Carroll Commencement
Fairborn commencement
Badin graduation
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > December > 07
Monday, December 7, 2009
Editorial: Republican state senate changing the subject in budget crisis
The budget crisis in Columbus comes down to this: the Senate’s Republican leadership is trying to get something into the crisis-resolving legislation that has nothing to do with the crisis.
This is fairly odd behavior, particularly given that are other ways to get these items enacted.
And given that the state really does have to get the budget resolved this month or face dramatically new and worse circumstances.
There is some good news: The two political parties are not going in diametrically opposite directions. Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland has proposed suspending the last year of an ongoing, gradual cut in state income taxes. The leadership of the Republican senate is saying it will give him the five Republican votes he needs — if all Democrats stay in line —if he signs off on additional provisions relating to subsequent budgets. In other words, the Republicans are not proposing cuts in this budget.
The Republican add-on generating the most controversy is a plan for reforming the state’s regulations for awarding construction contracts. The state has antiquated rules that prevent it from dealing with one prime contractor. By all accounts, having to deal with “multiple prime” contractors increases costs by millions for major projects. Ohio State President Gordon Gee has been particularly vocal on the subject.
Gov. Strickland acknowledged the problem when he created a bipartisan commission to make recommendations. Those recommendations raised alarms in the legislature’s Black Caucus, the fear being that if smaller contractors are cut out, black-owned firms will suffer most.
But the Senate leadership wants to incorporate contracting reform into the budget. In response, Democrats say the plan hasn’t been through normal legislative processes, including public hearings. That’s a strong argument, because it’s a complex matter involving billions of dollars.
If reform is passed all of a sudden as a package, the public, the contractors and unions have every reason to wonder whether games are being played behind closed doors, whether ideas that couldn’t stand the light of day are being enacted.
Some say the proposal should have had hearings by now. But if the concern is that the legislature is stalling, the solution may be to win a guarantee from the governor and legislative leaders in both houses to take up the matter fully and quickly next year.
If the legislature does not pass the tax-cut suspension this month, it will not be able to apply the suspension to this year. Revenue will be forfeited. That will mess up everything, eliminating the least painful solution to the budget gap.
Also, failure to pass a budget this year could result in dramatic cuts in the schools. That’s partly because the existing budget shortfall results from a court ruling that cuts off money that was slated for the schools (from slot machines at racetracks).
And it’s partly because finding spending cuts elsewhere, on top of recent cuts, would be difficult and painful.
The governor is not playing games with the budget crisis. He has put forth a clean, commensensical solution that has been embraced even by the leading business organizations as the least painful available. The House has embraced it. The Senate needs to do so as well, and then move on, clearing next year for next year’s battles, not this year’s.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Martin Gottlieb, Ohio government, Ohio politics
Editorial: GM has big opportunity for brave job-seeker
WANTED — Automotive executive.
World’s former largest company seeks proven leader for new era.
Must know how to bring change faster than anybody ever — and make it seem even faster.
Must be comfortable with debt. Have patience for politicians. Know enough not to fly company jet to Washington to beg for money.
Must be like that guy that Ford has.
Auto experience not a disqualification.
Are you willing to consider a package below $1 million? In Detroit? Let’s talk.
Good news for all the former auto industry people in Dayton: there’s a job opening at General Motors.
The top guy — the chief executive officer who was appointed during bankruptcy — is gone. Fritz Henderson, a company veteran, got the job when the Obama administration wanted Rick Wagoner out.
Mr. Wagoner was the fellow who used inappropriate transportation to get to Washington. But, more than that, he was associated with the company’s collapse. He wasn’t the image of change the politicians wanted.
Unfortunately, however, his successor looked like a government pick. That may be one reason the GM board decided to make a change.
Other factors have also been pointed to as explanations for his departure. Under him, the company had failed to sell Saturn and other brands it’s eager to unload. And his desire to sell Opel has been criticized by board members.
The public statements from the board about his departure were about the need for faster change. But that was predictable. “Change” is the magic word.
In truth, there had been a lot of change. A Detroit Free Press article on Nov. 29, begins: “At the new General Motors, the worst insult these days is calling somebody ‘old GM.’”
There are, reportedly, fewer meetings, quicker decisions and other changes, including a looser dress code.
