As commonly occurs in these pages, Dubos doesn't have the entire story. He doesn't mention the LSU System breach of contract letter sent to Biomed, nor that the commercial insureds that are subject to Biomed's suit make up just a small fraction of University Health's business, which means the financial implications are relatively small. That Biomed may lose the contract to what appears to be a much more efficient operator is the real story here; see http://jeffsadow.blogspot.com/2015/07/la-s….
DuBos needs to stop hyperventilating. Even if none of the changes to supply revenue were made, roughly 20 percent of higher education funding still would be picked up by taxpayers. But in Oregon it's less than 10 percent and they are having no funding problems there (in fact, its higher education system largely has been privatized). So why doesn't DuBos think for himself and seek the real causes of funding problems in higher education instead of placing a partisan lens on the issue?
While the stripping of dedications is a good idea, it's impractical to build a budget for this upcoming year on this for two reasons in the manner presented here. One is that a large portion of these in dollar terms are in the constitution, meaning multiple separate amendments. Secondly, why not just do funds sweeps? About half of all dedicated dollars do not go into funds protected from these. For this year, that would do, and would avoid the problem of potential voter rejection.
How long has Dubos "covered" politics? And he still doesn't know that you just can't zero out a line item for a governor's security detail, that statute requires that protection? This is what you get when your "analysis" is long on partisan emotion and short on critical thinking.
Jeremy's right, it's a lack of political will. All they have to do with the present system is to only put in as many projects as there are funds, and the governor has no leverage. But they prefer this system because they can claim they got something through, then blame it on the governor if he snips it.
As usual it is Dubos who can't read past the press releases. Since FY 2009 LA higher education spending has declined only 8.5 percent, down around $250 million a year. The reason is that tuition went up ... And after a few years of 10 percent increases,,it's still the fourth lowest in the country, well below,half the rate charged on average in some states. Meanwhile, LA per capita spending on higher education ranks 18th among the states and DC. As a commenter already noted, it is not unreasonable to ask for greater efficiency from higher education before reaching into taxpayers' wallets.
DuBos should know. Just his comments about higher education, health care, etc. in this piece show profound ignorance, and thus he throws around red meat devoid of intellect but always ready to excite those vapid enough to fall for it. Very post-modern of him, to put into words what columns like this represent.
All Comments »
Powered by Foundation