CCSD teacher complaining about her salary made over $82K in 2011
In Sunday's Las Vegas Review-Journal, a CCSD teacher named Cynthia McCoy wrote a letter to the editor complaining about her salary as a teacher and her lack of recent salary increases.
I am afraid it is not enough to pat us on our backs and tell us we are doing great work while expecting us to accept falling farther behind financially. ...One interesting thing that's missing from McCoy's letter is ... her salary. Given the tone of her letter you'd probably expect her to be making $30,000 or $35,000 a year, right? Nope.
In fact, I believe that in the 14 years I have been teaching in this district, I have more than met my responsibilities. Yet I have lost ground to inflation and budget cuts, having received only two real raises in that period. And this was during the so-called "good times."
How long can young families and those who are on the verge of retirement put up with a continual loss of income? ...
Since we receive very few raises from the state, step increases are the only way we have of getting ahead. It is not that we are unwilling to do our part. We feel we are doing our part. When will the rest of our community do theirs?
Cynthia McCoy
Las Vegas
In 2011, Cynthia McCoy's total compensation was... drum roll please ... $82,811.48. Doesn't knowing that one fact change your perspective on everything she said in her letter?
Now, I'm not opposed to paying terrific teachers more - indeed, along with paying poor teachers less, I think it's a great idea - but this letter is ridiculous.
How can anyone "put up with" only earning $82,811.48 a year? And having to work 184 days a year? And having summers off? And having two weeks off for Christmas? And a week off for Spring Break? And having to work 7 hours and 11 minutes a day, including a 30 minute lunch? And earn over $65 an hour in total compensation?
Indeed, how can anyone "put up with" this?
I certain many, many Nevadans would like to try and fall as far "behind financially" as McCoy has(n't).
If McCoy is truly upset about her compensation she should focus her attacks on NRS 288, Nevada's collective bargaining law, and the teachers' union, which works to insure that teachers get paid based on their seniority and education, not on how well they educate our children.
That's where real reform needs to happen.
Read moreDem. lawmaker 'proud' that EPA regs have 'scrapped' three coal power plants in NV
In case you needed any more evidence that President Obama's "all of the above" talking point on energy policy is a joke, Nevada Assemblyman "Tick" Segerblom, D.-Clark County, just wrote an op-ed bragging about how a recent ruling from Obama's EPA will kill coal power.
Media analysts from left and right are predicting that the most recent EPA rule-making decision spells the ultimate end of Big Coal as utilities turn to cleaner, cheaper sources for energy.So not only is Assemblyman Tick Segerblom "proud" that "plans for three coal-fired generating plants have been scrapped," this move has "helped generate thousands of jobs"!
In the five years since the Supreme Court made its ruling, Nevada has moved faster than many other states to accommodate a new regulatory situation. Simply put, we've got a lot to be proud of and our moves have helped generate thousands of jobs and contributed to a healthier environment.
Since 2007: ...
• The state has set a goal of 25 percent of electricity to be generated through renewable energy by 2025 - a goal that electric utility NV Energy executives insist is the minimum, not the ceiling, for clean energy production. ...
• Plans for three coal-fired generating plants have been scrapped in our state. (Emphasis added)
Sadly, this typifies what liberals want our energy policy to look like:
1. Shut down profitable businesses through excessive taxation and regulations.If it worked for the underpants gnomes, it must be a good plan.
2. Funnel taxpayer subsidies to clean-energy business losers like Solyndra and Solar Trust.
3. Unknown.
4. Cheap energy and thousands of jobs.
In the real world, however, solar and some forms of wind power are decidedly more expensive, 21.07 to 31.18 cents-per-kilowatt hour (p. 77), than coal power, 9.48 to 13.62 cents-per-kilowatt hour.
Nevada already has the highest commercial electricity rates in the Intermountain West, and the things Segerblom is bragging about will drive those prices even higher.
Unfortunately, as Jonah Goldberg notes, this isn't a bug in liberals' plans. It is liberals' energy policy.
Back in 2008, then-Senator Obama explained that under his energy plan, electricity prices would "necessarily skyrocket."
The explosion in costs wouldn't be a bug of his plan either, but a feature. The idea under so-called cap-and-trade is that if you tax fossil fuels, you will, over time, reduce the use of fossil fuels. It's really basic economics.
