The Campaign for Fiscal Equity suit, if it is to ever come of anything, will not only include more equitable funding for New York City’s schools (or at least higher, though still inequitable funding) but also increased “accountability” for those schools.  That is what the court decisions call for, and that seems reasonable, given that the city’s schools have been so bad for so long that the legal system finds that they violate the state constitution.  The usual way to create “accountability” in the public sector is to have a board or boards of people who don’t run an agency second guess it.  Implied is an acknowledgement that for our legislative elected officials, quality public services efficiently provided are not generally a priority.  After all, the New York City Council and New York State legislature control the purse strings and, in the latter case, the structure of the New York City schools.  They therefore have ultimate control over them, and have the ability to hold them accountable.  The City and State Comptrollers may audit their finances, and the New York State Department of Education and Board of Regents audit their performance.  And Mayor Bloomberg claimed that by putting him in charge, the city would gain accountability because he could be voted out if the schools didn’t work well.  But none of this is enough.  And yet another oversight board, appointed by the same politicians who have failed the city’s schools for 30 years, will not be enough either.

The Campaign for Fiscal Equity suit, if it is to ever come of anything, will not only include more equitable funding for New York City’s schools (or at least higher, though still inequitable funding) but also increased “accountability” for those schools.  That is what the court decisions call for, and that seems reasonable, given that the city’s schools have been so bad for so long that the legal system finds that they violate the state constitution.  The usual way to create “accountability” in the public sector is to have a board or boards of people who don’t run an agency second guess it.  Implied is an acknowledgement that for our legislative elected officials, quality public services efficiently provided are not generally a priority.  After all, the New York City Council and New York State legislature control the purse strings and, in the latter case, the structure of the New York City schools.  They therefore have ultimate control over them, and have the ability to hold them accountable.  The City and State Comptrollers may audit their finances, and the New York State Department of Education and Board of Regents audit their performance.  And Mayor Bloomberg claimed that by putting him in charge, the city would gain accountability because he could be voted out if the schools didn’t work well.  But none of this is enough.  And yet another oversight board, appointed by the same politicians who have failed the city’s schools for 30 years, will not be enough either.

The Campaign for Fiscal Equity suit, if it is to ever come of anything, will not only include more equitable funding for New York City’s schools (or at least higher, though still inequitable funding) but also increased “accountability” for those schools.  That is what the court decisions call for, and that seems reasonable, given that the city’s schools have been so bad for so long that the legal system finds that they violate the state constitution.  The usual way to create “accountability” in the public sector is to have a board or boards of people who don’t run an agency second guess it.  Implied is an acknowledgement that for our legislative elected officials, quality public services efficiently provided are not generally a priority.  After all, the New York City Council and New York State legislature control the purse strings and, in the latter case, the structure of the New York City schools.  They therefore have ultimate control over them, and have the ability to hold them accountable.  The City and State Comptrollers may audit their finances, and the New York State Department of Education and Board of Regents audit their performance.  And Mayor Bloomberg claimed that by putting him in charge, the city would gain accountability because he could be voted out if the schools didn’t work well.  But none of this is enough.  And yet another oversight board, appointed by the same politicians who have failed the city’s schools for 30 years, will not be enough either.

When Eliot Spitzer provided a one-word “yes” answer to the question of whether he would bring about universal health care, I can only hope that he meant he would do so someday as President, not as Governor.  After all, providing health care for every severely ill person in the United States without health insurance would be a big burden on the New York State tax dollar, perhaps leaving no money for anything else.  And as a result of a Supreme Court decision in the wake of welfare reform, which held that any benefit offered to state residents must also be offered to everyone else, that is exactly what would happen.  Anecdotal evidence suggests this happens, to an extent, already.  Still, while I believe a universal health care financing system must, and should, be implemented on the federal level, there are some things a New York State Governor could do to bring it about.

When Eliot Spitzer provided a one-word “yes” answer to the question of whether he would bring about universal health care, I can only hope that he meant he would do so someday as President, not as Governor.  After all, providing health care for every severely ill person in the United States without health insurance would be a big burden on the New York State tax dollar, perhaps leaving no money for anything else.  And as a result of a Supreme Court decision in the wake of welfare reform, which held that any benefit offered to state residents must also be offered to everyone else, that is exactly what would happen.  Anecdotal evidence suggests this happens, to an extent, already.  Still, while I believe a universal health care financing system must, and should, be implemented on the federal level, there are some things a New York State Governor could do to bring it about.

When Eliot Spitzer provided a one-word “yes” answer to the question of whether he would bring about universal health care, I can only hope that he meant he would do so someday as President, not as Governor.  After all, providing health care for every severely ill person in the United States without health insurance would be a big burden on the New York State tax dollar, perhaps leaving no money for anything else.  And as a result of a Supreme Court decision in the wake of welfare reform, which held that any benefit offered to state residents must also be offered to everyone else, that is exactly what would happen.  Anecdotal evidence suggests this happens, to an extent, already.  Still, while I believe a universal health care financing system must, and should, be implemented on the federal level, there are some things a New York State Governor could do to bring it about.