Obama WILL be the next president

[Spang]

Did you read the entire article, or just the words in bold?

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Did you read the entire article, or just the words in bold?

Yes, I did. Thanks for asking.

[Spang]

Why is space more important than our children?

[Fash]

Because eventually they'll all be dead if we don't get off this rock.

There's plenty of money to go around, though, so it's not a choice between one or the other. Reducing the space budget is a serious error in judgment... It should be increased ten fold!

edit: I should add that I don't think Obama would really do this...

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Space is not more important. They are both highly important. That's why you don't cut from space. You cut from somewhere else less important.

Top 10 Examples of Government Waste
by Brian M. Riedl
Backgrounder #1840

President George W. Bush has proposed terminat­ing or strongly reducing the budgets of over 150 inef­ficient or ineffective programs. This is a step in the right direction to pare back the runaway spending that has pushed the budget deficit over $400 billion. In less than three years, the first baby boomers will begin to collect Social Security: Lawmakers must therefore begin to reduce spending now to make room for the massive Social Security and Medicare costs that will follow.

The first place to trim runaway federal spending is in waste, fraud, and abuse. Congress, however, has largely abandoned its constitutional duty of overseeing the executive branch and has steadfastly refused to address the waste littered across government programs. In 2003, an attempt by House Budget Committee Chair­man Jim Nussle (R–IA) to address wasteful spending was rejected by the House of Representatives, and sim­ilar calls in 2004 by then-Senate Budget Committee Chairman Don Nickles (R–OK) were rejected by the Senate. A small group of House lawmakers has formed the Washington Waste Watchers, but their agenda has not been embraced by the whole House.

Lack of information is not the problem. Today, gov­ernment waste investigations and recommendations can be found in hundreds of reports, such as:

Studies published by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO),[1]
The Congressional Budget Office’s Budget Options book,
Inspector general reports of each agency,
Government Performance and Results Act reports of each agency,
The White House’s Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) program reviews, and
The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee’s 2001 Government at the Brink reports.
For those seeking past recommendations that went unheeded, the 1984 Grace Commission report on government waste and the 1993–1995 publications of Vice President Al Gore’s National Performance Review can still be found.

With all of this available information and in an era of tight budgets, why are lawmakers so resistant to reducing waste? One reason is that they see it as a thankless job that would go unnoticed back home. With Congress in session just 80 days annu­ally, reducing waste would take precious time away from most lawmakers’ higher priorities of increas­ing spending on popular programs and bringing pork-barrel projects home.

A second reason is that some of the most waste­ful programs are also the most popular (e.g., Medi­care), and lawmakers fear that opponents would portray them as “attacking” popular programs. Consequently, waste and inefficiencies continue to build up, costing taxpayers more while providing beneficiaries with less.

A real war on government waste could easily save over $100 billion annually without harming the legitimate operations and benefits of government programs. As a first step, lawmakers should address the 10 following examples of egregious waste.

1. The Missing $25 Billion

Buried in the Department of the Treasury’s 2003 Financial Report of the United States Government is a short section titled “Unreconciled Transactions Affecting the Change in Net Position,” which explains that these unreconciled transactions totaled $24.5 billion in 2003.[2]

The unreconciled transactions are funds for which auditors cannot account: The government knows that $25 billion was spent by someone, somewhere, on something, but auditors do not know who spent it, where it was spent, or on what it was spent. Blaming these unreconciled transactions on the failure of federal agencies to report their expenditures adequately, the Treasury report con­cludes that locating the money is “a priority.”

The unreconciled $25 billion could have funded the entire Department of Justice for an entire year.

2. Unused Flight Tickets Totaling $100 Million

A recent audit revealed that between 1997 and 2003, the Defense Department purchased and then left unused approximately 270,000 commercial airline tickets at a total cost of $100 million. Even worse, the Pentagon never bothered to get a refund for these fully refundable tickets. The GAO blamed a system that relied on department personnel to notify the travel office when purchased tickets went unused.[3]

Auditors also found 27,000 transactions between 2001 and 2002 in which the Pentagon paid twice for the same ticket. The department would purchase the ticket directly and then inex­plicably reimburse the employee for the cost of the ticket. (In one case, an employee who allegedly made seven false claims for airline tickets professed not to have noticed that $9,700 was deposited into his/her account). These additional transactions cost taxpayers $8 million.

This $108 million could have purchased seven Blackhawk helicopters, 17 M1 Abrams tanks, or a large supply of additional body armor for U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.

3. Embezzled Funds at the Department of Agriculture

Federal employee credit card programs were designed to save money. Rather than weaving through a lengthy procurement process to acquire basic supplies, federal employees could purchase job-related products with credit cards that would be paid by their agency. What began as a smart way to streamline government has since been corrupted by some federal employees who have abused the public trust.

A recent audit revealed that employees of the Department of Agriculture (USDA) diverted mil­lions of dollars to personal purchases through their government-issued credit cards. Sampling 300 employees’ purchases over six months, investigators estimated that 15 percent abused their government credit cards at a cost of $5.8 million. Taxpayer-funded purchases included Ozzy Osbourne concert tickets, tattoos, lingerie, bartender school tuition, car payments, and cash advances.

