SUNDAY, JUNE 6, 2010 GEORGE F. WILL
The teacher bailout J
ay Gould, a 19th-century rail- road tycoon and unrepentant rapscallion, said he was a Demo- crat when in Democratic dis-
tricts and a Republican when in Re- publican districts but that he was always for the Erie Railroad. Gould, emblematic of Gilded Age rapa- ciousness, was called a robber bar- on. What should we call people whose defining constancy is that they are always for unionized public employees? Call them Democrats. This week, when Congress re- turns from its Memorial Day recess, many Democrats, having gone an eternity — more than a week — without spending billions of their constituents’ money, will try to make up for lost time by sending another $23 billion to states to prevent teachers from being laid off. The alternative to this “desper- ately” needed bailout, says Educa- tion Secretary Arne Duncan, is “ca- tastrophe.” Amazing. Just 16 months ago, in the stimulus legisla- tion, Congress shoveled about $100 billion to education, including $48 billion in direct aid to states. Ac- cording to a University of Washing- ton study, this saved more than 342,000 teaching and school staff positions — about 5.5 percent of all the positions in America’s 15,000 school systems. The federal component of educa- tion spending on kindergarten through 12th grade, the quintessen- tial state and local responsibility, has doubled since 2000, to 15 per- cent. Now the supposed emergency, and states’ dependency, may be be- coming routine and perpetual. Duncan says that without the $23 billion, 100,000 to 300,000 public school teachers and staff will lose their jobs. But Neal McCluskey of the Cato Institute says 300,000 would mean a cut of just 4.8 percent of the teachers and staff nation- wide; 100,000 would mean cuts of 1.6 percent.
Although the public education
lobby’s cry of “Parsimony!” is not much of an argument, it is persua- sive to Democrats comfortable in a relationship of co-dependency with teachers unions. But before Con- gress is stampeded into spending yet more (borrowed) billions, it should read “The Phony Funding Crisis” in the journal Education Next by James W. Guthrie, a profes- sor at Southern Methodist Univer- sity, and Arthur Peng, a research as- sociate. They say: “For the past hundred years, with
rare and short exceptions and after controlling for inflation, public schools have had both more money and more employees per student in each succeeding year.” Indeed, pub- lic schools have been so insulated
DAVID S. BRODER
Mexico, which consumes an in- ordinate portion of time and atten- tion in the media, a struggle of po- tentially greater consequence for most American families is taking place with far less publicity. I am referring to the scenarios being enacted in legislatures across the land as the final strokes are be- ing applied to state budgets and the fate of thousands of teachers and pupils is being decided. As noted here more than once, the arguments over taxes and bor- rowing that have become louder and more pointed in Washington are nothing compared with the fis- cal mayhem in capitals from Sacra- mento to Boston. State economies have barely begun to recover from the wreckage of the Great Reces- sion. And since taxes are mostly col- lected retroactively, after individu- al incomes are earned and spent, it will be well into 2011 or more likely 2012 before state and local budgets can be restored to their pre-reces- sion levels — when more people are working. Meanwhile, state after state is wrestling with the dilemma posed by their schools, the largest single item in most of their budgets. They were given a year’s grace
when President Obama dedicated a large slice of the 2009 fiscal rescue package of $787 billion to staving off the cuts that otherwise would have taken place in school budgets for this year. That saved an estimated 300,000 or more teaching slots. But there is currently no second-year funding coming from Washington for an- other rescue mission. Liberal Dem- ocrats, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, are trying to assemble such a package, but they have encoun- tered resistance not only from Re- publicans but from moderate and conservative Democrats, well aware that the voters are becoming more and more worried about the deficits and debts this nation is in- curring.
Of all the dilemmas Obama faces,
this may be the cruelest. The argu- ments on each side — for averting
School reform at risk W
hile the nation remains preoccupied by the drama of the oil leak in the Gulf of
KLMNO
R
A19
from economic downturns that “there have been 11 periods during which GDP declined but mean total real per-pupil revenues still in- creased.” Primary and secondary educa- tion is given privileged status in most state constitutions, some of which declare it the “paramount duty” of the legislature. Between 2001 and 2007, in 12 states the num- ber of teachers rose while the num- ber of students fell. In another six states, teachers were hired much faster than enrollment increased: In Virginia, enrollment grew 5 per- cent, the number of teachers 21 per- cent. In Florida, the numbers were 6 percent and 20 percent; in North Carolina, 9 percent and 22 percent. In New York state between 2000 and 2009, public schools added 15,000 teachers while enrollment was declining by 121,000 pupils. By 2008, New York’s pupil-teacher ratio (13:1) was eighth lowest among the states, and its per-pupil spending ($16,000) was the nation’s highest.
