Mitch Daniels

A Mild-Mannered Radical

Former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels' totally insane, very practical ideas about how to fix college debt, reform entitlements, and redefine social justice

|

At first glance, Mitch Daniels seems rather bland. His hair is straight and tidy. His suits are understated but tasteful. He speaks slowly and in quiet tones. He gently declines to answer questions about the failings of other politicians. And he seems genuinely mortified when he accidentally refers to his interviewer as Meghan.

But Daniels' record as governor of Indiana could best be described as radical. During his governorship, which ran from 2005 to 2013, he decertified all government employee unions on his first day in office, managed to defeat teachers unions in a pitched battle for school choice, imposed tough spending austerity and raised taxes to balance the books, and inspired the Democrats in Indiana's legislature to walk out at the beginning of his second term over a right-to-work bill. In his previous gig as the head of George H.W. Bush's Office of Management and Budget, his nickname was "the Blade."

In his regular Washington Post column, Daniels seems to delight in triggering his readers. He has advocated relocating all the major federal agencies away from Washington, D.C., defended the morality of genetically modified foods, and most recently called for the abolition of the "tasteless, classless spectacle" of the State of the Union.

He also rides a motorcycle and was indicted for marijuana possession as an undergrad at Princeton.

In 2010, he told The Weekly Standard that the next president "would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues" in the face of a mounting fiscal crisis. Between the kerfuffle caused by those remarks and his desire for privacy about an unorthodox relationship history—he and his wife married each other twice, with a break in between—he ended up stepping back from politics.

Since 2013, Daniels has been running Purdue University. If you talk to one of the people on his team, they refer to him as "President Daniels." On the phone, it's all too easy to imagine he's calling from an alternate dimension where he actually ran for president of the United States—as many of his associates and the national media believed he would in 2012—and won. And after a wide-ranging conversation in January, it's hard not to think that might have been a better, freer, calmer timeline than our own.

In January, Daniels spoke with Reason's Katherine Mangu-Ward about free speech, the power of unions, and whether it's already too late to avert a full-fledged American economic collapse.

Reason: These days, our national politics can sometimes feel like it's oriented around student debt and educational availability. You're trying some unusual solutions to these problems as president of Purdue University, including not raising tuition over the last seven years.

Daniels: The tuition freeze began as a one-year time-out, a gesture to indicate sensitivity to what was plainly—even in 2012 or '13—a growing burden. Often when people ask for an explanation, I'll tell them what we didn't do. They want to know what kind of voodoo we practiced and I say: Here, let me allay all your suspicions. We didn't cheapen the faculty. We had one of the highest ratios in the country of tenure-track faculty. We didn't downshift to so-called contingent or temporary or part-time teaching. We didn't get any more money from the state. In fact, slightly less. We didn't dip into the reserves—they've been growing every year. We didn't resort to a sleight of hand through other fees in lieu of tuition. There haven't been any of those either. So the way I usually frame it is that, if a place like ours can do those things and run in the black on an operating annual basis while investing, while maintaining quality, why would you raise tuition? It ought to be the last resort, not the first instinct.

Sometimes we solve the equation for zero. Zero meaning zero increase in tuition. If you start with that premise—that's our objective, that's our goal—you can frequently make systems and budgets and practices adapt to that. It serves the very same purpose that a balanced budget requirement can in government or a flat topline sales number or revenue number can in business. When you have to, you do. And sometimes it's easier than you thought it'd be.

Income share agreements (ISAs) have been somewhat controversial but also now seem to be potentially a Silicon Valley darling. These are arrangements where students sign a contract and some or all of their education is paid for. Then when they get a job, they hand over an agreed-upon percentage of their income for a fixed period of years. Purdue has been experimenting with them. How did you come across the idea?

It has been out there since Milton Friedman a half a century ago. I'd read it somewhere and knew about it. I got cornered into going down and testifying in Congress; I usually try to avoid those things. The subject wasn't ISAs or even higher education finance—it was about innovation in education. I offered up a few thoughts about ways the federal government should get out of the way of innovation, some regulations and so forth. And almost as a throwaway example, I mentioned ISAs. If there were less ambiguity around some of the tax laws, I thought, this idea might finally take wing. I was astonished by the amount of press interest in it. I got engulfed as soon as the hearing was over, over this throwaway line.