The USDA has pledged a thorough investigation, but it will have a huge task: 55,000 USDA credit cards are in circulation, including 1,549 that are still held by people who no longer work at the USDA.[4]

4. Credit Card Abuse at the Department of Defense

The Defense Department has uncovered its own credit card scandal. Over one recent 18-month period, Air Force and Navy personnel used govern­ment-funded credit cards to charge at least $102,400 for admission to entertainment events, $48,250 for gambling, $69,300 for cruises, and $73,950 for exotic dance clubs and prostitutes.[5]

5. Medicare Overspending

Medicare wastes more money than any other federal program, yet its strong public support leaves lawmakers hesitant to address program effi­ciencies, which cost taxpayers and Medicare recip­ients billions of dollars annually.

For example, Medicare pays as much as eight times what other federal agencies pay for the same drugs and medical supplies.[6] The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently com­pared the prices paid by Medicare and the Depart­ment of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care program for 16 types of medical equipment and supplies, which account for one-quarter of Medicare’s equip­ment and supplies purchases. The evidence showed that Medicare paid an average of more than double what the VA paid for the same items. The largest difference was for saline solution, with Medicare paying $8.26 per liter compared to the $1.02 paid by the VA.[7] (See Table 1.)



These higher prices not only cost the program more money, but also take more money out of the pockets of Medicare beneficiaries. In 2002, senior citizens’ co-payments accounted for 20 percent of the $9.4 billion in allowed claims for medical equipment and supplies.[8] Higher prices mean higher co-payments.

Medicare also overpays for drugs. In 2000, Medicare’s payments for 24 leading drugs were $1.9 billion higher than they would have been under the prices paid by the VA or other federal agencies. Although Medicare is supposed to pay wholesale prices for drugs, it relies on drug manu­facturers to define the prices, and manufacturers have strong incentives to inflate their prices.[9]

Nor are inflated prices for drugs and supplies the most expensive examples of Medicare’s inefficien­cies. Basic payment errors—the results of deliber­ate fraud and administrative errors—cost $12.3 billion annually. As much as $7 billion owed to the program has gone uncollected or has been written off.[10] Finally, while Medicare contracts claims pro­cessing and administration to several private com­panies, 19 cases of contractor fraud have been settled in recent years, with a maximum settlement of $76 million.[11]

Putting it all together, Medicare reform could save taxpayers and program beneficiaries $20 bil­lion to $30 billion annually without reducing ben­efits. That would be enough to fund a $3,000 refundable health care tax credit for nearly 10 mil­lion uninsured low-income households.

6. Funding Fictitious Colleges and Students

In 2002, the Department of Education received an application to certify the student loan participa­tion of the Y’Hica Institute in London, England. After approving the certification, the department received and approved student loan applications from three Y’Hica students and disbursed $55,000.

The Education Department administrators over­looked one problem: Neither the Y’Hica Institute nor the three students who received the $55,000 existed. The fictitious college and students were created (on paper) by congressional investigators to test the Department of Education’s verification pro­cedures. All of the documents were faked, right down to naming one of the fictional loan student applicants “Susan M. Collins,” after the Senator requesting the investigation.[12]

Such carelessness helps to explain why federal student loan programs routinely receive poor man­agement reviews from government auditors. At last count, $21.8 billion worth of student loans are in default, and too many cases of fraud are left undetec­ted.[13] Tracking students across federal programs, verifying loan application data with IRS income data, and implementing controls to prevent the dis­bursement of loans to fraudulent applicants could save taxpayers billions of dollars.

7. Manipulating Data to Encourage Spending

The Army Corps of Engineers spends $5 billion annually constructing dams and other water projects. Yet, in a massive conflict of interest, it is also charged with evaluating the science and eco­nomics of each proposed water project. The Corps’ “strategic vision” calls on managers to increase their budgets as rapidly as possible, which requires approving as many proposed projects as possible.[14] Consequently, the Corps has repeatedly been accused of deliberately manipulating its economic studies to justify unworthy projects.

Investigations by the GAO, The Washington Post, and several private organizations have found that Corps studies routinely contain dozens of basic arithmetic errors, computer errors, and ridiculous economic assumptions that artificially inflate the benefits of water projects by as much as 300 per­cent.[15] In one case, a study’s authors inflated a project’s benefits by using a 2.5 percent interest rate that dated back to 1954. In many cases in which the Corps calculated that a project would be a net benefit, arithmetic corrections revealed that the costs would be many times greater than the bene­fits.[16] By that point, of course, the unnecessary and wasteful project is often underway and cannot be stopped.

These errors appear to reflect more deception than sloppiness. A Washington Post investigation uncovered managers ordering analysts to “get cre­ative,” to “look for ways to get to yes as fast as pos­sible,” and “not to take no for an answer.” After a public outcry, in 2002, the Corps suspended work on 150 projects to review the economics used to justify them.[17] However, given the combination of Congress’s thirst for pork-barrel projects and the Corps’ built-in incentives to approve projects that will increase its budget, real reforms seem unlikely.

