SGK is a privately funded organization who made the decision to fund “higher impact programs” such as entities that actually do mammograms, something PP does not provide. PP simply does breast palpation to screen for breast cancer. This is something any individual, nurse, mid-level provider, physician, etc can and does do during an exam. It’s really the mammogram that is the life-saving test. PP does the screening and then refers the individual to another provider for the mammogram. Personally, I think it would have been a better use of their funds and was well within their right to make that decision.

While I am not anti-abortion, I do have some basic issues with PP. Since they receive about 45% of their funding, directly or indirectly, from the government, this means that the government is funding abortions, something I believe they have no business getting into. (Just as I believe the government has no business in healthcare in general.)

PP is the love child of Margaret Sanger, who though she is viewed as a champion of reproductive rights, was a racist and eugenicist. You can make the argument that an organization is not its founder, but really, aren’t the ideals and values of a founding father (mother) interwoven into an organization’s foundation?

Having been no friend of PP before this finely crafted media assault on SGK, I now have absolutely no respect for them or their cause. Unfortunately, by caving to the pressure and flip-flopping, SGK has become PP’s “bitch”. What a horrific precedent has been set by these events. It saddens me that one of the most recognizable US charitable organizations is willing to compromise its mission and greater potential benefits to appease the liberal base.

Let me ask you this. What percentage of the budget do YOU think should be spent on education in this county? And when you answer that question, ponder this: would additional spending break the barrier those 237 freshmen who entered high school have from graduating? I say it wouldn’t.

I don’t think there is a correlation between spending and learning; otherwise, the kids who go to inner-city schools would be Ivy League candidates and those who go to private school (or are homeschooled) the ditch diggers. We know the opposite tends to be the case.

As I said somewhere back in my comments about this whole thing, I don’t think anyone on County Council doesn’t want to build BMS, nor do they want anything less than the best for our kids. But I happen to agree with what is now the minority (sadly, we found Stevie Prettyman doesn’t have the strongest of core beliefs) that the cost would be too high in this economic downturn. I don’t think the kids who go to BMS are at much more of a disadvantage than those who go to Wicomico Middle (which is much older) or any other middle school. Certainly they’re no worse off than the era when my generation was in middle school, when I attended a school which ranged between 25 and 70 years old, depending on where you were standing in it. Obviously you’ll argue that’s apples and oranges because school is so much different now, but I disagree – the purpose of the building is to provide a place for classroom instruction. No more and no less.

I suppose what rankles me the most about this whole argument is the premise that we are something less of a county if we don’t have all new schools. Obviously I had a different definition of “quality of life” than others did when I moved here, for it didn’t matter which school district I settled into. But the reason I came here was to take a job, and what drives people away isn’t the quality of the schools but the lack of economic opportunity. Once that problem is settled then we can address the need for new schools, but until then we have a lot of other areas which we need to spend our money on as well and not a lot of prospective tax revenue to do so. Businesses are looking at quite a soaking if we indeed raise the property tax seven cents per $100 because their personal property tax will leap 17.5 cents per $100. That’s a sobering increase.

But apparently some in this area are flush with money because they wanted a new school. Feel free to stroke a check for what you’re willing to pay.

Spending cuts are a popular theme for Republicans at the federal level and can be justified by deficits in the trillions and discretionary spending that leaves plenty of room for reductions. These same principles can’t be applied at the local level where every cut means real reductions in education, public safety and the overall quality of life in the county.

As part of the exemption, the legislature mandated that its Legislative Services Commission (LSC) report on the impact of the exemption on school construction costs, quality, and construction wages after five years. The LSC submitted its report in May 2002. The LSC estimated that the exemption had resulted aggregate savings of $487.9 million (10.7%) in school construction project costs between 1997 and 2001 without producing any discernable diminution in construction quality or negative impact on construction wages.

Granted, the study had its limitations but even a 5 percent savings – which I think is quite doable – would cut about $4 million from the project. And I’m sure I can eliminate more if I had the plans in front of me. Many of the “standards” are added for political correctness and have nothing to do with the educational project.

I worry less about the acceptable graduation rate than I do what the kids who are graduating have learned. That is superfluous to the Bennett discussion, but the potential of needing millions of dollars annually in the county’s budget just to take on this additional bonding is worrisome in this economic era.

Based on County Council records, opponents to building the school say that the price tag is too high. None of the opponents are experts in education technology or school construction, and they never offer specific items which are extravagant. You have experience in architecture and engineering, so why don’t you look at the plans and tell us where you could cut $5 million from the project and still meet the education technology and state BOE building requirements along with any other standards for the project. It is time for someone to back up there argument.

Many people go before the council and support cuts to education with a seeming disregard for the consequences. The WCBOE has experienced drastic cuts over the past two years, and is struggling to meet the needs of our students. The average high school graduation rate for Maryland public schools is 87%. I will close by asking you what you think an acceptable graduation rate would be for Wicomico County under recent budget cuts? I think many people would be shocked by the reality that exists in the face of further declines in funding for education.

However, I disagree with the remainder of your premise.

There is only so much that an average family can afford to give in taxes before they decide to go somewhere else. Honestly, I don’t think anyone on County Council doesn’t want to build BMS – perhaps they would be more comfortable with a Chevrolet design rather than the Cadillac we were presented, but I would venture to say that if money were no object they would be right there shoveling the dirt. But money IS the object.

There is a big difference between the time when Bennett High School was approved and now. People who may have thought we were experiencing a little economic bump in the road back when the high school was approved have now learned we are in the midst of a long-term economic slump, when each level of government is dealing with massive debt and not enough revenue to pay it back. Soon the state will be increasing our taxes because they don’t have the money to pay for all that they want and they don’t have the courage to tell the spoiled brats “no.” Same goes for the federal government, except they don’t even go by the pretense of approving a budget anymore.

And there has to be something said about the idea that if BMS is a “known health and security risk” why wasn’t this problem addressed instead of simply using that and other undone maintenance as a cudgel to get a new building? The problem is that, by using such a large part of our bonding capacity to build BMS, where would they get the money to do needed maintenance at other schools? It seems to me that the WCBOE has this thought that maybe if the buildings fall apart a little more, Uncle Sugar Daddy in Annapolis will sprinkle a little more fairy dust and give us new ones.