Super Tuesday approaches in this ridiculously front-loaded Presidential campaign. Since I’m not with the bastards or the other bastards, I don’t have a horse in this race, and here on Room Eight I try to refrain from making personal judgments about people I know nothing about. For those of you pondering decisions, however, there is something I’d like to point out. The President is just one actor in the federal government, since the Congress — which also has an election that no one is talking about — is equally important. The federal government is just part of the government in the United States; as I explained last August, it controls much of the money but, aside from national defense and the Post Office, actually does very little of the work. The government is just one part of American society, arguably less important than families or businesses and other private organizations. And the United States has problems, both internally and with the rest of the world, that are affecting government, business, other organizations and families alike.

The President, however, isn’t just the CEO of the federal government, he is the leader of and, for other countries, the symbol of the United States. His or her ability to improve the United States and the world rests not only on their ability to have the federal government force people to do things, but their ability to influence people to do things, or not do things, on their own, through their arguments and personal example. Of the remaining candidates, which one is capable of exercising that kind of leadership in your life, in a direction you believe to be the right one?

The rest of the state seems to have all kinds of ideas for capping property taxes. One would give school districts in the rest of the state (but presumably not in New York City) the ability to force the state to pay for their education costs, no matter how high. City residents, would have to pay, but would get nothing. Another would have the state pick up the retiree costs for all teachers. New York City would pay far more in state taxes than it would get in state help, because years of under-funding, fewer teachers and lower pay mean it would have less in retiree costs to pick up. Some want to limit the increase in taxes each year for all school districts. This will ensure the New York City’s lower spending, staffing and teacher pay, relative to the rest of the metropolitan area, will be locked in. Or, if the city is allowed to use local income taxes to increase school spending, the state would presumably raise state income taxes, which city residents also has to pay, to increase school spending in parts of the state subject to a cap. Speaking of the local income tax, Governor Spitzer’s idea, implied by his latest budget, is to have the state pick up more and more of the cost of education in the rest of the state through STAR property tax relief while cutting state aid to the city by gradually eliminating STAR income tax relief.

Mayor Bloomberg is absolutely right. By telling the rest of the state they deserve lower taxes without insisting that the rest of the state spend less money, and not even considering the tax burden in New York City (which is more tilted toward income taxes), virtually every proposal being consider would work to the detriment of the people of the City of New York, and attempt to roll back any improvement in the city’s own schools.

I’ve often said that just because it is the national average, adjusted as best as possible for population, the cost of living, and other factors, doesn’t make it right. But a substantial deviation in any direction raises questions. As it happens, the U.S. Census Bureau makes data available that can be used to calculate an average public school spending per child for every region and every school district in the state. I compiled the data for 2005, simplifying the revenue and expenditure categories and adding a cost of living adjustment for high-cost Downstate New York; based on last year’s release, updated data should be available in late May or early June.

As the spreadsheet attached to this

It seems that, perhaps because my teenage kids spend too much time on the phone, no one called to ask that I serve on the Suozzi Commission on high property taxes. No matter. Rather than stand on ceremony, I’ll just make my contribution here on Room Eight. Those on the Commission are encouraged to download the spreadsheets attached to the posts linked here. What the data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows is the opposite of what people in the portion of New York State outside New York City insist on believing, and their elected officials insist on telling them. Property taxes are high in the rest of the state because spending is high, not because New York City has such a wonderful deal. Spending in the suburbs and upstate is high in particular categories, not in all categories, for reasons that are not unfamiliar in New York City. Spending in those categories benefits powerful interests with an outsized and unchallenged sense of entitlement. And spending in those categories is increased by one set of elected officials, who get credit, but funded by another set of elected officials, who get the blame. High staffing levels, particularly in the public schools, may also be a response to weaknesses elsewhere in the economy, as it was in New York City under Mayor John Lindsay. But whereas economic problems in New York City led to a growth in the welfare rolls, economic problems elsewhere have led to an increase of more than 100,000 local government jobs since 1990, jobs that have pensions and unfunded retiree health care attached to them.

Now that the Hillary vs. Rudy Presidential race is dead, the NY press is desperately hyping the other pipe dream – Mike for President dream. The latest to waste newsprint on the subject is New York Magazine.

http://nymag.com/news/features/43308/

Most of the story is the same old, same old about how voters want a competent alternative to the two major parties, blah, blah, blah.

Room 8 readers might not have appreciated this post when I wrote it last April, but might want to give it close a read now. I don’t think I could explain any better the economic situation we have gotten ourselves into, so I have decided not to try. We are about to have a recession driven by a cultural problem, a psychological need to spend significantly more than we produce. That is a condition that cannot persist forever, and only persisted as long as it did because people were allowed to borrow money they could never pay back.

2 weeks ago, the NY press was all excited about the announcement that the 2 political has-beens who started Unity 08 – Gerald Rafshoon & Doug Bailey were leaving to start an effort to draft Mike Bloomberg.

Their effort consists entirely of a website where they ask people to sign up to urge Mike to run.

As I write this (Sunday, January 27 at @2:30 PM), less people have signed up than the 5,457 people who voted for Duncan Hunter in the first 4 Republican contests!

My guess is that Mike numbers will eventually pass Hunter (now that he has dropped out) but I don’t know if he can catch Kucinich!