I immediately began hearing from what turns out to be an incipient industry out there of people who like this, who want to see this idea get airborne. And I discovered that there were people hoping to operate businesses to administer these things and funds to invest in ISA contracts. So away we went.

"It was one thing when speakers who were too conservative were being harassed, but when professors who see themselves as good liberals are getting called in front of tribunals for something they said in class, that's not so much fun anymore."

I continue to be amused that you can do things you believe are really important or potentially very exciting and nobody pays any attention to them. Then once in a while—really, we to this day haven't done that much, just several hundred of these, and it's not achieved any real scale yet—and yet there's an immense fascination with it. So that's good.

Do you think that's a product of desperation? That is, do you think people have glommed on to this idea so eagerly because so many of the other proposals to solve the problem of college affordability have turned out to be impossible or dead ends?

Well, [Americans] just passed a trillion and a half in education debt—twice as much as credit card debt. Clearly what's out there is not working. The attraction to me and I think to so many people is that this is equity, not debt. The essence of that is the risk shifts from the student and his or her family to the investor. If things don't work out, it's the investor's problem, not the person who otherwise would've borrowed this money and been on the hook. As people see that, they find it a much safer way to finance or partially finance this very expensive process. I sometimes say it's earning your way through school after you graduate.

There's a real generational divide, right? You have people from a generation older than mine saying, "I worked my way through school. Why can't the kids these days do it?" And the kids these days are saying, "I don't think you understand the numbers we're talking about here."

That's right. Working in the cafeteria helps, and we want kids to do that too. But you're right, it can't cover it all anymore. Financially, you can't beat the heavily subsidized government loans, but you can definitely beat the loans that so many young people have to take on top of that. And there's a further thing out there, which is what happens if we can get this thing to scale. We need lots more schools doing it. We need the number of—never say borrowers, by the way—the number of contracts to get bigger. But a fascinating thing to me is that at some stage, the market will begin to set the rate.

What percentage and for how long should an electrical engineer be expected to pay vs. a sociology major? All we had to go on was history. We looked at what those categories typically were earning two years, five years, 10 years out of school, and we were able to build a matrix. But if this ever got to real size, the rates would be a signaling device. The students would look and see that the market believes that this degree or that degree is this much more valuable than some other. [But it] requires more funds getting going and more markets, more repayment experience.

How are things going at Purdue in the campus free speech and due process wars?

When I first got here, there's a watchdog group called [the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, or] FIRE. I noticed that they had us down with a yellow mark instead of green. So the first thing we did was change a couple of policies. They were fairly small things. Up to that time Purdue had said that demonstrations had to be in one part of the campus, a designated place. There were some policies about what could be on a bulletin board. So we changed those policies and got the green rather quickly. But I wanted us to have a clear policy on the part of the university, which means the trustees would vote formally for it.

Courtesy of Mitch Daniels' office

As soon as I saw what the commission did at [the University of] Chicago, I called the president there. I could commission a faculty group and it would take years and the statement wouldn't be any better or maybe not as good as that one. So I said, "Would you mind if another school just Xeroxed it?" And he said, no, they'd be pleased. So we did that. Our board of trustees voted it through and we became either the second or the third school to adopt what I tried to get everybody to call "the Chicago principles." I think we're at 50-some schools now. The idea was that not only would it be more straightforward to just take something off the shelf that was good, but also that you would have more impact and power if a lot of institutions said exactly the same thing.

At least as measured by FIRE and watching the press, there was a sharp drop in incidences of abuse over the last year or two. I do believe that shame has had some impact. I definitely believe that as soon as this began to bite faculty in their classrooms it took a different turn. It was one thing when speakers who were too conservative were being harassed, but when professors who see themselves as good liberals are getting called in front of tribunals for something they said in class, that's not so much fun anymore. So that's good news, although we don't know the extent to which people just stopped inviting speakers.

As governor of Indiana, you implemented a universal K–12 school voucher program. Are there lessons for other states that want to do the same thing?

The starting point for me has always been that [the debate over school choice] needs to be defined by a term which has been, I think, improperly appropriated by others: This is a social justice issue. Social justice, first of all, cannot be allowed to [only] mean taking money from A and handing it to B. That can occasionally be just. But what is just is one of the fundamental questions always. And everybody should be able to approach it and lay claim to it if they have a good argument. So whatever social justice is, enabling poor people to have the same choice about one of the most fundamental of life's decisions—the education of their child—qualifies, and so I always talked about it that way.