8. State Abuse of Medicaid Funding Formulas

Significant waste, fraud, and abuse pervade Medicaid, which provides health services to 44 million low-income Americans. While states run their own Medicaid programs, the federal govern­ment reimburses an average of 57 percent of each state’s costs.

This system gives states an incentive to overre­port their Medicaid expenditures in order to receive larger federal reimbursements. Not sur­prisingly, the GAO has identified state schemes that shift money between state accounts to create an illusion of higher Medicaid expenditures. Simi­larly, some states have spent their federal Medicaid dollars on non-Medicaid purposes. Tight state budgets like those experienced by most states today have increased the pressure to use such deceptive tactics.

The GAO and the HHS Inspector General have also uncovered some states’ practice of recovering improper payments, retaining the funds, and then spending them on unrelated programs—a practice that costs the federal government well over $2 bil­lion per year. Congress could enact legislation to prohibit these actions more effectively.

Minor reforms enacted by HHS in 2001 and 2002 are expected to save Medicaid $70 billion over the next decade. A small sample of financing schemes uncovered in a few states suggests that, if Congress acts, even larger savings are available.[18]

9. Earned Income Tax Credit Overpayments

The earned income tax credit (EITC) provides $31 billion in refundable tax credits to 19 million low-income families. The IRS estimates that $8.5 billion to $9.9 billion of this amount—nearly one-third—is wasted in overpayments.

The complexity of the EITC law leads to many of these mistakes. Calculating the credits is more complex than calculating regular income taxes. While the credit amount depends on the number of children in a household, the tax code does not clearly define how a child qualifies for the credit. In addition, fraud and underreporting of income are common, and the IRS lacks the resources to verify the qualifications of all EITC claimants.

Efforts are being made to address this prob­lem, but Congress can do more by requiring bet­ter verification of incomes and by clearly defining the standards by which a child qualifies for the EITC.[19]

10. Redundancy Piled on Redundancy

Government’s layering of new programs on top of old ones inherently creates duplication. Having sev­eral agencies perform similar duties is wasteful and confuses program beneficiaries who must navigate each program’s distinct rules and requirements.

Some overlap is inevitable because some agen­cies are defined by whom they serve (e.g., veterans, Native Americans, urbanites, and rural families), while others are defined by what they provide (e.g., housing, education, health care, and economic development). When these agencies’ constituencies overlap, each relevant agency will often have its own program. With 342 separate economic devel­opment programs, the federal government needs to make consolidation a priority.

Consolidating duplicative programs will save money and improve government service. In addi­tion to those programs that should be eliminated completely, Congress should consolidate the fol­lowing sets of programs:

342 economic development programs;
130 programs serving the disabled;
130 programs serving at-risk youth;
90 early childhood development programs;
75 programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities;
72 federal programs dedicated to assuring safe water;
50 homeless assistance programs;
45 federal agencies conducting federal crimi­nal investigations;
40 separate employment and training pro­grams;
28 rural development programs;
27 teen pregnancy programs;
26 small, extraneous K–12 school grant pro­grams;
23 agencies providing aid to the former Soviet republics;
19 programs fighting substance abuse;
17 rural water and waste-water programs in eight agencies;
17 trade agencies monitoring 400 interna­tional trade agreements;
12 food safety agencies;
11 principal statistics agencies; and
Four overlapping land management agencies.[20]
Conclusion
Lawmakers have an opportunity to take a strong stand for efficient government and spending restraint. Reforming wasteful programs will build essential momentum for the larger reforms that are needed to bring the budget under control.

[Kaldaur]

Hmm, that's not good news. Space is our future. It may seem dark and foreboding now, but there will come a day when we fly through it as easily as we do our own skies.
On one hand, I can see how he conceives of NASA as a wasteful entity. Having a monopoly on scientific advancement doesn't encourage the best results. Hopefully, the addition of private firms plotting their own research in spaceship design will increase NASA's productivity.
On the other hand, it's NASA. The people who have (inadvertently) given us many of the technologies we use today and have propelled humanity forward by leaps and bounds (and a few small steps as well).

Obama's position on this is very troubling to me.

[Nick]

The early education plan will be paid for by delaying the NASA Constellation Program for five years

Unbelievably bullshit. He needs a kick in the fucking head for that one. If Obama is going to take money from NASA he can fuck right off. That is fucking lame.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

If Obama is going to take money from NASA he can fuck right off. That is fucking lame.

*hug*

[Animale]

Of course the current administration has kept the budget of NASA pretty minimal over its tenure, while piling on "new" programs without increasing funding (moon, mars, etc.) forcing NASA to cut its lower budget scientific programs for the big-ticket Presidentially mandated engineering programs.

http://www.space.com/news/spacestation/ ... 10731.html
http://www.feedsfarm.com/article/eb8e34 ... 4809c.html

And, what the hey, the administration also politically influenced NASA scientists to "marginalize or mischaracterize" the data collected by climate satellites which pointed to global warming in 2004 and 2006.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/spa ... 9314.story

Obama can't be worse for science than the current President is/was. I'm 100% sure he'll appoint scientists to his scientific advising committee, unlike Bush who fired most of the scientists and replaced them with politically connected medical doctors and sociologists.

