bedford, come nowhere near paying the taxes necessary to even "break even" what they cost the taxpayers.

Illegal aliens are a MASSIVE drain on our economy.

So Tom, why did Alan Greenspan say that he believes more immigrants will improve our economy?

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2007/03/alan_greenspan_.html

Kiersten,

In the quote you cite, Greenspan didn't say more immigration would be good for the economy. He said more immigration would be good because it will help depress American wages. (We posted an item on the statement here)

Hey, it's his logic, not mine.

Matt,

We should be spending MORE on youth and adult ESL programs!

If that’s not the plan, then where is the money for “more” going to come from?

Reading down in Kiersten's cited Bloomberg article it jumps out at you bringing us full circle:

>>Greenspan did say that an inadequate education system in the U.S. had exacerbated income inequality.

``By the time they get to high school, they are at the bottom of the international heap,'' he said. ``Our education system takes a big hit'' as responsible for the income gap, he said.<<

So long as our schools rank behind other industrialized nations, the income gap is going to continue to widen and low income earners will continue to be taken advantage of.

Hopefully everyone can agree that education is power and it is our best weapon against inequality and exploitation.