What now? There’s been talk that GM wants to go outside the auto industry for a new chief. That’s what Ford did, and Ford is now profitable. And the chairman of the board that will be picking a successor is from outside. (He’s also the interim CEO.)
Initially there was talk of Bob Lutz, the high-profile 77-year-old insider, but he may now be history.
At any rate, a lot of Daytonians with auto-industry experience are both insiders and outsiders, having been outside for a while now. So an application might be worth a shot.
The winner would get quite a job.
GM has actually been making progress. The company is talking about starting early to repay its federal loans.
In November, sales were up 5.6 percent over last year for core brands — Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick and GMC — though not for the company as a whole. Buick was up 15 percent, and Cadillac 10.3 percent. Some new models were particularly popular.
This was all despite prices being at a high for the year.
Meanwhile, of course, there are high hopes for the electric Volt and a new compact. Beyond all that, the new CEO, especially if coming from outside the industry, will be free of the taint of having gone into bankruptcy and accepting the government bailout.
Still, the company did lose $1.2 billion in the quarter after emerging from bankruptcy. And nobody knows what the car market will be like next year.
And there are those unsold divisions. And there’d be those politicians breathing down your neck. And those hard feelings from decades of decline.
Whether to apply is a tough call. Might depend on whether your unemployment has run out.
Permalink | Comments (6) | Post your comment | Categories: Auto industry, Editorials, Martin Gottlieb
Editorial: Protect students from shady schools
As higher education evolves, there’s a place for for-profit colleges — provided they can compete with traditional nonprofit schools on quality.
Right now, quality isn’t a big enough consideration when it comes to handing out federal student aid. That’s a problem.
An Associated Press report last month found that the five schools receiving the biggest chunk of federal aid aimed at poor students all were for-profit colleges. This should cause Congress to rethink the rules of the Pell Grant program.
The AP reported the amount of Pell Grant money going to for-profit colleges is skyrocketing — doubling in the last decade to $4.3 billion and representing about a quarter of all Pell Grant money.
There are a wide range of for-profit colleges. Perhaps the best known is the enormous University of Phoenix, which offers classroom and online instruction all across the country.
But also in this category are smaller career and trade schools. They market themselves aggressively as a route for people to earn their way to better jobs.
For-profit schools, which tailor their instruction to people juggling full-time jobs and family obligations, are a good fit for some students. In fact, some for-profit schools have pioneered new approaches to teaching (especially online) that traditional colleges could learn from.
For-profit schools also argue that they’re needed if this country is serious about achieving President Barack Obama’s goal that everyone get at least some college-level training. Traditional colleges just don’t have enough space if everyone were to enroll at once.
Still, the vast majority of those seeking college-level programs would be better off at a traditional school. At their worst, some for-profits are scams designed to grab cash while providing little of value.
But even compared to the average legitimate for-profit college, a traditional public or private school is usually a better bet.
Locally, for instance, the programs at Sinclair Community College are often better quality and much cheaper than their for-profit competitors.
Something is needed to ensure tax dollars go to programs that make a difference. Unfortunately, the Pell Grant program doesn’t do enough to ensure the money it offers is spent at institutions — traditional or for-profit — with track records of success. Congress might consider following Ohio’s lead by working to strengthen the system for awarding financial aid.
Ohio is in the process of building performance measures into student aid. For students to keep receiving grants, they’ll have to show progress. The more they move toward a degree, the more aid they can receive.
The Pell Grant program also has some performance measures for students. What it needs to do is create incentives for all colleges to focus on student success by rewarding those that can demonstrate they are making a difference on quality measures like course completion and graduation.
It wouldn’t even be a bad idea if the program considered whether a school’s students had manageable debt levels compared to other schools. Some schools allow their students to load up on crushing debt before they finish their degrees.
Spending on Pell Grants was dramatically raised last year with the goal of making college more affordable for needy students. The AP reported the amount paid to for-profits in the first quarter of this year jumped by 67 percent over last year.
At the same time, the median graduation rate for for-profits is just 38 percent. Washington shouldn’t be subsidizing substandard college programs. Adding a few performance measures to the Pell Grants would help focus the money on schools that are in business to seriously benefit students.
Permalink | Comments (5) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Education, Scott Elliott