I think there's very good evidence that competition improves education both in the voucher schools and in the surrounding public schools. And we've seen it here. But I think you start the argument with simple fairness and equity for those less fortunate, and that gets you a certain distance. Now, there is no special interest in our society as strong, as stubborn, as well-funded, and as permanent as the public education establishment. And there is no argument one can make—certainly not one based on welfare of children or better results—that is persuasive to folks who believe that the system itself and the adults in it are the primary priority. So to answer your question: You have to get to a political equation where you can pass these things over their efforts, which are always very sophisticated, well-funded, and untiring.

How did you do that?

Ultimately we had a big electoral success in 2010, following a few others, that brought legislative majorities large enough that we were able to do things we couldn't do before. This was part of a package of reforms which are still bitterly and falsely criticized to this day by the teachers union and others but have brought marked improvements in reading scores, math scores, all the things that one would hope, in our state.

"Whatever social justice is, enabling poor people to have the same choice about one of the most fundamental of life's decisions—the education of their child—qualifies."

The scholarships or vouchers get more attention than anything else, but that was just one of [the changes]. A big part of that reform package was that we narrowed collective bargaining to wages and benefits, meaning that it frees principals to run their schools, superintendents to run their districts, and all these things are no longer dictated to them by a contract that they signed or somebody signed. Performance pay for teachers, the radical notion that better teachers ought to be rewarded more so than those who were not producing. But none of those things probably would have been possible if we had not secured a strong enough political situation. There are no studies anybody's going to produce, no speech, no matter how eloquent, I could give [appealing] to the social conscience, that will suffice in most political environments against the strongest, toughest, most-seasoned, and best-funded interest group we know.

In that same period, you also got through some reforms to labor regulation and health care entitlements. The teachers unions were the strongest opponents?

Yes, they were. We became the first Northern state since the Taft-Hartley Act to pass right-to-work legislation. That would not have been possible, I don't think, 15 or 20 years ago. The industrial and other unions were much larger and better-funded and stronger then. We passed civil service reform. On my first day on the job, after a lot of thought, I almost backed away from doing this. I struck down the executive order that authorized collective bargaining inside Indiana state government. And I was very afraid that it would cause an explosion and derail so many other things, a huge agenda of things that we'd come to office to do. That did not happen.

Given how much you got done in this period of relatively united government in Indiana, talk a little bit about the missed opportunities at the federal level of the last two years, in terms of fiscal responsibility and elsewhere.

I try studiously to stay away from things that look and sound partisan. My preoccupation for a very long time has been what I believe will be economically, internationally, and probably societally a cataclysmic problem when our debts can no longer be financed on federal debt. That's a failing of both parties.

When I talk about taxation in this state and elsewhere, I draw the line to where I think it really leads. This is about freedom. I used to play this little game when I'd visit a high school classroom. I'd say, "Hey, anybody here got a $5 bill?" Some kid would produce one and I'd say, "Oh thanks" and stick it in my pocket and keep walking and talking. The kids would laugh and I'd pretend to not notice they were laughing. Then I'd say, "Please notice that up until a minute ago, Katherine was more free than she is now. When she had that $5, she could decide what to do with it. Now I've got it and I'll decide, and she has to hope I decide on something that is important to her."

I had hope for [Barack Obama's presidency] because, Nixon-to-China style, a Democratic administration has a far better chance of reforming the entitlement programs before they devour us all and our freedoms with them. But that administration—even when presented with a good first start, the Simpson-Bowles report—refused at the last minute to move on with it. I thought that was really unfortunate.

We've passed the easy point. It's now a question of when, although you should never say it's too late, and federally I suppose there's still ways we can muddle through. But up until three or four years ago I thought, looking at the arithmetic, that it was possible that if we just got started, we wouldn't have to diminish the benefits promised to people who are in the system or about to get there. I think that opportunity went slipping past, and so now when something has to happen, someone may wind up with less support than was promised.

So what does the worst-case scenario look like?

One thing that could happen is the world decides to move away from the dollar as the reserve currency. You'd have nasty consequences pretty quickly.

In 2010, you told Andy Ferguson at the late Weekly Standard that in order to deal with the burgeoning fiscal crisis, the nation would have to call a truce on social issues. You took some flak for that at the time, and I think we can safely say the opposite of that has happened. It's now all culture war, all the time. What were you hoping for when you said that?