While the private sector has shed 8.5 million jobs — 7.4 percent of workers — during the recession, lo- cal governments have lost only 141,000, less than 1 percent. Duncan says the $23 billion is for an “emer- gency.” But, then, what isn’t an emergency nowadays? The Senate just passed a $60 billion “emergen- cy” supplemental appropriation for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are “emergencies” as Washington understands that term: They are regularly recurring surprises. Watch for an attempt to attach the $23 billion for teachers to the war- funding bill. We are witnessing a familiar gov- ernment dance, the Prosperity-to- Hysteria Two-Step: When revenue grows, governments put in place permanent spending streams; when revenue falls, governments exclaim that any retrenchment, even back to spending levels of a few years ago, is a “catastrophe.” The National Education Associa- tion, a net subtraction from the na- tional mind, has a television ad fea- turing children dressed in suits and ties: Kid 1: Maybe Congress would lis- ten to us . . . Kid 2: If I was a Wall Street bank-
er . . . Kid 3: Or a car company CEO .... The largest teachers union gets an F for grammar — the correct sub- junctive mood would be “If I were a Wall Street banker” — but it under- stands the logic of public life in the bailout era: If anyone gets to the trough, everyone is entitled to get there.
georgewill@washpost.com
South Africa’s model for moderation
By Jim Hoagland
From the barbaric practices of apartheid to the heroism and wisdom of Nelson Man- dela, they seem capable of anything, or per- haps of everything. I confess to having been poleaxed anew by
S ASSOCIATED PRESS Slain al-Qaeda leader Mustafa Abu al-Yazid, in an image made from an undated video.
How al-Qaeda will miss its moneyman
As a result, al-Qaeda is in its weakest By Stuart A. Levey L
ast month, al-Qaeda was dealt a major blow. In losing Mustafa Abu al-Yazid — also known as Sheik
Saeed al-Masri — the terrorist organiza- tion was deprived of one of its founding members and also its third-highest offi- cial. An early confidante of Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahi- ri, Yazid has essentially served as al- Qaeda’s “chief financial officer,” coordi- nating the group’s fundraising and over- seeing the distribution of money essen- tial to its survival. While Yazid’s death deprives al-Qaeda of a uniquely valuable commander, the ideology that under- pins terrorism continues to attract ad- herents, and we must redouble our ef- forts to prevent the emergence of the next generation of Yazid’s replacements. More than anyone else, Yazid pos- sessed links to the deep-pocketed donors in the Arabian Peninsula and beyond who have historically formed the back- bone of al-Qaeda’s financial support net- work. Wealthy donors gave their money and, more important, placed their trust in Yazid, which makes him exceedingly difficult to replace. With Yazid gone, confidence that donations to al-Qaeda will reach their intended destination will continue to erode. Over the past several years, the United
teacher layoffs and for avoiding even more ruinous debt — are en- tirely convincing. But they collide. In an ideal world, the president and his party would respond by passing a budget resolution provid- ing an immediate rescue package for the states and committing to longer-range economies and rev- enue adjustments that would as- sure bond markets and financial circles that, with recovery, deficits will soon start to shrink. But as they talked among them- selves before the Memorial Day re- cess, the Democrats could not mus- ter the will, or the courage, even to attempt to pass a budget resolu- tion. Instead, they prefer to leave the hard trade-offs to the commis- sion on deficit reduction that Oba- ma has appointed, which will not report its recommendations until after Election Day. The irony of ironies is that while these thousands of teachers are left twisting in the wind, the states, in a rare act of courage, have committed to each other to stiffen their re- quirements in English and math — the most heartening step in educa- tion reform in many years. This bipartisan movement, en-
couraged by the administration but not led or forced by it, has won vol- untary backing from the vast ma- jority of states. That is a powerful statement from grass-roots Amer- ica about the willingness to im- prove the education of our children so they can measure up to interna- tional competition.