Animale

[Sylvus]

The long-term thinking is that better education will be better for our country than a pipe dream of starting a colony on Mars or the Moon. I realize you guys have seen lots of science fiction movies, but the Genesis Torpedo (or whatever that thing in Star Trek was called) does not exist. Notice he still supports some plans that NASA has and wants to increase education in this country without specifically taxing anyone reading this message to pay for it. I also believe that education should be a priority, and am absolutely for NASA, and would have no problem with him not cutting any NASA money and instead increasing each taxpayers burden by the $74 it would cost to not cut $10B from NASA.

If you really want to go big picture, where is the money going to come from to get people onto the moon, mars or somewhere else? It currently costs roughly $20,000 per pound of material taken into space on the shuttle. Doesn't that seem a little high to anyone? How many pounds of material are we going to need to take into space to get a colony started? What's wrong with "But Obama said he does not agree with the way the space program is now being run and thinks funding should be trimmed until the mission is clearer." He said he believes in "the Final Frontier", and it appears he just wants to get his ducks in a row rather than wasting money for the sake of saying "it's going to NASA". What a horrible person! Do any of you work in an industry with an R&D department? Throwing money at a problem without a good plan is rarely as effective as spending less money with a good plan. And besides, a better educated nation leads to more brains to work in the space program, and more dollars to be taxed in the future and spent on the space program.

And finally, Winnow has been all about McCain since the beginning, so who cares if he isn't going to vote for Obama? McCain is from Arizona ffs, like any other candidate from any party ever had a chance.

[Nick]

I don't really see that as any sort of legitimate justification for what would be his most idiotic scheme by a longshot. This is honestly a completely retarded statement and I hope he doesn't pursue it as a policy. The money for education can come from plenty of other places without having to interfere with NASA. This is criminally retarded.

NASA is already being fucked over, Obama is in danger of looking like a 2 dimensional Dan Brown character if he isn't careful (he's still a better choice than McCain thought).

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Wow. Excellent two paragraph blurb of parroting. You don't take from a greatly important cause to fund another one, that is already very well funded.

You want to help education? Start by removing the trouble makers, retards, etc. from the normal classrooms and put them back in Special Ed classes where they belong. They disrupt the entire classroom and distract the students who are there to learn. Thank you liberal democrat scum for putting them in the regular classrooms so these people aren't made to feel less special. Thank you for tainting all of the students. Thanks.

[Kaldaur]

As a teacher, I've got to disagree with you there Midnyte. Inclusion, or the process of introducing special education students to the regular instruction classroom, is a great policy. Full-inclusion is very rare, where a special education student spends all day in that classroom. However, for three or four periods a day, these students are put into regular classrooms and allowed to interact with the other kids and do the same work. This serves a number of benefits: one, the special ed student gets to observe normal interactions. Second, special education is such a blanket label that applies to dozens of different education types, such as behavioral disorders, learning disabilities, and mental retardations. Autism, Asperger's, they're all special education as well. Many of those students (don't know the exact number) are able to function in a normal classroom with only minimal support from aides or special educators.
By including those students in regular classrooms, school districts save a great deal of money on special education, allowing them to allocate funds to other areas. Special education is already one of the most draining aspects of any public school budget, as any child who requires special education needs an IEP team (Individualized Education Plan), special planning, different education materials, and specialized educators who take up another line on a budget. If you're really sincere about keeping these education costs down, and keeping as much money in other important areas (such as NASA), then you should be trumpeting 100% inclusion.
In all my time in the classroom, it's the BD kids (behavioral disorders) that cause the problems, and most of the time they have accompanying special needs. Children with retardation, autism, or learning disabilities do not cause as many disruptions. Having them in a classroom is an absolute joy, and I love spending time with those students, because when they come to understand a concept, they actually appreciate it.
As for tainting, I won't even go into that. But the idea that students are 'tainted' by being exposed to different personalities and individuals is ludicrous. That's what education is all about, exposing students to new ideas and lifestyles. It's easy for a kid to make fun of autism. It's a lot harder when a boy with autism is sitting right next to you and you two are friends.

[Winnow]

It doesn't have to be one or the other. A preschool program or NASA's future.

I understand the importance of "well used" funds for education. Note: we waste billions on education (no child left behind).

(maybe Clinton's only positive although it doesn't seem genuine below)

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1141/1

How to become a presidential hero

by Greg Zsidisin

Monday, June 2, 2008

Representatives of the three major presidential candidates participated on a panel at the International Space Development Conference (ISDC), the National Space Society’s annual conference in Washington, DC last week, to present candidates’ views. There were no revelations: lots of replies amounted to little more than “we’ll have to study that.” Only Hillary Clinton’s rep, Lori Garver, provided really engaging and direct responses to moderator Miles O’Brien’s questions, particularly on issues such as humans to Mars. (Clinton seems to be in favor of eventual human Mars missions, although she doesn’t exactly flaunt it.)