Some people misunderstood or chose to view truce as one-sided. The idea was that both sides might stand down and try to join hands on something that threatens us all. I had hoped that would be a theme, or a party or somebody might pick it up. They didn't, and I can't say in all honesty it would have had much chance. Every time somebody tries to tell the truth about our—I hesitate because I don't like the word entitlements, but that's what we call them—they get their head chopped off. But no, we didn't have a truce. We had a rout, ultimately.

What are you excited about in politics right now? Is there anything happening in terms of big ideas, new proposals, newly elected officials that gives you hope for the future?

Well, I'm tempted to be flip and say, "Can I get back to you?" But I am optimistic about the ingenuity of people in general, and people in the United States in particular, and on this campus. I see all kinds of ways in which we're going to solve our problems. Our material problems, our environmental problems. The things that bother people or worry people so much—I said to our last graduating class here that I have every confidence that we'll handle those. The biggest assignment for them might be to fashion again a common vocabulary and to bring this tribalized nation back together. And I can't tell you how that's going to happen. But I still believe it will.

This interview has been condensed and edited for style and clarity.

NEXT: Paul Manafort's Lenient Prison Sentence Isn't the Travesty—the Rest of the System Is

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

    1. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
      >>>>>>>>>> http://www.Aprocoin.com

    2. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
      >>>>>>>>>> http://www.payshd.com

  2. Cut the size of the federal government by 96% = problem solved.

    No federal government involvement in all of this bull shit.

    1. Yeah, that’s practical. Why stop at 96%? Like the minimum wage, if $15 is good, why not $20 or $50 or $1000?

    2. Only 96%? Statist!

        1. ROADZ?

          1. Sell them off now while there’s crony profit to be made, before we all die in 12 years anyway. Ha ha, those damned capitalists are such suckers for a quick profit!

          2. Somalia?

            1. Sorry. My Somalia comment was a knee jerk reaction to the roadz comment above.

    3. Just prohibit it from initiating force.

  3. Mitch Daniels does not seem to be a radical. Like most Republicans he talks about entitlement reform, but what he means is taking away a benefit that you paid into your entire working life. As a college president he has no problem delaying his retirement and taking social security a little later. He might feel differently if he was a factory worker, truck driver, service worker, or any other group that does physical labor. People that are worn out and really can not work an extra 5 years. Overall we are living longer, but that does not mean that we can all continue to do the work physically and mentally that we did may 10 years earlier. If you want to talk about improving the fiscal state of earned benefit programs like Social Security and Medicare, then start with an open mind. That would be radical.

    1. Welfare trap gotta end somehow.

    2. Medicare isn’t an earned benefit program.

      1. None of them are earned in the traditional sense of having received the money, socked it away someplace, and now withdrawing it. It is telling how much people don’t realize this, that the phrase has become so common place.

        One of the worst long term aspects of all this government distortion of reality is that it makes it so easy for people to lose track of reality, like this. Or tariffs being taxes on consumers, not producers. Or rights not applying to scarce resources, like health care of jobs or houses, which are allocated one way or another regardless of what redistributionists pretend they want for everybody.

        1. I didn’t mean this in the way I think you interpreted it – that there is no trust fund. I meant that there is no relation whatsoever to what you put in (in Medicare taxes, or any other taxes) to what you get as a benefit. Even if you never paid any taxes in your life you receive the same benefit as everyone else your age. Your Medicare taxes just help fund the government. They do nothing to create a benefit for you. Unlike Social Security taxes.

          1. I know that, poor phrasing I guess. I meant that people have come to talk about them so much in the wrong sense that now most people believe it.

      2. Well, somebody stuck a gun in my ear and took my money, saying I was entitled to get it back later as healthcare insurance, as long as I lived that long.

        So I do feel I earned the care, even as crappy as it is.

        1. Not so. No one said your Medicare taxes would entitle you to anything. Just like no one says your capital gains taxes entitle you to anything. They are simply a way to fund government. There’s no relation to what you pay in Medicare taxes and your benefits, and there never was. Everyone of a certain age gets the same benefit, regardless of whether they’ve never paid any Medicare taxes or whether they’ve paid millions.

          1. “No one said your Medicare taxes would entitle you to anything. ”

            That is exactly wrong and I can’t understand how you arrived at such a delusional conclusion.