If Heath Morrison goes to Charlotte, it won't be because of funding
My colleague and NPRI's communications director, Victor Joecks, wrote a great post this morning about Washoe County School District Superintendent Heath Morrison's possible decision to leave for the Charlotte/Mecklenburg school district.
I won't rehash what Victor said here. However, I have heard a meme beginning to circulate that one of Morrison's driving motivations might be to go to a district that receives more funding than supposedly depraved Nevadans will afford to their own school districts.
I've met and spoken with Dr. Morrison many times, and I don't think that's the case for one reason alone: he's very intelligent--intelligent enough to familiarize himself with the facts.
According to the U.S. Department of Education, North Carolina taxpayers spend $1,332 less per pupil than do Nevada taxpayers for their government-education monopolies. (There's also a handy chart on page 29 of Solutions 2013 that displays this data. It's almost like we made it, in part, to clarify misperceptions just like this one!)
And, of course, despite the recent, false political rhetoric about education "cuts" in the Silver State, state per-pupil funding is today at its highest level ever.
So, the Superintendent of the Year isn't really interested in going to a district that spends more money, he's interested in going to one that spends less money. Of course, despite being one of the 12 states that spends less per pupil than Nevada, North Carolina schools have far greater student performance. In fact, of the 12 states to spend less per pupil than Nevada, eighth-grade math and reading NAEP scores in all but Mississippi and West Virginia are higher than those found in Nevada. (West Virginia still outscores Nevada on the reading test, but not the math test.) It's all right there in the 2010 Digest of Education Statistics (and replicated in Solutions 2013).
Perhaps the good doctor just wants to go to a state where real education reform is possible...
The public-sector/private-sector pay differential
Remember the days when individuals, in choosing a life of public service, received increased job security in exchange for not making quite as much as could be available to workers in private industry?
If you do, you're probably at least entering retirement age, because the last time that was true for any sustained period was prior to 1970, according to data compiled from the Bureau of Economic Analysis by Cato scholar Chris Edwards.
The difference today is not that public servants no longer enjoy increased job security - the layoff rate of public-sector workers remains about one-third that of workers in private industry. (Check out the nifty chart compiled here by Reason's Adam Summers, which shows that 98,000 government jobs were added during the Great Recession while private industry lost 7.34 million jobs.)
No, the difference is that, today, those employed through taxes levied on private industry now enjoy compensation far greater than what the average worker in private industry can hope to achieve. Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that total worker compensation in state and local governments today amounts to $40.90 per hour, on average, whereas total worker compensation in private industry amounts to only $28.57 per hour.
Moreover, the gap between public-sector and private-sector pay has been growing throughout the past decade, sparking some resentment from the poor, working saps who are forced to subsidize, through taxes, what they see as a more extravagant lifestyle for the privileged government class.
In response, labor unions (whose membership is increasingly composed of public-sector workers) have spent the past few years publishing compensation studies (like this one) designed to downplay this pay differential. They claim that straight-up comparisons of employee compensation using hard numbers are unfair because they fail to account for the special training and certifications that government workers achieve (as if private employers don't, also, provide their employees with specialized training particular to their specific job function).
Tim Cavanaugh over at Reason Magazine has a great article detailing the arrogance and short-sightedness of these studies over at Reason Magazine.
The long and short end of it comes down to this:
1) It's difficult to put a value on job security, which is three times greater in the government sphere, and which all of these studies fail to account for in their "adjustments."
2) In the real world, labor compensation is a function of labor productivity. The possession of a degree or some other government-approved certificate does not necessarily mean the worker is more productive. As Cavanaugh points out, public school teachers are more likely to hold state-approved credentials than private school teachers, but the evidence shows that private school teachers, on the whole, are far more effective. (Note: I said "on the whole." Of course there are some outstanding teachers working in government schools, too.)
3) The kicker: Cavanaugh points out that it's the workers with the lowest skill set who enjoy the largest pay differential between the public and private sectors--undermining the entire apologist argument.
Take a look. It's worth your time.
TransparentNevada now has benefits info for CCSD, Henderson, Reno and WCSD
TransparentNevada released 2011 salary and benefits data for over 120,000 government employees last week. There's a lot of interesting data there, some of it detailed in our press release, but what was more interesting was the information that was missing.
Clark County School District, Henderson, Reno, Washoe County School District and the State of Nevada did not include benefits information in response to TransparentNevada's records request.
