RIDER COMMENT: One core tenet of public education is this: “More spending on education provides better results.” It’s intuitive, axiomatic — and dead wrong.

Here’s the summation of a recent study (one of several) verifying this lack of correlation. Indeed, closer inspection often reveals an INVERSE correlation. A second, more detailed study is included below as well.

Obviously correlation does not prove causation, but a LACK of correlation makes any causation claims highly suspect. Most studies that DO conclude there is some causation are produced by and for the public education employees — and often even funded by such groups (primarily labor unions).

———–

http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/study-finds-no-relationship-between-ed-spending-and-results/

For the 34 years since the passage of Prop 13, advocates for higher taxes have complained about inadequate CA property tax revenue. But the one thing ALL such critics have in common is that they NEVER show the actual revenue shortfall. They never provide the figures.

They never compare the property tax revenue collected in 1977 (the year before the big Prop 13 drop when everything was supposedly hunky dory) with the property tax revenue being collected today.

Why? For one of two reasons. And ONLY one.

1. They don’t know the figures. Never checked. Even supposed financial gurus haven’t a clue what the numbers are. They just INTUITIVELY know that the revenues are woefully inadequate. After all, this “massive revenue shortfall” has been endlessly cited by fellow leading California “progressives” for decades, so most liberals mindlessly conclude that it MUST be true.

2. They DO know the figures. But they intentionally omit them, as such figures DESTROY their argument. For it turns out – compared to property tax revenue collected the year BEFORE Prop 13 passed – in the more populous counties (over 85% of the CA population live in… Read More

With the exploding IRS scandal growing daily, it’s hard to keep up. But let me cover one aspect previously revealed, but not looked at in detail. Consider the 55 questions asked of the Richmond Tea Party — questions that doubtless were sent to most of the Tea Party applicants. And remember — as insanely comprehensive and potentially criminally dangerous as these “on penalty of perjury” questions are, they are not the ONLY questions asked. There were other batches of such queries demanded by the IRS. Below is a link to just two IRS questionnaires that were sent to the Richmond group.

The IRS goal was clear — the purpose was todeterTea Party groups from being active (let alone effective) in the 2012 election cycle — especially considering their success in the 2010 elections. For 27 months, apparently the IRS did not approve a singly Tea Party nonprofit application — while often routinely approving left of center groups’ applications.

Only after… Read More

Here’s a crucial paragraph from that “business climate” survey article in Chief Executive magazine that I blogged about earlier — ranking states. It is so important, I’m putting it out as a separate item. http://riderrants.blogspot.com/2013/05/california-ranked-worst-business-state.html

CEOs are well disposed to Texas, and it’s not hard to understand why. Fifty-two Fortune 500 companies now call Texas home.Fifteen Texas companies went public in 2011, making the state the hottest IPO market in the nation. Austin has become one of the fastest growing tech hubs. (The A5 chips in Apple’s iPhones and iPads are made in Austin.) Young programmers and engineers can actually afford to live well in Austin, where the housing cost index is 300 percent lower than in San Francisco.Texas job creation has outpaced the national average, too. Writing inInvestors Business Daily, Wendell Cox commented that, “the number of jobs in Texas has grown by a truly… Read More

SACRAMENTO — Balancing the economic realities of the state budget with political influences surely is a challenging task. Unfortunately, in California it is a task which few administrations have managed in recent state history.

Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown announced Tuesday morning that despite a state budget surplus, his May budget revision included projected lower budget figures for fiscal year 2013-14, which begins on July 1, than for the previous fiscal year. The reasons are one-time revenue surges because of federal tax changes that last only one year; and the retroactive part of the Proposition 30 tax increase for 2012.

The result will be less program spending, but with most of the spending increases focused on schools and Medi-Cal.

“We have climbed out of a hole with a Proposition 30 tax,” Brown said, referring to his 2012 initiative which increased taxes on those with incomes exceeding $250,000; and increased sales taxes on everyone. “This is not the time to break out the Champagne,” said Brown, who still called for caution despite an uptick in the state’s revenues.

“I am pleased that for the first time since I was elected to the… Read More

The pro-tax politicians in the Legislature continue to threaten Prop. 13, homeowners and small businesses.

TODAY at least 7 bills that would directly undercut various provisions of Prop. 13 will be heard in committee. If approved, these bills could cost every property owner thousands of dollars.

There are seven bills pertaining to Proposition 13 that are up in the Senate Governance and Finance Committee. Six of these bills directly undercut various provisions of Proposition 13.

The bills are: SCA 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 11.

THE FOLLOWING BILLS PLACE A BULLSEYE ON PROPOSITION 13 AND TAXPAYERS:

Senate Constitutional Amendment 3(SCA 3), Mark Leno (D—San Francisco): Lowers the threshold for school district per-parcel property taxes from two-thirds to 55%. This is a direct assault on Proposition 13 because it makes it easier to increase property taxes above Proposition 13’s one percent cap.

Senate Constitutional Amendment 4(SCA 4), Carol Liu (D—La Canada)and Senate Constitutional Amendment 8(SCA 8), Ellen… Read More

One week from today in what is predicted to be a low-turnout election, voters will elect a new mayor to lead California’s largest city. Because the mayor manages the 47,000 employees of the City of Los Angeles, at least 47,000 voters employed by that city have a strong interest in who wins. But these workers will wield clout beyond their numbers, because no source of mayoral campaign contributions is anywhere close to those coming from unions representing Los Angeles city employees.

Here is a link to a graphic from the Los Angeles Times “Campaign contributions by special interest,” showing reported direct and independent expenditures on behalf of the two major candidates, Eric Garcetti and Wendy Gruel. Over $6.0 million has been spent by labor unions, more than twice as much as the next four largest categories of contributors. And that’s only partly why these unions are buying this election.

Using data from the LA Times graphic, we’ve come up with our own table, one that shows what percent of each contribution – by category – went to each candidate.… Read More

Yesterday the State Senate and State Assembly both passed, on party-line voters, well over thirty empty bills each — placeholders in advance of an eventual budget deal. These bills get amended (they would be “gut and amends but there is no there-there to gut) to include an 11th hour budget and trailer bills. This will be a budget that doesn’t get public scrutiny, and likely gets jammed through the legislature before it’s 120 members all get a chance to thoroughly understand what is in the budget.

The most obvious question: Since the budget only requires a majority vote, and the same political party controls the legislature and the Governor’s office — what is… Read More