As with some other key sessions at ISDC this year, audience members were not given the opportunity to ask questions. That’s really too bad, because I’m sure audience members would have injected a lot more life and spirited debate into the proceedings. As it was, we got what amounted to exhortations by NASA to support the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) and ISS programs exactly as they are.

Coming away from these sessions, as well as Stephen Metschan’s talk on DIRECT in a much smaller afternoon breakout talk, I’ve begun to think that a presidential candidate could make a real splash if he or she cast themselves as a reformer of NASA.

To wit: taking a vocal stance on NASA and exploration that is visionary yet fiscally responsible might play very well to a populace weary of issues that deal only with negatives, such as war and the economy. We really need a hero these days, and spaceflight is one of those few areas Americans can point to with ready, justifiable pride. At the same time, this is hardly the point at which a battle cry of “Mars or bust, damn the cost!” can be made.

This is not about the merits or demerits of the specific shuttle-derived vehicles that the DIRECT team advocates. Overall, they make several excellent general points. If we’re truly trying to build a robust family of launch vehicles that will take us into the next 30 or 40 years of spaceflight, to pursue whatever specific goals we choose—and do that basically within the constraints of NASA’s current budget—the Ares 1/5 route doesn’t make much sense.

A far more reasonable approach would leave the vast majority of our unique launch facilities, experience, and workforce in place. The overriding principle would be to use whatever immediate technology we have at hand, and rigorously keep new development work and “requirements creep” at a minimum.

This approach would also assiduously avoid duplication of existing capabilities, especially those available or nearly available commercially. (A particular question: why develop Ares 1 when EELVs can do the job if they’re human-rated? And why not create an incentive for Boeing and Lockheed Martin to do it on their dime, in exchange for flight guarantees?) Because of this, NASA is absorbed in the creation of Ares 1, when it could well focus on getting its Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) built and tested, as well as the J-2X engine that is probably required for any new large launcher family. (For now, we’ll leave off why development of a variant of the in-production RS-68 engine wouldn’t be a wiser, nearer-term choice in the upper stages on at least some missions.)

The point is that there is no shortage of opinion that NASA’s approach is confoundingly complex and inefficient. That perception is undiminished by the marked absence of real persuasion on NASA’s part that it is set on the right course.

Enter the presidential hero. A candidate or new president-elect could score some quick political points not only by making an eloquent case for returning to exploration, and keeping America the leader in something it does best, but taking NASA to task on its VSE implementation, and setting it straight.

That last point doesn’t have to be a negative, either. A newly-inaugurated President Clinton, McCain, or Obama could give NASA a big public challenge to do better, while instructing the agency to do no damage or modification to the nation’s precious STS infrastructure. Let him or her challenge NASA to come up with a better plan to get its new launcher online sooner, and cheaper.

Frankly, if the immediate concern is about getting Orion spacecraft to the ISS, I think we could find a way to human-rate EELVs to carry those, even if it meant creating a first-pass CEV with reduced capability, with room for growth into the full-fledged CEV intended for flight beyond the ISS. At least we’d have American vehicles flying a new American spacecraft, something certainly doable within a single presidential term.

Let the president also challenge NASA to come up with a more reasonable plan to transition from that to launch vehicles with more capability than EELV by adapting the shuttle infrastructure in a more direct way, whether it looks very much like DIRECT or something else. When that’s ready, we can move the CEV back to flying from Launch Complexes 39A and B, and begin to work on a truly capable exploration program using a more sensible adaptation of the STS infrastructure and workforce.

In this way, the president would be a true hero. He or she would make an early, positive example of real leadership by keeping our commitment to a return to exploration and to the International Space Station, while making NASA more accountable to fiscal reality and public expectation. All over the tiny (albeit inordinately visible) portion of the federal budget involved.

What could be more of a slam dunk for a new president?

[Noysyrump]

You can spend all the money in the world on education and not make it a tiny bit better. I'm a public school kid (well was) and I can tell you, I didnt learn shit except mathmatics and my wonderful spelling skillz. History? hah! that came after on my own incentive. Home ec? again, how is learning to sew a bunny or bake a cake gonna help me beat the chi-coms to the moon? There was no technical type classes other than woodshop, or a very basic computer class. The computer class however was back in the 80s, so I cant really fault them for how bad it was. They didnt know how important that would be in the next two decades. The rest, indoctrination.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