But we cannot commit to raising standards in one breath and turn around and issue layoff notices to thousands of teachers in the next. That would be as unconscionable as vowing to rid Afghanistan of the Taliban while simultaneously pull- ing out NATO troops. As the days before the midterm
reckoning dwindle, the inevitable paring of the Obama agenda will proceed at a faster pace. He will not be able to satisfy all the demands cascading on him. But when he looks at his young daughters, it should be clear to him that saving the schools is one promise he must keep.
davidbroder@washpost.com
States and allied governments have made it a top priority to target financial facilitators such as Yazid, thereby dis- rupting al-Qaeda’s access to money. When experienced financial facilitators are arrested or killed, al-Qaeda is forced to turn over their duties to increasingly junior and untested members. These low-ranking members often do not know and are not trusted by potential donors. They also lack a deep under- standing of the most effective ways to move money. Actions that have significantly dis- rupted the activities of key terrorist fi- nanciers and facilitators have been the product of the hard work of devoted but unheralded people who risk their own lives to protect our safety and well- being. In addition to these efforts, we continue to target those who provide fi- nancial and other material support to al- Qaeda for designation and asset freez- ing. Financial institutions all over the world use our list of designated parties to protect themselves from engaging in transactions that involve al-Qaeda or its supporters. The U.N. sanctions program targeting al-Qaeda and its affiliated groups further ensures that those who support these organizations do not have access to the international financial sys- tem and are constrained from travel. There is also ever-improving coopera- tion between the United States and our allies in the Middle East and South Asia to disrupt facilitation networks.
financial position in years. While the group undoubtedly maintains the capa- bility to carry out attacks, its financial woes matter a great deal. Its lack of funds is inhibiting its ability to recruit and train new cadres, purchase arms, support operatives and provide benefits for the families of terrorists. In the months before his death, Yazid himself said that the organization urgently need- ed money and that some who wanted to sacrifice themselves fighting against U.S. troops in Afghanistan were prevented from doing so because of this. Al-Qaeda is in such dire financial straits that oper- atives are being required to pay for their own room and board, training, and weapons. All of that is a real success. But there is a risk that the advantage that comes from these disruptions will be only tacti- cal or temporary. As long as there is a sig- nificant number of people who wish to give money to groups such as al-Qaeda, a more difficult strategic battle remains. It is therefore critical to go beyond ef-
forts to incapacitate individual finan- ciers, facilitators and terrorists to focus on the long-term objective of deterring and dissuading potential donors from supporting terrorism. Attaining this ob- jective means holding terrorists and their supporters publicly accountable by imposing sanctions or pursuing pros- ecutions to send a strong message to those who might be tempted to support terrorists financially. The United States and its allies must continue to work to counter the violent extremist ideologies that are the foundation of terrorism. We must also support the efforts some coun- tries have undertaken to reintegrate for- mer terrorists into society by persuading them to abandon those ideologies. Even more important, however, is
preventing people from embracing vio- lent extremism in the first place. Among other things, we must focus on educa- tional reform in key locations to ensure that intolerance has no place in curric- ula and textbooks. There is still much to be done in this area, but unless the next generation of children is taught to reject violent extremism, we will forever be faced with the challenge of disrupting the next group of terrorist facilitators and supporters.
Because of the role he played in al-
Qaeda, Yazid’s demise is an important marker for all those engaged in the struggle against terrorism and especially for those focused on terrorist financing. For his death to have a lasting impact, however, it must become a part of a broader campaign to deter or otherwise dissuade those who would follow in his footsteps. Our work toward this end continues.
The writer is Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence.
POST PARTISAN
Excerpts from The Post’s opinion blog, updated daily at
washingtonpost.com/postpartisan
JO-ANN ARMAO
Pay attention to murders of women
When Natalee Holloway went missing five years ago, quite a lot was made of all the at- tention focused on her mysterious disap- pearance. The suggestion was that the only reason the media, and, hence, the public, were so interested was because Holloway was pretty, blond and American. I confess it is a thought that crossed my cynical mind. But last week’s news about the murder of an- other young woman is a horrific wake-up call that, in fact, there may not have been enough attention, after all. Five years to the day that Holloway dis- appeared while vacationing in Aruba, a 21- year-old Peruvian woman was found stabbed to death in the Lima hotel room of the man last seen with Holloway. Joran Van der Sloot, 22, has been charged in the death of Stephany Flores. Hours after his arrest, law enforcement authorities in Alabama an- nounced extortion and fraud charges against him, alleging he demanded payment
in exchange for revealing information about the death of the 18-year-old Holloway and the location of her body. Sloot must be pre- sumed innocent until the charges are prov- en, but his behavior — refusing to cooperate and changing his story about Holloway — is as appalling as was the ineptitude of Aruban authorities in investigating the case, as well as the prurient tone of much of the news coverage. Holloway’s mother, Beth Twitty, is said to
be “overwhelmed” at the news of Flores’s death. To be sure, she must be thinking “if only” — maybe if Aruban police weren’t so slow off the mark, if more people had cared or if even more attention had been paid. Too often, violence against women is, if not con- doned, accepted. I still recall — with shame — the days when as an editor I would con- sign the murder of a woman to a few short paragraphs deep inside the paper because it was “just a domestic.” Never mind that if you tally up all the women who have been vic- tims of domestic abuse, you would have a near epidemic. Sadly, it is too late for Holloway and Flores, but that shows why it is never wrong to make a big deal out of every instance in which a woman is brutalized.
