Letter: Budget cuts hurt higher education

With all due respect to state Sen. Conrad Appel, his letter to the editor (Jan. 31) unfortunately reads as an apologia for the more than $625 million in cuts to higher education over the past five years, cuts that have left our state with the lowest overall level of college funding in the South.

Because of these budget cuts, many respected professors and academic leaders have left for universities in other states, and with them have reportedly gone millions of dollars in research grants.

In an effort to offset these budgetary cuts, tuition and fees have escalated. The escalation of costs to students and working families places the dream of a college education at risk.

These cuts have not been surgical. They have not been limited to the elimination of the duplications of programs, or the consequences of low graduation rates. Make no mistake about it, these cuts have affected students.

For at least five years, a cuts-only approach to fiscal policy has produced inadequate funding and mid-year cuts.

Real damage has been done to higher education and the future of our state. Literally hundreds of tax breaks, deductions and rebates have been promoted, passed and continued with little regard for their need or value to Louisiana citizens.

As a result, Louisiana is suffering disastrous consequences. Higher education stands as one of the more prominent victims.

Steve Monaghan, president,

Louisiana Federation of Teachers

Baton Rouge

Comments

1) Comment by InPVille - 06/02/2013

@twinkie1cat: One other point bears mentioning. You say: "The biggest issue with Jindal's cuts is that they are all designed to harm the middle class, working people, and the poor." Then you say: "One problem is that the property taxes here are some of the lowest in the nation. I know more than one one person who pays only $38 per year. Surely, $200 would be more reasonable yet still not backbreaking." In case it hasn't occurred to you. Who do you think pays only $38 a year in property taxes? Those people are the workers/poor! ! ! So you are arguing that in order to help the workers/poor we must take more from their already limited funds. In the rephrase the refrain so often voiced by yourself and others of like mind when any "non-progressive" tax idea is floated , THE TAX WOULD PLACE AN OVERBURDEN ON THOSE NOT IN THE WEALTHY CLASSES ! ! !

2) Comment by InPVille - 05/02/2013

@twinkie1cat: "One problem is that the property taxes here are some of the lowest in the nation. I know more than one one person who pays only $38 per year. Surely, $200 would be more reasonable yet still not backbreaking." -[**]- The Louisiana Homestead Exemption exempts the payment of property taxes on the first $75,000 of the homes fair market value. Apparently the limited circumference of your ambit has given you tunnel vision. I don't live in anything close to a McMansion and my annual property taxes are several time higher than the amount you list. A group of Republicans in the state legislature are trying to remove the protections from the many other budgetary items that leave only Education and Medical care as about the only unprotected outlays. But would you support these changes to the state constitution?

3) Comment by twinkie1cat - 05/02/2013

The biggest issue with Jindal's cuts is that they are all designed to harm the middle class, working people, and the poor. If he wanted to help Louisiana's average people he would make education more accessible, especially higher education and LOWER the cost of getting it. Then the graduates would be able to turn around and get better jobs, make more money and pay more taxes. But he does the opposite. One problem is that the property taxes here are some of the lowest in the nation. I know more than one one person who pays only $38 per year. Surely, $200 would be more reasonable yet still not backbreaking. But Jindal does not want his donors to spend money on anything but him. ................. If Education and Health care are really the only parts of the budget that can be cut under the Louisiana constitution, why has no bill been put up to change that? Why not make the entire budget changeable so that the Executive Branch bears a big part of the costs. The legislators, it would seem should take a pay cut. Surely ther is something that can be done constitutionally to remove the b runt of the budget cuts from the most necessarily funded parts of government. The brain drain is going to continue as long as our dictator refuses to cooperate with the feds on medical care and educate our citizens properly and publicly. Just because he can afford to send his kids to private universities does not mean he should or that everyone else should have miss out on a decent education. I mean he got a constitutional amendment passed to circumvent federal regulations on gun control. Why not do something positive for a change????? IMPEACH JINDAL AND KLECKLEY!

4) Comment by InPVille - 05/02/2013

@SuzanneMS: Most states in the United States have cut spending for Education and Medical Assistance in the past few years. Did all of their legislatures also cut taxes or are we seeing the effects of an economic downturn leading to less income for both individual citizens and government programs?

5) Comment by DMJ - 05/02/2013

People don't need to go to LSU or the UL system.... they can just go to an Ivy League school, like Jindal.

6) Comment by agagent - 05/02/2013

The recent mid-year cuts were primarily to fill the Medicaid deficit. By state law the mid-year cuts must come from higher education, health and hospitals, etc. while the vast majority of the budget is protected from mid-year cuts. Medicaid must be reformed before it takes up the entire budget and the state constitution must be amended to spread budget cuts across the entire budget. Games are being played with revenue estimating. The estimates are too optimistic allowing greater funding for budget items like public schools, while higher education takes the mid-year cuts, along with the rest of the unprotected portion of the budget.

7) Comment by crazycajun - 05/02/2013

To fully understand the logic L'il booby uses in his decision making process look up "caste system" in India. This determines how he views what he considers the different classes of people and how he treats them. It will open ur eyes.

8) Comment by [e-mail] - 05/02/2013

Education is one thing, helping to stuff already overfull pockets is another.

9) Comment by Scrooge - 05/02/2013

Regardless of how one justifies the cuts, Monaghan states that the cuts are damaging higher education. It is correct that no effort has been made to mitigate the cuts and Louisiana will reap what it sows.

10) Comment by arin - 05/02/2013

@ pv, the truth is there but some choose not to see it. Good comment.

11) Comment by SuzanneMS - 05/02/2013

These are not "necessary cuts." These cuts are a direct result of Jindal reducing income tax rates and increasing tax rebates, exemptions and deductions for his wealthy campaign contributors. Yes, the nonsense about protecting every little piece of pork barrel spending in the Constitution has to go as well, but good luck with that. The so-called legislators back constitutional amendments because that means they don't have to make the hard calls to cut something that will directly affect someone in their local constituency or one of their campaign donors.

12) Comment by InPVille - 05/02/2013

As has been variously mentioned and ignored depending on the particular ax being ground by both "The Advocate" and "Letters Writers", Education and Medical Care spending are about the only areas of state spending not protected from cuts by the Louisiana Constitution. Since the constitution also requires balancing the budget, Education and Medical care spending are where the cuts must be made. The Advocate contained an article in the last week about an effort by certain people in the legislator seeking to remove the prohibitions from making cuts in other areas in order to provide some kind of balance. This would seem to me a better course of advocacy than to just complain about state government making necessary cuts in spending in the only places it is possible to legally cut spending. But I'd suspect there will be none of that. Far better to have an issue with which to bludgeon your political opponents than actually do something about the problem.

13) Comment by gary - 05/02/2013

tradewinns, you sound like brother Woody and Gene of the family forum.

14) Comment by tradewinns - 04/02/2013

i'm all for fully funding education. if education needs a dollar, take two dollars from any of the hundreds of welfare programs out there. the poor are too comfortable in their current position to strive to get ahead and they raise their children to utilize the system to the fullest. if they were to lose their comfortable position, they may get off their duff and use the education system to enhance their opportunities in this world.