Congress Called Back to Bail Out Teachers Unions While Starving Children By Cutting Food Stamps

The “jobs” bill Nancy Pelosi is forcing members of the House to return to Washington to vote on is so indicative of the Democrats’ hypocrisy and total corruption. They claim to be for the “little guy” and they tell us this bill is all about saving jobs. In reality, it’s just a way to give more of our money to the unions. Many of the jobs they say they are saving were already saved, as Heritage pointed out.

  • In Indiana, 148 of the 284 teachers laid off by the Fort Wayne Community School District have been rehired.
  • The Hesperia Unified School District in California decided to rescind the pink slips of 77 teachers that had been laid off earlier this year.
  • The Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District in North Carolina conceded that the state’s budget woes were overblown, and has decided to hire back 141 teachers that were previously laid off. The district also noted that 120 more teachers could also be rehired after budget talks conclude.
  • In Ohio, a budget deal reached with the Cleveland Teachers Union will likely mean that a majority of the 545 teachers laid off in the spring will get their jobs back.
  • The Broward County School District in Florida will be rehiring 465 teachers who were laid off earlier this year.

These pink-slip rescissions likely represent a larger trend nationwide. It’s common practice for school districts to overestimate the number of teachers that will be laid off in advance of budgets being set, and in advance of the school year. What is less common is the federal government stepping in to bail out state budgets to “save” public-education jobs.

But when the largest political contributor to Congress asks members to jump, they catapult their way into more deficit spending. The two national teachers’ unions — the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) — contributed more than $70 million to campaigns during the 2007–2008 season, with 95 percent of contributions going to Democrats and left-leaning causes.

A look at the numbers:

Teachers’ unions, members of Congress, and the Obama administration claim that the $10 billion public-education bailout would save 100,000 teaching jobs. That means taxpayers will be paying $100,000 per job — nearly double the national average for teacher salary, $54,000. Moreover, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that about 57 percent of teachers are unionized. Using a conservative estimate of $300 in annual dues paid, the NEA and AFT have a minimum of $24 million in dues at stake.

Some of the money is coming from cuts to food stamps. The teachers unions are much more powerful than food stamp recipients, and as long as the people get some food money, the democrats figure they’ve got their vote locked up anyway.

To pay for a much-needed, job-saving and job-creating bill to help ease states’ budget woes, Democrats have made further cuts to food stamps, and for the first time ever, benefit recipients could see their monthly checks shrink.

The initial version of the state aid bill — championed by Republican and Democratic governors, as well as congressional Democrats — cut approximately $6.7 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as food stamps). It did so by taking back some of an expanded benefit created in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Feb. 2009 stimulus bill. The state aid bill made a number of cuts to provide $10 billion for teachers’ jobs and $16.1 billion for Medicaid funds.

The government giveth, and the government taketh away. Who knows, with a record number of Americans receiving food stamps, maybe enough of them will be angry enough at their own financial situation and the politicians who have made it worse, to either sit out the vote or vote the Democrats out of office.

I just wonder why I haven’t heard Alan Grayson ranting about how Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats are starving children to pay off their supporters.

Remember what Ayn Rand warned – there’s always someone needier than you. And the criteria used to measure need is always quite subjective.