a recent appearance before a group of Sil- icon Valley entrepreneurs by F.W. de Klerk, South Africa’s last white president and the man who freed Mandela from prison in 1990 to begin the march to majority rule. In elo- quent, passionate terms, de Klerk sought to part these successful investors from some of their cash to help the nonprofit organization he now leads in fighting “the suffering and poverty” of Africans across the continent. I almost expected to feel the twirling in their graves of de Klerk’s Afrikaner ances- tors, who cursed the finding of gold on their land in 1867 because it would corrupt and endanger their nation and who imposed apartheid on South Africa in 1948. Their po- litical heir had not only dismantled their ar- tifice of prejudice but taken pride in turning power over to Mandela in 1994. Since then, de Klerk has faded into the po- litical background in his native land. When South Africa becomes the center of interna- tional attention again on June 11 — this time by hosting soccer’s World Cup, the globe’s most watched sporting event — the tributes will flow predominantly to Mandela, and de- servedly so. Mandela is the most impressive of the scores of national leaders I have met and interviewed over the years and should be so honored.
But this is also a good moment to recall de
Klerk’s large contributions to South Africa’s relative success and stability — especially since they may offer important insights for contemporary American interests in nu- clear nonproliferation, international sanc- tions and political polarization. In several conversations and a speech ear- lier the same day at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, de Klerk, now a cheerful and active 74, talked in detail about what prompted him to free Mandela, destroy a nuclear arsenal of “six and one-half bombs” and establish his Global Leadership Foun- dation, which “provides confidential, dis- creet advice” to governments in Africa and elsewhere that face seemingly intractable economic or political conflicts. De Klerk will not discuss which countries
have asked for assistance from the group, which includes other former statesmen such as Michel Rocard of France and Britain’s Chris Patten. But the presidents of Colombia and East Timor have publicly thanked the organization for helping them manage diffi- cult transitions smaller than but similar to South Africa’s transformation. A series of unexpected events “opened a window, through which we jumped,” de Klerk says of the set of interconnected, rapid decisions South Africa’s government began to make in the mid-1980s. Looming surpris- ingly large in those events was a 1988 U.S.- brokered agreement that led to the with- drawal of Cuban and Soviet forces from Angola and the eventual independence of Namibia. “This reassured the South African govern- ment that it could secure its interests through negotiations,” something no previ- ous government had believed, de Klerk con- tinued. The fall of the Berlin Wall a year later and the collapse of the Soviet Union re- moved deeply held fears of a foreign in- vasion supported by Moscow and of the in- fluence of the South African Communist Party over Mandela’s African National Con- gress.
De Klerk minimized the effect of trade
embargoes and most other sanctions on his decisions. “We had enough oil stored in empty mines to last us four years of total em- bargo,” he told me, suggesting that South Af- rica had no trouble finding countries that broke the embargo. “We even exported oil. . . . What did concern us were financial sanc- tions and threats to impound our airliners.” He also conceded that the prospect of ma-
jority rule helped influence his 1989 order to dismantle South Africa’s nuclear arsenal, which was halted while work was underway on a seventh primitive weapon. “But I was always opposed to developing these ‘dirty bombs.’ Who would you use them against?” De Klerk did not elaborate, but the implo- sion of the Soviet Union ended any possibil- ity of using the bombs to blackmail the West into intervening to halt an invasion, as South African military planners originally intended.
But the driving forces for change were in- ternal and were accelerated in 1986 when Afrikaner hardliners broke away into a new party rather than accept modest conces- sions to the black majority that de Klerk’s National Party was considering. In the last all-white election in 1987, he developed an action program that would eventually lead to the cataclysmic changes represented by Mandela’s release and the simultaneous dis- mantling of apartheid and the nuclear ar- senal. “We were liberated to become a re- form party when the right became the ultra right,” de Klerk said. The differences and distances between
the United States and South Africa are enor- mous. But I could not help but hear an echo of what could happen here as the Tea Party and other ideologues seek to pull main- stream Republicans to the far right. F.W. de Klerk’s experience suggests that such swings open the space for enlightened moderation to spring to life and ultimately prevail.
The writer is a contributing editor to The Post. He was the Annenberg Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution in April and May.
outh Africa’s remarkable, resilient citi- zens have never failed to surprise or im- press me over the past four decades.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164