Hmm.. Nice Participation. Especially all of the new Temp Debaters. I guess Ill just post my research in attempt to get this topic to live.
Pro
More Money for Education
-On average nationwide, local governments raise 46% of the money needed to run public schools, state governments provide 47% and the federal government chips in 7%. (Issues and Controversies, March 31 2002)
-The federal government spent $439.3 billion(2007) for the department of defense while $57.3 billion (2005) for Dept. of Education. (Department of Education/Defense 2005/2007) 10% of Dept. of Defense will near double department of Education’s budget.
-More money equals better education. Schools that receive more funding have better results than schools with less funding. (Issues and Controversies, March 31 2002)
More Money for Teachers
-With near doubling of the budget, teachers will be rewarded with bonuses (logic)
-"A system that does not reward excellence cannot inspire it" (Ellen R. Delisio, Education World, 2006)
-As seen in the Hamilton County (Tennessee) school district which bonus incentives to teachers for good performance increases education. (Ellen R. Delisio, Education World, 2006)
-Many teachers are forced out of the teaching work force because of little pay. This cycle leads to young, inexperienced teachers.
Too much unnecessary money being spent in Dept. of Defense
-We already have the most powerful, advanced military in the world. Some of the defense money should be spent in other areas of the budget. (Petition to lower defense spending, Josh Pease)
-More money is not going to protect us from a nuclear war. “Multilateral peace talks are our best protection against a nuclear attack” (President Bush, February, 2007)
Con
Hurt our defenses
-Just before the September 11, 2001 attacks Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld “DoD needs every nickel to address the near decade-long decline in America's military” (Sept. 5 2001, Jim Garamone, American forces press reserve)
- [Rumsfeld’s Sept. 5 2001’s request] includes money for military quality of life programs, pay raises, housing improvements and TRICARE (Sept. 5 2001, Jim Garamone, American forces press reserve) Taking 10% away from dept. of Def.’s budget will take away these programs.
-Today we're vulnerable to missile attack. That's a fact. And as has been suggested by the chairman, weakness is provocative. It invites people into doing things that they otherwise would avoid." (Sept. 5 2001,Donald Rumsfeld)
Throwing money at education is not the answer
*First note that passing this bill will nearly double the budget for Education (logic)*
-The District of Columbia spends far more money per student in its public elementary and secondary schools each year than the tuition costs at many private elementary schools, or even college-preparatory secondary schools. Yet, District 8th-graders ranked dead last in 2005 in national reading and math tests. (Human Events Magazine, March 23 2006)
-Money does not increase education on the wide spectrum (Cato Institute 2005)
Hurt our ability to help third world nations
-With less money available to the Dept. of Defense, it will become more unsafe for peace keeping organizations and the U.S. to get involved because we won’t have troops to protect the peace keepers (logic)
- The best way to work to solve the Darfur conflict is directly with U.S support. (Lee Feinstein, Foreign affairs magazine)This will be harder to do with less money towards Dept. of Def.
-Some aid to Darfur is given directly from Dept. of Defense’s budget. In 2005 the Dept. gave up to $6 million to support African Union forces,(Memo directly from President Bush to for the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, July 15, 2005)