As a teacher, I've got to disagree with you there Midnyte. Inclusion, or the process of introducing special education students to the regular instruction classroom, is a great policy. Full-inclusion is very rare, where a special education student spends all day in that classroom. However, for three or four periods a day, these students are put into regular classrooms and allowed to interact with the other kids and do the same work. This serves a number of benefits: one, the special ed student gets to observe normal interactions. Second, special education is such a blanket label that applies to dozens of different education types, such as behavioral disorders, learning disabilities, and mental retardations. Autism, Asperger's, they're all special education as well. Many of those students (don't know the exact number) are able to function in a normal classroom with only minimal support from aides or special educators.
By including those students in regular classrooms, school districts save a great deal of money on special education, allowing them to allocate funds to other areas. Special education is already one of the most draining aspects of any public school budget, as any child who requires special education needs an IEP team (Individualized Education Plan), special planning, different education materials, and specialized educators who take up another line on a budget. If you're really sincere about keeping these education costs down, and keeping as much money in other important areas (such as NASA), then you should be trumpeting 100% inclusion.
In all my time in the classroom, it's the BD kids (behavioral disorders) that cause the problems, and most of the time they have accompanying special needs. Children with retardation, autism, or learning disabilities do not cause as many disruptions. Having them in a classroom is an absolute joy, and I love spending time with those students, because when they come to understand a concept, they actually appreciate it.
As for tainting, I won't even go into that. But the idea that students are 'tainted' by being exposed to different personalities and individuals is ludicrous. That's what education is all about, exposing students to new ideas and lifestyles. It's easy for a kid to make fun of autism. It's a lot harder when a boy with autism is sitting right next to you and you two are friends.

I understand your perspective. Mine is coming from the parent of an 11year old who comes home and tells me about the days chaos with the same 3-5 kids. He actually cares about his grades, all As, and says it is very distracting. The teacher has to spend too much time focusing in on the same troublemakers and waterheads, instead of concentrating on the kids who are there to learn. Your empathy is a great trait to have for your profession and I'd be happy to call you my son's teacher, but from my angle, empathy is only dumbing down my child by having to slow down his growth to keep pace with the dummies. Inclusion feels good, but isn't truly good. Which is right in line with much of the liberal/democrat philosophies. They are about what feels good. Getting behind global warming feels good. Section 8 housing, feels good. ood stamps, feels good. Busing ghetto trash from the ghetto to the nice area of town, feels good. Giving criminals probation and stays of execution and life sentences, feels good.

[Ashur]

They are ALL "there to learn"... idiot.

[Xyun]

You can spend all the money in the world on education and not make it a tiny bit better. I'm a public school kid (well was) and I can tell you, I didnt learn shit except mathmatics and my wonderful spelling skillz. History? hah! that came after on my own incentive. Home ec? again, how is learning to sew a bunny or bake a cake gonna help me beat the chi-coms to the moon? There was no technical type classes other than woodshop, or a very basic computer class. The computer class however was back in the 80s, so I cant really fault them for how bad it was. They didnt know how important that would be in the next two decades. The rest, indoctrination.

Dude, you really don't need to convince us as to how uneducated you are.

[Forthe]

China will not catch up to the US's space program in the next 5 years. India is a non player. However, both are kicking the US's ass when it comes to science grads and it is accelerating. You need to stop throwing away brain power, even if you start today you have 15-20 years were you are going to be losing ground.

We also need to turn focus away from pumping out paper pushers. The .com bust did serious damage to science progress in the west.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

They are ALL "there to learn"... idiot.

No, they aren't. Don't remember school much, do you? A good portion are there because they have to and have no interest in learning. A small portion of children actually want to accel and do well.

[Winnow]

We need a new Mr Wizard for kids.

Robot Wars gets kids fired up about technology. We need more things like that to get the younger generations focusing their energy on more than video games.

[Siji]

kicking the US's ass when it comes to science grads and it is accelerating.

Make high paying jobs in science, in this country, and kids will take science classes. It's like the tech industry - I wouldn't suggest my worst enemy take any degree related to computers. Unless they were moving to India, China or Canada.

[Ashur]

They are ALL "there to learn"... idiot.

No, they aren't. Don't remember school much, do you? A good portion are there because they have to and have no interest in learning. A small portion of children actually want to accel and do well.

I remember school quite well, thank you. I was one of those that wanted to accel, but I also understand that public schools must try to provide an education to all children that attend. My 12-year old nephew is autistic and has several periods of inclusion a day, normally in math/sciences where he excels.

Yet your rant was directed against inclusion kids AKA "retards" "waterheads" "dummies". The high achievers will achieve highly. If you want absolute control of your child's learning experience, send them to a private school or home school them yourself. Sorry if society is holding your child back... public schools are going to serve the "public"*


* including the "retards" "waterheads" and "dummies"

[Xatrei]

I enjoy learning, and always have. I liked school and wanted to be there, for the most part. Lots of kids don't particularly want to learn, though. There's thousands of other things many of them would prefer to be doing. It's the job of the educators and the parents to guide the kids' behavior, though, and to create an environment to learn. There are so many things fucked up about our education system atm, but trying to teach these "undesirables" isn't one of them.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Yup. There is nothing wrong with removing the very disruptive few to their own special classes so teachers can give them the attention they deserve. I never said they didn't deserve an education too.

[Xouqoa]

The space race is becoming increasingly driven by private industry, and will probably continue to shift more in that direction. I agree that NASA is a necessary agency, and I really love what they do, but I think the ... business model, I guess, of space is outdated.

