PDA

View Full Version : Anti-Ron Paul letter to the editor in response to my article




madcat033
11-30-2007, 11:26 AM
Someone has written an anti-Ron Paul letter to the editor in response to my article. You can read his letter here:

http://www.dailybruin.com/news/2007/nov/30/letters-editor/


Ron Paul would hurt education

Interestingly, what was missing from Stephen Campbell’s “Ron Paul would bring prosperity back to America” (Viewpoint, Nov. 28) was Paul’s stance on education. Perhaps that is because it is nothing; that is, he would have zero taxpayer resources go toward education.

The irony is that he and all the writers and many readers of the Daily Bruin attend or have attended a top-rated public school.

If UCLA’s public funds were diverted, UCLA students would suffer tuition increases as well as severe cutbacks in order for the university to remain a top-rated institution.

So, while Ron Paul may bring prosperity to some in America, that set does not include UCLA students.

Josh Hernandez

Graduate student, mathematics

Should I respond with my own letter to the editor? On the one hand, he got in the friday paper which gets the least circulation so I could just let it die. What do you think?

kylejack
11-30-2007, 11:28 AM
Track him down and throw an Ayn Rand book at him, preferably a heavy one like Atlas Shrugged.

MrCoffee
11-30-2007, 11:29 AM
I think all you have to do is remind people of no child left behind...

Federal funding for education comes with strings attached. If the schools need more money, state govts. can increase their taxes to make up the difference.

seapilot
11-30-2007, 11:38 AM
Ask them why should some poor sap that makes minimum wage(taxpayer) that cant afford to pay for a college education support those that do(UCLA) with federal funds?

ConstitutionGal
11-30-2007, 11:42 AM
Personally, I would remind him that there was NO federal department of education until Jimmy Carter created it in exchange for the backing of the NEA during his campaign. Also, one of the platforms that Reagan ran on was the abolition of that very same department because that was still in the Republican Party's platform when he ran for Pres. It is a VERY new department and our schools have done nothing but go downhill since it was created. Also, the state school systems receive something like 10% of their funding through the Fed. Dept. Of Ed. and, yet, the VAST majority of the curriculum is dictated to the states by the fed if they take the funding. As one of our local TV anchors is wont to remark, "THAT'S MESSED UP".

margomaps
11-30-2007, 11:47 AM
The responder apparently believes that education would fall apart without federal funding? Dr. Paul proposes that the federal government get out of the business of collecting tax money from the states, then doling it back out as it sees fits. Therefore if California wanted to keep funding UCLA at the same level the federal government currently does, then California is free to spend its taxpayer's money that way.

jenninlouisiana
11-30-2007, 11:49 AM
I'd let it go. I mean in Louisiana the public schools are so bad, no one would care if the Dept. of education was abolished. Katrina practically did that anyway here and the state took over all the messed up schools.

It's a state issue.

I dont' think republicans care about the dept. of education... probably only liberal democrats do.

madcat033
11-30-2007, 11:49 AM
Can someone help me find some info? This guy is lying through his teeth.

"If UCLA’s public funds were diverted, UCLA students would suffer tuition increases as well as severe cutbacks in order for the university to remain a top-rated institution."

I'm pretty sure UCLA doesn't get federal funding. All of its public funding comes from the state. Can anyone help me find something that lists all the funds the university of california gets? I don't think they get federal money.

jenninlouisiana
11-30-2007, 11:50 AM
In other words, dude's letter might actually get Ron Paul a few more supporters.

kylejack
11-30-2007, 11:51 AM
Can someone help me find some info? This guy is lying through his teeth.

"If UCLA’s public funds were diverted, UCLA students would suffer tuition increases as well as severe cutbacks in order for the university to remain a top-rated institution."

I'm pretty sure UCLA doesn't get federal funding. All of its public funding comes from the state. Can anyone help me find something that lists all the funds the university of california gets? I don't think they get federal money.

I doubt that's true. Most public universities get some federal funding. Even if they don't, there's federal student loans that are a factor.

Mark Rushmore
11-30-2007, 11:55 AM
Someone has written an anti-Ron Paul letter to the editor in response to my article. You can read his letter here:

http://www.dailybruin.com/news/2007/nov/30/letters-editor/


Ron Paul would hurt education

Interestingly, what was missing from Stephen Campbell’s “Ron Paul would bring prosperity back to America” (Viewpoint, Nov. 28) was Paul’s stance on education. Perhaps that is because it is nothing; that is, he would have zero taxpayer resources go toward education.

The irony is that he and all the writers and many readers of the Daily Bruin attend or have attended a top-rated public school.

If UCLA’s public funds were diverted, UCLA students would suffer tuition increases as well as severe cutbacks in order for the university to remain a top-rated institution.

So, while Ron Paul may bring prosperity to some in America, that set does not include UCLA students.

Josh Hernandez

Graduate student, mathematics

Should I respond with my own letter to the editor? On the one hand, he got in the friday paper which gets the least circulation so I could just let it die. What do you think?

The problem is as follows:

1) Schools receive roughly 7% of funding federally.
2) That money does not appear out of thin air, the money is brought into the Federal government from people in the various states through taxes.
3) That money is processed through an enormously wasteful and bloated bureaucracy before it reaches the schools. I don't have any facts but you have to figure of the money that goes into the Fed. Dept. of Education - after paying for buildings, salaries, office supplies, this and that: *Maybe* .80 cents on the dollar goes back out to schools?
4) If you cut the Dept. of Ed. AND CUT THE TAXES THAT FUND IT, then local areas could simply raise their own taxes by an equivalent amount.
5) Local areas ALREADY have Departments of Education - so this increase in revenues will not need to spawn significant new overhead.
6) Voila - rather than .80 cents on the dollar, now you can spend the full dollar on education.
7) Resultingly, whatever dollar amount that 7% was, has now increased by 25%!

So, by cutting the Department of Education AND BY CUTTING THE TAXES THAT FUND IT - schools could realize an INCREASE IN FUNDING.

Not to mention what they'd save on not having to comply with Federal regs.

runderwo
11-30-2007, 12:30 PM
Track him down and throw an Ayn Rand book at him, preferably a heavy one like Atlas Shrugged.

That is precisely the WRONG approach to reach the mainstream. It's not about ideology, it's about results.

lasenorita
11-30-2007, 12:31 PM
UCLA's Annual Financial Reports are available online (http://www.accounting.ucla.edu/06annual/default.asp).


Grants and Contracts revenue from federal, state, private and local sources increased by just under $17 million during 2006 to $810 million. Federal grant and contract revenue, including facilities and administration cost recovery of $133 million, direct expenditures of $460.3 million and receipts in excess of expenditures of $8.2 million, grew by $15.2 million to $601.5 million. This revenue represents support from a variety of agencies: the Department of Health and Human Services, $405 million; the National Science Foundation, $61 million; the Department of Education, $42 million; the Department of Veterans Affairs, $17 million; the Department of Energy, $19 million; and other federal agencies, $58 million. Other changes in contracts and grants are as follows: State contracts decreased from $48.4 million in 2005 to $41.5 million in 2006, private contract and grant funds increased by $4.5 million to $134.2 million, and local contracts and grants increased by $4.1 million to $32.7 million.


For insight into Ron Paul's ideas and stances on Education, visit RonPaulLibrary.org (ttp://ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=13)