I'm happy to report that after our press release pointing this out and subsequent media coverage, TransparentNevada received benefits information from Clark County School District, Henderson, Reno and Washoe County School District and that information is now on TransparentNevada.
There's a lot of information to dig through from just those four jurisdictions, but here is an interesting fact from each one to get you started.
Clark County School District: 2,259 employees made over $100,000 in 2011. Yes, you read that right.
Henderson: Henderson's Director of Cultural Arts and Tourism made $199,107.66 in 2011, including a base salary of $153,029.11, which is higher than the $143,426.25 in base pay made by Gov. Brian Sandoval. Her base pay has also increased by over $18,000 since 2008.
Reno: Reno's Director of Parks/Recreation/Community Services has a higher base salary, $148,991.80, than Gov. Brian Sandoval, $143,426.25. It total the Director of Park and Rec made over $208,000 last year.
Washoe County School District: 394 employees made over $100,000 in 2011.
Heath Morrison free to choose the job he wants. Why aren't parents and students free to choose the school they want?
Earlier this week, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School board in North Carolina announced that Washoe County School District Superintendent Heath Morrison is one of three finalists to become its new superintendent. Morrison was recently named National Superintendent of the Year by the American Association of School Administrators and is credited with helping raise WCSD's graduation rate.
In an open letter to the community, Morrison explained what attracts him to the Charlotte-Mecklenburg job.
The reasons that I have said "yes" to being considered in Charlotte when I have told other school districts "no" are both professional and personal. In my professional career in Montgomery County, Maryland, and Washoe County, Charlotte-Mecklenburg has always been a district with which we have compared ourselves in performance. I have high regard for their education system and the work they are doing to educate all of their children. Also, there are personal reasons for my consideration. As I've said, my family and I love Northern Nevada and would be very happy to be here the rest of my career, however we continue to have strong personal and family ties just a short distance from Charlotte.
I believe this public process in Charlotte will be a relatively short one. In the end, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg community will make a decision that is best for their school district, and I will make a decision based on what I think is best for my family and my responsibilities in Washoe County School District. (Emphasis added)
Now, I don't begrudge the professional success Morrison has had, which has led to this opportunity. Indeed, I applaud it.
It's a great thing to be able to have the option to apply for and pursue the best job for you. It's great that Morrison will be able to "make a decision based on what I think is best for my family."
My only question is, "Why isn't this option available to every child in Washoe County and every child in the state of Nevada?"
Only Morrison and his family know what is best for their family. The same is true for almost every parent in Nevada when it comes to selecting a school for their child. Instead of the options available to Morrison however, parents in Nevada, unless they have the means to pay for private school, home school or get into a charter school, are forced into the government-school monopoly.
It is a good thing that Morrison will be able to make a decision based on what is best for himself and his family. It would be better if that option was available to every parent and student in Nevada.
2 great videos from ReasonTV
One is short and pretty funny. "Will Whole Foods destroy Brooklyn?"
The other is long and informative. Austrian economist Peter Schiff unpsins the history of the Federal Reserve.
Cook: Our best-funded schools are the worst
A terrific column from Glenn Cook at the Las Vegas Review-Journal that details how, contrary to what many say, Clark County's best-funded schools are also our worst.
His piece is too good to excerpt, so I'll just add that it should be required reading for elected officials.
It also helps explain how Nevada has nearly tripled inflation-adjusted, per-pupil spending in the last 50 years while student achievement has been stagnant.
5 charts from AEI show how much trouble Social Security is in
Although, to be honest, you don't even need five charts; the first two charts do the job just fine.
All five charts are here.
As these charts show, Social Security is in deep financial trouble. Unfortunately, it's not the only program dragging the U.S. towards the debt cliff. As Mark Steyn so clearly articulates:
Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute calculates that, if you take into account unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare versus their European equivalents, Greece owes 875 percent of GDP; the United States owes 911 percent - or getting on for twice as much as the second-most-insolvent Continental: France at 549 percent. ...The debt crisis is here, and the United States federal government is out of money. The status quo is not an option, because the government's cheap line of credit is going to run out.
The 2011 budget deficit, for example, is about the size of the entire Russian economy. By 2010, the Obama administration was issuing about a hundred billion dollars of treasury bonds every month - or, to put it another way, Washington is dependent on the bond markets being willing to absorb an increase of U.S. debt equivalent to the GDP of Canada or India - every year. ...