Personally, I'd like to see NASA take on more of a scientific research role and/or possibly become a broker for scheduling space travel using government facilities. Leave the technology research and logistics to private industry.

[Winnow]

The space race is becoming increasingly driven by private industry, and will probably continue to shift more in that direction. I agree that NASA is a necessary agency, and I really love what they do, but I think the ... business model, I guess, of space is outdated.

Personally, I'd like to see NASA take on more of a scientific research role and/or possibly become a broker for scheduling space travel using government facilities. Leave the technology research and logistics to private industry.

Screw that. I want as much of my tax dollars going into space exploration as possible. Our tax dollars get flushed down the drain on a regular basis. I want at least something being generated from them that I'm proud of.

The private sector is welcome to team up with NASA. More power to them. Those $200K 15 minute rocket rides are a start I guess. I'm not waiting around for the private sector to get it's ass into gear. They never have and will only do it to make a buck unlike NASA where it's possible to spend mega bucks on actual research and exploration (with fallout technology benefiting the population)

There's no way I want a candidate that's planning on cutting the NASA budget even more.

John McCain has been a strong supporter of NASA and the space program. He is proud to have sponsored legislation authorizing funding consistent with the President’s vision for the space program, which includes a return of astronauts to the Moon in preparation for a manned mission to Mars. He believes support for a continued US presence in space is of major importance to America’s future innovation and security. He has also been a staunch advocate for ensuring that NASA funding is accompanied by proper management and oversight to ensure that the taxpayers receive the maximum return on their investment. John McCain believes curiosity and a drive to explore have always been quintessential American traits. This has been most evident in the space program, for which he will continue his strong support.

[archeiron]

kicking the US's ass when it comes to science grads and it is accelerating.

Make high paying jobs in science, in this country, and kids will take science classes. It's like the tech industry - I wouldn't suggest my worst enemy take any degree related to computers. Unless they were moving to India, China or Canada.

I pay college graduates with CS degrees six figure salaries (Amazon). Google, Microsoft, and Expedia all do the same. What on earth are you talking about?

[Kaldaur]

Well, he's clinched the nomination. Taking bets now on the VP!

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Well, he's clinched the nomination. Taking bets now on the VP!

He reached an arbitrary number, first. He proclaimed himself the nominee. As much as the media wants it to be over, it isn't over yet.

[Nick]

So by such reasoning that "arbitrary" numbers don't mean anything, McCain isn't the Republican nominee? I had the misfortune to be not logged in and saw that. Why are you being ridiculously contrary for zero reason other than to be an ass?

[Sylvus]

Midnyte's right. It's very similar to how the Boston Celtics reached an arbitrary number against the Detroit Pistons in the NBA Eastern Conference Finals. As much as the media wants it to be over, it's not over.

I await the results of game 7!

[Fash]

Midnyte's right. It's very similar to how the Boston Celtics reached an arbitrary number against the Detroit Pistons in the NBA Eastern Conference Finals. As much as the media wants it to be over, it's not over.

I await the results of game 7!

[Fairweather Pure]

He's been the nominee for at least the past month for all intents and purposes. I think Clinton has the potential to cause even more damage now than before the last state's votes were in. I can't imagine how difficult it would be to have her as a VP, but Obama and his camp have to consider it.

I say let sleeping dogs lie for a couple of weeks and see where everyone stands.

Of course, the conservative talk shows are going nuts and that's always nice to listen to. "Presidant Hussein? Not in MY America!"

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/

It is a very tight race. Unlike the NBA playoffs, when you reach that number, the DNC is under no obligation to move that person to the next level. It is a very subjective process, not s definitive one as in the playoffs when you when a 4th game in a best out of 7 series.

I'm disappointed I need to explain such a simple concept as this.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Of course, the conservative talk shows are going nuts and that's always nice to listen to. "Presidant Hussein? Not in MY America!"

Not sure who you are listening to. I have not heard such stupidity.

[Canelek]

I am happy that Obama is in the home stretch of the Dem contest. However, I still think Edwards would make a much better VP. That said, having Hillary on the same ticket could possibly help the overall cause, since she seems to be quite popular with a good segment of "blue-collar" America.

[masteen]

Without improving education in this country, where is NASA and the multitude of scientific organizations like it going to find the engineers, technicians, and sundry other eggheads needed to make all this Star Trek shit possible?

[Homercles]

About NASA.
I was down at the Space Center this weekend to watch the shuttle launch.
An absolutely amazing site to behold. Everyone should try to get down to see one. Only two more years of the Shuttle program remain.
Something that kind of suprised me, but not really....I'd say there were more foriegners (europeans, australians, japanese, chinese, etc) than there were americans. It made me realize, The Shuttles are something every american SHOULD be proud of, but they are something the world IS proud of.
NASA and the shuttles are such a unique thing to this planet. An amazing accomplishment. It should be embraced and encouraged. Yet there are people in this country that cry over the expense. That mindset truely boggles my mind.
To me, being the country of wealth that we are, it is our responsibility to fund the majority of space exploration. We are the only nation capable of covering such a cost. To deter funds from NASA is an absolute dealbreaker for me.

