Friday, January 19, 2007

Another costly Michigan Republican "solution"



Finally! A Republican identifies a program he would cut! We have a winnah!



Or ....not.



From the Freep story on the sea of red ink facing our state, Rep. Jack Bradenburg offers up a program that he would eliminate.



And, true to Republican form, it's a cut that could actually cost us more in the long run.



Cut state spending, said Rep. Jack Brandenburg, R-Harrison Township, a member of the House Appropriations Committee.



"There are rumors that there's going to be a sales tax on services and whatnot," Brandenburg said. "Just because deficits occur, it doesn't mean you're taxing too little. It means you're spending too much.



"You spend your way into a deficit, you have to cut your way out."



First of all, we are going to ignore this statement because one can't begin to address the logic being applied here. We did not "spend" our way into this deficit, and we cannot "cut" our way out of it. But, this does a offer a bit of insight on the Pub mindset- they still believe that cutting is the answer, and that is going to be a big problem.



Jack gives us a good example of how a "cut" can actually end up costing us more.



Many school districts are hoarding surpluses that could be used to pay for everyday costs, Brandenburg said. And he would eliminate high school classes for prison inmates to save $41 million a year.



Would love to see proof that "many" school districts are sitting on mounds of cash, but let's let that one slide, too, for now.



Let's look at Jack's "savings" instead.



Numerous studies have shown that education is one key to reducing recidivism rates. This page offers study upon study upon study that show that prisoners who receive assistance in obtaining a GED or some training significantly reduce the numbers that return to prison. To sum it up-



Steurer (1996) suggests that while a direct correlation between educational disadvantage and crime has not been verified, descriptions of prison populations suggest that poor literacy skills and crime are related. According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, there is an inverse relationship between recidivism rates and education. The more education a prisoner receives, the less likely he/she is to be re-arrested or re-imprisoned (Harer, 1994).



The Educational Testing Service (1996) reported that the most common finding of twenty years of research is that inmates exposed to education programs are more likely to be employed and less likely to end up back in prison than non-participants.



And if they end up back in prison, they cost us more money. Educational cuts to inmates almost guarantee that a percentage of them return to crime, and the spiral continues.



This really is that simple.



Any other bright ideas, Republicans?