There's a famous exchange in Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises. Someone asks Mike Campbell, "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways," he replies. "Gradually, then suddenly." We've been going through the gradual phase so long, we're kinda used to it. But it's coming to an end, and what happens next will be the second way: sudden, and very bad.
(h/t E!!)
NV Supreme Court Chief Justice Nancy Saitta's 'Captain Louis Renault' moment
On Wednesday, Nevada Supreme Court Justice Nancy Saitta appeared on Jon Ralston's "Face to Face," where Ralston asked her how the Supreme Court could simultaneous run the Foreclosure Mediation Program and rule on its constitutionality in the pending case, Wells Fargo Bank v. Renslow. (8:39 mark)
Ralston: Philosophically, that sounds very strange to me: That you would have the Supreme Court running this thing [the Foreclosure Mediation Program] and then having to rule on the constitutionality of it. Isn't that weird?Now, it's easy to show that what Saitta said is inaccurate and incomplete. On multiple occasions, then-chief justice and current Nevada Supreme Court Justice James Hardesty testified before legislative committees on how to set up the Foreclosure Mediation Program. Hardesty even contributed an amendment to the legislation establishing the program. Once the bill was passed, the seven justices mobilized to implement the program, from scratch, in less than 30 days.
Nancy Saitta: No, in fact, the way, the manner in which the legislative decision-making happened, we were tasked with the foreclosure mediation program, setting it up in our court room. And it's a separate and distinct program from anything that the court or the justices or our central staff have to do with. So we're really reviewing a case - whether it's a foreclosure mediation case, a child custody case or a death penalty case - we're reviewing it with the same look at transcript, existing law, impacting law and applying the facts of that case to that decision.
Ralston: But how do you then rule on whether the system, that you are essentially a part of, is constitutional or not?
Saitta: We aren't a part of the process, and with respect to constitutionality, there are principles that guide us when we're looking at constitutional questions, and those are what we apply. It's quite simple.
The Nevada Supreme Court runs the program and currently collects fees from it - although there's no evidence those fees benefit the justices financially. Prominently, on the Supreme Court website, there is a link to the Foreclosure Mediation Program.
Frequently, justices have gone on television, proclaiming the program a success (Oct. 31, 2011 edition of "Nevada Newsmakers," 16-minute mark) and boasting about how many people the program has helped. Hardesty has even proclaimed it probably the "most financially stable government program in the state."
As reported by David Schwartz in the Las Vegas Sun, the seven justices are now considering whether or not to implement proposed rule changes to the Foreclosure Mediation Program.
Leaving all that aside for the moment, consider the next question Ralston asks Saitta.
I don't know if this was just a natural follow-up question or a brilliantly subtle trap set by Ralston, but it perfectly illustrates how involved the seven Supreme Court justices are in running the Foreclosure Mediation Program. (7:31 mark)
Ralston: Is the program working?Why would Saitta answer a question on whether the program was working? Just seconds earlier, she had stated that the Foreclosure Mediation Program is a "separate and distinct program from anything that the court, or the justices or our central staff have to do with" and that "[w]e aren't a part of the process."
Instead, she gives the answer you would expect from someone ... running the Foreclosure Mediation Program - even using the word "we" to describe the program.
Saitta: Well, I would like to think that it's working. If you look at statistics, at least we are getting homeowners who are at risk of losing their homes into a program where someone's listening, someone's listening. Like any other program, it can always be made better.This earns Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice Saitta a "Captain Louis Renault" award.
Now, under Nevada's Code of Judicial Conduct - issued by Saitta and the other six current members of the Nevada Supreme Court, no less - these circumstances mean all seven justices should "disqualify" themselves from the Renslow case.
Rule 2.11. DisqualificationThe need for these disqualifying factors also shows that the way the Foreclosure Mediation Program is set up violates Article 3, Section 1 of the Nevada Constitution, the separation-of-powers clause. There are other reasons the program is unconstitutional, but this one should be a no-brainer.
(A) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances:
(1) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's lawyer, or personal knowledge of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding.
(2) The judge knows that the judge ... is:
(a) a party to the proceeding or an officer, director, general partner, managing member, or trustee of a party; ...
(c) a person who has more than a de minimis interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding; (Emphasis added.)
(h/t to Hotair for the Captain Louis Renault award gimmick)