            1. Are you dense? I explained it above. Show me anything at all that tells you what Medicare benefits you accrue because you pay Medicare taxes. Every benefit you receive are simply because you are a certain age. Your Medicare taxes are irrelevant.

              1. Not legally. But (a)morally, in the campaign promise sense ingrained by 50 years of everyone talking about it like that. Thus the name “entitlement”.

                1. “a ab abc abcd abcde abcdef ahf|3.10.19 @ 3:02PM|#

                  Not legally. But (a)morally, in the campaign promise sense ingrained by 50 years of everyone talking about it like that. Thus the name “entitlement”.”

                  This guy gets it.

              2. “Are you dense? I explained it above.”

                And you explanation was wrong and stupid.

                1. We are t promised a specific benefit, but participation in the program, whatever it entails at the time you use it.

                  1. “You fucked up. You trusted us! Hey, make the best of it! Maybe we can help.”

          2. Even with social security, which does have an “account” recording what you and your employer paid in (the FICA line on your pay stubs, times 2), someone who just barely worked long enough to qualify gets about 5 times as much per dollar paid in as someone who worked full time for 45+ years at someone above the median pay. I can’t even imagine how badly someone who’s been paying the maximum in FICA taxes is screwed.

            And the courts decided a long time ago that you have no rights to that account. Congress can change the payment schedule, or cancel the program entirely, with retirees having no legal recourse.

      3. Well let us see how you feel after paying Federal tax, SS Tax, Medicare tax for 50 years.

  4. “But that administration?even when presented with a good first start, the Simpson-Bowles report?refused at the last minute to move on with it. I thought that was really unfortunate.”

    Yeah, that’s what happened, governor. You hypocrite. Did both Mitch and Katherine forget that Paul Ryan voted against Simpson Bowles and then denounced Obama for not supporting it? And have both Katherine and Mitch never noticed that Republicans spend massively when there’s a Republican in the White House and then become tightwads when a Democrat takes office? Too many softball questions.

    1. Technically true but not substantively.

      http://www.politifact.com/trut…..ull-story/

      1. Yeah, Alan gets a bit dizzy from spinning.

  5. As has been definitively established by now, Russia hacked our 2016 election. Patriotic Americans must demand it doesn’t happen again.

    Russian Trolls Shift Strategy to Disrupt U.S. Election in 2020

    If the Democratic candidate doesn’t win, we can be sure the election was illegitimate.

    #TrumpRussia
    #LibertariansForGettingToughWithRussia

    1. I remember the good old days when the Democrats were the pinkos. Now it’s the Republicans. Maybe it’s really both parties. But not the Libertarians. Though sometimes you wonder about them, too. Frigging Russkies are under all our beds.

      1. At some point after 2012, Russia became our biggest threat and most important enemy on the world stage. Democrats, being the reality-based party, adjusted their stance toward Russia in light of these new developments. Republicans, as usual, are on the wrong side of history.

        1. I blame Mitt Romney. His laughable debate answer in 2012 turned out to be a challenge Putin couldn’t resist!

        2. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian|3.10.19 @ 11:25AM|#

          “At some point after 2012, Russia became our biggest threat and most important enemy on the world stage.”

          My new favorite of yours.

      2. I’m under their spell

        http://www.complex.com/pop-cul…..ian-women/

    2. Everyone excellent the far left candidates will be smeared as a Russian puppet. By smeared I mean I will smear grape jelly on their faces and lick it off seductively and by puppet I mean tied up in my basement.

      1. That’s silly. The only known Russian puppet among the Democrats is Tulsi Gabbard.

        1. Would lick jelly off of.

        2. Don’t forget Robert Mueller. Totally Putin’s Puppet.

        3. She aight

    3. You have become seriously boring

    4. Yeah, The Russkies convinced HildaBeast to never issue any positive messages in 2016 & to forget about campaigning in several key states!