If I had a choice on where my tax dollars were spent, NASA would be the top of the list, followed by the military, then the infrastructure of the country (roads, rail, bridges, sewers)

As for Obamas runningmate, Hillary put him in a tough spot. We all know Obama and his wife do not like the Clintons. Accepting her as a VP shows a little bit of weakness on his part. But denying her the position may alienate her core support groups. Women, in particular, may opt for McCain if Obama snubs Hillary

[Winnow]

Without improving education in this country, where is NASA and the multitude of scientific organizations like it going to find the engineers, technicians, and sundry other eggheads needed to make all this Star Trek shit possible?

No one is saying not to improve education. The point is to not cut NASA budget in order to improve education. That's counterproductive.

I don't have time to look at the bloated budget but I'm sure I could find places to trim programs in order to get this preschool prep crap going.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Without improving education in this country, where is NASA and the multitude of scientific organizations like it going to find the engineers, technicians, and sundry other eggheads needed to make all this Star Trek shit possible?

Education has improved greatly in the past 15 years. My 11 year old is studying the same things in 6th grade, I didn't get until 10th and 11th.

[Nick]

Anyone who thinks NASA funding should be cut to help education is a fucking retard of the highest order. Try shaving 0.001% off the military budget (which already creates more weapons than it could ever need) instead of fucking over scientific and explorative excellence, you stupid fucks.

[Bagar-]

kicking the US's ass when it comes to science grads and it is accelerating.

Make high paying jobs in science, in this country, and kids will take science classes. It's like the tech industry - I wouldn't suggest my worst enemy take any degree related to computers. Unless they were moving to India, China or Canada.

Didn't you watch Iron-Man? Scientists totally get laid.

[Funkmasterr]

Anyone who thinks NASA funding should be cut to help education is a fucking retard of the highest order. Try shaving 0.001% off the military budget (which already creates more weapons than it could ever need) instead of fucking over scientific and explorative excellence, you stupid fucks.

I only agree with the first sentence of this post wholeheartedly, but this is the third or fourth post in this thread you have made that I agree with.. fucking weird.

[Aslanna]

But Obama said he does not agree with the way the space program is now being run and thinks funding should be trimmed until the mission is clearer.

I don't see anything wrong with that. Not sure why that wasn't bolded as well. Would you invest in a business that had no business plan? I sure wouldn't.

He's not saying he's for "stopping our progress into space" anywhere in that article. Despite your claim that you read the entire thing I don't think you did at all.

Anyone who claims this is a 'dealbreaker' for ever voting for him, assuming they were even considering it in the firstplace, is rather shortsighted. We have immediate issues in this country that need to be addressed NOW. If that delays certain things a few years to get us back on track I'm all for it. Do you really think in the grand scheme of things even 5 years is going to make all that much of a difference in us "get(ting) off this rock"?

Having said that I agree military spending is the place to get the needed funds. Getting out of that money pit known as Iraq would go a long way towards freeing up money for more important things.

[masteen]

Education has not improved everywhere. At a lot of Florida schools, the name of the class might be Geometry or English, but what's actually being taught is "How to pass the FCAT." These kids aren't learning problem solving or critical reading, they're learning how to pass a test so the school doesn't lose funding. This isn't just the remedial classes, either, we're talking college track classes spending half of their annual classroom time teaching a test.

If it wasn't so fucking bad for the country, it might be amusing the ends the hardcore Clintonites will go to to spite Obama. It's no wonder the Democrats have been losing ground everywhere for over a decade now. Remember kids, if you can't get what you want, throw a tantrum and fuck things up for everybody!

[Noysyrump]

Anyone who thinks NASA funding should be cut to help education is a fucking retard of the highest order. Try shaving 0.001% off the military budget (which already creates more weapons than it could ever need) instead of fucking over scientific and explorative excellence, you stupid fucks.

Nonono. Dont trim the military budget. How else are we going to invade Ireland. Potatoes are the next hot comodity after the oil is gone. They even power clocks!



edit: img added for dramatic effect

[Nick]

Yes. bring it.

[Forthe]

The funny thing about the US military budget is everyone knows the pentagon wastes incredible amounts of money. That is the conventional wisdom. Rather than try to fix it your politicians just increase the budget to compensate.

[Truant]

Education has not improved everywhere. At a lot of Florida schools, the name of the class might be Geometry or English, but what's actually being taught is "How to pass the FCAT." These kids aren't learning problem solving or critical reading, they're learning how to pass a test so the school doesn't lose funding. This isn't just the remedial classes, either, we're talking college track classes spending half of their annual classroom time teaching a test.

Exact same thing in Texas, except it's the TAKS test. It's real fucking bad here right now.
Was reading an article about the rediculous % of entering college freshmen that are having to take remedial courses. It's fucked up that the majority of graduates of our public education system have to turn around and essentially retake high school in college.