The NEA's issue page of their website reads:
"This does not mean the 65% deception has necessarily been put to rest. Versions of the scheme have been introduced in the legislatures in South Carolina, Vermont, and South Dakota and there is no indication that the plan's primary backers are ready to fold up their tent."
Fold up the tent? We're just getting going!
Last year, the organization I founded, First Class Education for Vermont, got 28 legislators to back our non-binding resolution to encourage 65 percent spending for direct instruction. Currently we are pushing for transparency in education spending, and our group remains active.
Check out our newly updated site.
Notice on the NEA site how misleading their rhetoric is. Here's a sample:
"Spending on football programs, for example, would be allowed, but not on librarians, nurses, counselors, or the buses and bus drivers needed to get kids to school in the first place."
Of course spending would be allowed on librarians, nurses, counselors, etc. The 35 percent that would be spent on these people is a large amount of money. And kids would still get "to school in the first place." How dumb do they think their members are? And why do they always pick on football? Why not tennis or golf? Are they stereotyping football players?
Comments