  6. A reasonable man. In other words, unelectable.

    1. Alas.

  7. Useful summary of the abysmal state of the Drumpf economy.

    Gap, Tesla and Victoria’s Secret are among the nearly 5,000 store closings already in 2019

    #DrumpfRecession
    #UnbanPalinsButtplug

    1. I thought it was All Gore who invented the internet?

    2. Victoria’s Secret??!! THE FIEND HAS GONE TOO FAR THIS TIME!

          1. Appropriate.

      1. Based on the window displays, I would say Victoria has few secrets – – – – –

    3. Don’t be stupid. This has been happening for decades now. It had nothing to do with Trump.

      1. OBL is not a serious commenter; it’s supposedly sarcasm.

        1. No kidding. He uses terms and sentence structure like an 11th grader doing an online media project.

          1. It’s called verisimilitude.

    4. Creative destruction is UN-American!

      #JosephSchumpeterWasNotCommunistEnough

  8. Too bad he has that messy marriage problem.

  9. America would be happier, calmer, and more peaceful with a Right to Work supporting, government union decertifying, tax raising, spending cutter??

    I don’t know what color the sky is in that fantasy world you’re living in, but whatever the hell it is you’re smoking, you should stop immediately!

    1. The headlines literally use the words “insane” and “radical”.

  10. Suder-Mangu-Ward has introduced a new Suder-Man to the Suder-verse. Welcome, Suder-Mitch!

    1. I’ve no idea how this guy end- hey if I could not interrupt myself for just a min- hey but what if Suder-Mitch is just a puppet of Vladimir Von Doom? Oh my god that would be so weird ri- hey if I could just interrupt Mangu-Ward for sec, want to talk about my artic- *both halves of Suder-Mangu-Ward talk over each other*

    2. Thanks, fellow Suders. I hope my K-12 vouchers are valid across dimensional boundaries.

      1. All things are possible throughout the quantum realities that constitute the Suder-verse.

  11. How is banning collective bargaining for teachers a step forward? Instead of bargaining one contract for tens of thousands of teachers, we presumably end up with tens of thousands of teachers bargaining for tens of thousands of contracts. It sounds like a colossal waste of time and effort for the teachers and those charged with representing the state.

    1. Yes, that’s what the way public service unions work. It is no way a symbiotic relationship between politicians and the teachers union designed to fleece the tax payers and ensure the reelection of said politicians.

      1. Do teachers rig elections? Not well enough, apparently.

        1. By using the teacher’s unions to support specific politicians, they absolutely influence elections, much more so than any Russians.

          1. “they absolutely influence elections, much more so than any Russians.”

            You mean teachers vote? Holy fucking shit, man how long has this been going on?

        2. Do teachers rig elections?

          Phbbbt! Rig *an* election? Any one-term chump can do that!

          Now, demand money to consistently underperform, year over year, while openly endorsing multiple candidates that promise to increase funding at all levels and across several decades worth of election cycles? That’s what a teacher’s union can do. Buying off a candidate or rigging a single election is just going to get you wiped out when school choice comes along and your candidate gets caught with their pants down. Now, convincing the populace that their kids will become violent retards if they don’t support a failing education system to the point that they vote to compel charter schools to be subject to union rules… that’s how you “rig” an “election” once and forever.

          1. So they do rig elections. And vote too, apparently. Is forcing individuals to negotiate their own contracts meant to punish them for voting and rigging?

    2. “How is banning collective bargaining for teachers a step forward?”

      How is increasing individual freedom a step forward?

      You’re seriously asking that on a libertarian website?

      1. “You’re seriously asking that on a libertarian website?”

        SInce when does Libertarianism advocate a proliferation of unnecessary paper work wasting precious time that could well be focused more on the education of the students.

        “How is increasing individual freedom a step forward?”

        How is it freedom to force individuals to take time from their busy lives and do something a union is perfectly capable of?

        1. “How is it freedom to force individuals to take time from their busy lives and do something a union is perfectly capable of?”

          How is it a statement like that is assumed to be other than the baffle-gab of an ignoramus?
          Fuck off, asshole.

          1. If individuals want a contract they’ll have to negotiate it themselves. A major inconvenience. I’d prefer to have others, skilled and experienced negotiators, do it on my behalf, especially since I’ve already paid for it through my union dues. Teachers can put their time to better use. You want to force teachers to waste time in tedious negotiations with pompous windbag bureaucrats. Your freedom is nought but an empty slogan.

            1. Mtrueman seems to be trying his hand at OBL-style parody. I’d advise him not to give up his day job if I thought he might be better at that. But it doesn’t sound like he’s good for anything.

              1. “But it doesn’t sound like he’s good for anything.”

                I’ve never claimed the contrary. But my question is sincere. How is having to take on the responsibility for negotiating one’s own contract an improvement over having others, more experienced negotiators presumably, do it instead? So far the answers have been disappointingly off topic.

                1. LOLz.

                  So I suppose that all tech programmers, and gardeners, and dentists, and dog walkers, and… Well you get the point… Should ALL have unions too, since having a single conversation about the compensation package you want when applying for a job is best left to “professionals” then?

                  How retarded thou art.

                  1. “So I suppose that all tech programmers, and gardeners, and dentists, and dog walkers, and… ”

                    If they want a union, let them have one. Strength in numbers. If you want tech programmers, gardeners, dentists and dog walkers to remain weak and isolated, then obviously you’d be against them forming a union.

                    1. I’m fine with them forming a union, if they want to. I am AGAINST forced unionization though… And when it is a government union there are a lot of conflict of interest problems you DO NOT have with private for profit businesses. Public unions are a separate thing.

                      Given that the overwhelming majority of jobs have ZERO PROBLEM dealing with salary negotiations without unions, I simply don’t see why people freak out so bad about the very notion of a teach saying “Well, that sounds pretty good principal… But how about another $5,000 a year, and an extra 10 days sick leave a year.”

                      Especially since teachers in private schools have clearly been able to do this just fine…

                    2. “I am AGAINST forced unionization though…”

                      I think you mean ‘forced membership.’ I agree, though I do understand the rationale of the closed shop. America’s greatest union, the IWW, or wobblies, had entirely voluntary membership. Didn’t stop the government from hounding its members into prison. A good deal of them died falling from platforms during public ceremonies.

                      “Especially since teachers in private schools have clearly been able to do this just fine…”

                      Are you sure about this? I thought Charter school teachers salaries were typically a lot lower than public school teachers. Since when is low pay better than high pay?

            2. But you not only want to have others negotiate a contract on your behalf, you want to deny yourself AND ALL OF US the freedom to choose that negotiator.

              And any teacher who’d choose the negotiators they actually have is too stupid to teach. The effect of teachers’ unions over the last 50 years is clear: far more expensive schools that do a poorer job of teaching the basics to children. Most of the added money is not going to teachers’ pay, books and supplies, classroom maintenance, or anything else that actually benefits the teachers or contributes to teaching, but to a greatly expanded administrative staff, often occupying luxurious offices while the classrooms are rotting. The NEA doesn’t care as long as they continue to get their cut.

    3. And yet, somehow, private industry manages to survive.

      1. And lawyers positively thrive. Without producing anything.

    4. How is banning collective bargaining for teachers a step forward? Instead of bargaining one contract for tens of thousands of teachers, we presumably end up with tens of thousands of teachers bargaining for tens of thousands of contract

      Have you never worked in a private sector, non-union job?

      People get yearly reviews, with merit based raises–or not–every single year. Tens of millions of them.

      The biggest difference– the reviewer and the employee don’t get to collude to take money from the person ACTUALLY doing the paying.

      1. “The biggest difference– the reviewer and the employee don’t get to collude to take money from the person ACTUALLY doing the paying.”

        It’s not so different. In a private business, employer and union arrive at a deal, and the people who pay are the business’ customers.

        1. Until they go too far, the customers take their business elsewhere, and the company folds. Which is what would have happened to all the unionized American automobile companies if the government had had the sense to not bail them out.

  12. I can’t take anyone seriously who supports Universal Pre-K.

    1. At least not without Universal Pre-Pre-K and Pre-Pre-Pre-K.

      1. Is that after the 4th trimester?

        1. Haven’t the progtards usually performed the live birth abortion by that point?

  13. I didn’t see a solution to current student loan debt in there. I saw an alternative system of paying for it going forward. It isn’t going ti vanish. And people will vote based on it if it isn’t dealt with.

  14. “In 2010, he told The Weekly Standard that the next president “would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues” in the face of a mounting fiscal crisis.”

    I can understand that, but bear in mind what this means.

    School choice is a cultural issue. So are GMO foods. Daniels seems to have views on these subejcts. Is he willing to “call a truce” (aka concede to the Democrats) and agree to end school choice programs and ban GMO foods? After all, isn’t the debt more urgent?

    1. Oh, and guess what kind of an issue legal marijuana is?

      And guns, of course.

      I assume by “social issues” he doesn’t simply mean “issues I don’t personally care about.”

  15. AOC: “Capitalism is irredeemable”

    More pearls of wizdum from AOC:

    “Capitalism is an ideology of capital ?- the most important thing is the concentration of capital and to seek and maximize profit,” Ocasio-Cortez said. And that comes at any cost to people and to the environment, she said, “so to me capitalism is irredeemable.”

    Though she said she doesn’t think all parts of capitalism should be abandoned, “we’re reckoning with the consequences of putting profit above everything else in society. And what that means is people can’t afford to live. For me, it’s a question of priorities and right now I don’t think our model is sustainable.”

    1. The parts of capital she wants to keep are the ones elites like her consume.

      That’s about it.

      This bitch is incredibly ignorant. Another example of why the socialist herd must be thinned, and sooner than later.

      1. Thinned? How many kids get pumped out of high school and college every year? 10 million? How many in the past 10 years, or in the next 10 years? They’ve all been educated in the same system as Cortez, and while they may not have her political chops or her deep-seated hatred of capitalism, they have been heavily indoctrinated with the precursors and the ideology. They are the equivalent of individual sleeper cells insofar as their education has made them defenceless against her kind of rhetoric.

        She’s the tip of the iceberg and we’re on the Titanic. Turn hard a-port all you like, but this thing is going down.

        She could drop dead tomorrow but it wouldn’t matter because it’s not about her; it’s about the cultural forces that created her.

    2. I don’t see how Daniels is all that radical, but I will concede that AOC is radically dumb.

      She’s not even consistent in her idiocy. Last month she was saying how she’s sure the world will end in 10 years, and now she’s worried because she doesn’t think our model is “sustainable.” Umm, why do you care if everyone is dead in ten years? Make up your mind, idiot. Seriously, there are flat earthers with better reasoning skills than this person.

    3. I don’t see how Daniels is all that radical, but I will concede that AOC is radically dumb.

      She’s not even consistent in her idiocy. Last month she was saying how she’s sure the world will end in 10 years, and now she’s worried because she doesn’t think our model is “sustainable.” Umm, why do you care if everyone is dead in ten years? Make up your mind, idiot. Seriously, there are flat earthers with better reasoning skills than this person.

      1. “Seriously, there are flat earthers with better reasoning skills than this person.”

        You think so? How do you account for the fact that stars seem to rotate counterclockwise north of the equator, and clockwise on the south?

        1. Exactly

        2. No, no, no. That’s Ocasio-Cortez’s eyes that rotate differently.

  16. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.

    ???????? http://www.Help80.Com

  17. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.

    ???????? http://www.Theprocoin.com

  18. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.

    ???????? http://www.Geosalary.com

  19. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.

    ???????? http://xurl.es/Bizweek

  20. Makes me mad that the Republicans had someone like this and we ended up with Trump. Christ.

  21. Makes me mad that the Republicans had someone like this and we ended up with Trump. Christ.

    1. There are probably 100,000 Republicans that have better political views than Trump… Problem is they all have problems. Like not being known, powerful, influential, having charisma, etc. Ron Paul was the best politician this country has seen since the era of the damn Founding Fathers if you ask me, and while the GOP establishment DID try to side line him, he wouldn’t have been able to pull off getting the nomination even if they hadn’t. He’s just not the right personality type or whatever. It’s sad that most people are idiots, but it is what it is.

  22. The Commission on Presidential Debates?

    Would have been a good question.

    He was one of the only honest members of the CPD in its history.

  23. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://xurl.es/BestOnline

  24. He seems like an alright guy. He’s certainly above the norm for GOP politicians, but the truth is there are TONS of Rs in lower level offices that are awesome. He was a governor, which makes him one of the better ones to make it to that level, but he’s far from perfect.

    That said, if every state, and the country, were even run by guys as sane as him, we’d be a HELL of a lot better off.

  25. I earned $9000 last month by working online just for 7 to 8 hours on my laptop and this was so easy that i myself could not believe before working on this site. GBd If You too want to earn such a big money then come?2019 news
    Try it, you won’t regret it!?..

    SEE HERE http://www.Theprocoin.com

  26. There is no social injustice. It’s totally fake! Life is life, if you don’t like it, fix it yourself. I ain’t gonna pay for you to live off the government teat, which is my boob too. Anything a Democrat does for education will include full indoctrination into their socialist system.

  27. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.