dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2005
share rss forum feed

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

Shut it down

School districts already get way too much money.
They certainly don't need ANY federal money.
It isn't a "a mess". It is a fraud.

bac522

join:2003-08-04
Manchester, NH
When I worked at a CLEC we loved billing for this fund because CLEC's didn't have to pay for it, but not one customer ever questioned it...yes it was a nice little "slush" fund...although to be honest it troubled me that we were duping customer's like this with bogus charges. We also charge a billing fee too! Yup, we charged you $5 to bill you and again most customers paid it because the Accounts Payable dept. didn't care! Added up to $50K a month in extra money.

Its rather sad how sleazy the telecom industry has become !

mj3431

join:2003-04-21
STL, MO
Reviews:
·Charter
reply to elray
said by elray:

School districts already get way too much money.
They certainly don't need ANY federal money.
It isn't a "a mess". It is a fraud.
To say in a blanket statement that school districts already have too much money is nothing more than a dumb remark fueled by your ignorance of the subject. While this may be the case in your particular area I suggest that you do some additional homework on other districts in the nation, particularly the rural ones.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
It doesn't matter that the schools benefit from it, there is no doubt, we agree they do. The problem is the fund is overrun with waste and lack of oversight, not so much at the school level, but the telecom level.

The Telecom provides the school, which is great for the school. Benefit received. The Telecom then massively overinflates or exaggerates the costs of providing the school's services, and they just print their own bill and submit it to the E-rate program for full payment. THIS is the fraud, the waste, the slush.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

mj3431

join:2003-04-21
STL, MO
Reviews:
·Charter

1 edit
While I don't disagree that there is some amount of fraud in the program I believe that you may be foggy on how the process works. The applicants of the program file for services and state the costs up front (from provider). Funding is either approved or denied and the telecom is reimbursed up to approved dollar amounts, which is based on funding level, which is based on NSLP data. Discounts are passed on to school by either SPI or BEAR until approved amount is absorbed. Contracted services further enable the applicant to lock in prices with the provider and statements are provided to the applicant quarterly. Applicants are also required to keep paperwork for 5 years after the last date of service.

It sounds to me like the slush you refer to is at fault of the applicants for not keeping up with their statements and discounts. Edit: I firmly believe that unless you have personally dealt with the paperwork and the forms (470, 471, 486, 479, BEAR etc.) then you're going to have to really convince me that you know what you're talking about and provide factual information to back it.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
said by mj3431:

It sounds to me like the slush you refer to is at fault of the applicants for not keeping up with their statements and discounts.
Because of lax oversight there's little incentive to try and do it efficiently.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

mj3431

join:2003-04-21
STL, MO
And that's why I posted above that budgeting for audits has significantly increased this year. Again, I'm very familiar with the e-rate process and I feel your opinion may be different had you seen it from my perspective.
Expand your moderator at work


anonguy0999

@k12.co.us
reply to elray

Re: Shut it down

You obviously don't work in education, with such a poor interpretation of the matter.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
reply to mj3431
said by mj3431:

said by elray:

School districts already get way too much money.
They certainly don't need ANY federal money.
It isn't a "a mess". It is a fraud.
To say in a blanket statement that school districts already have too much money is nothing more than a dumb remark fueled by your ignorance of the subject. While this may be the case in your particular area I suggest that you do some additional homework on other districts in the nation, particularly the rural ones.
Sorry, but I live in a town where we increase school funding by leaps and bounds every year, and yet, the district has a 50% dropout rate. If you're looking for ignorance, it is found in the classroom, not in my wallet.

School districts have TOO MUCH money - the mission is lost by the pursuit of funding. At our local high school (now an "inner city school", though its under a mile to the beach), the most important article in the school newspaper covers the cafeteria manager's quest to get students to submit their free-meal-ticket forms in order to get her federal funding. Our county is spending in excess of $20 billion dollars to build schools they acknowledge don't need, but they're willing to evict thousands from their homes under eminent domain to achieve their "goal" "for the children".

The last thing they need is the federal government offering to tax us to pay their phone and internet bills. Our local school district can't even FIND the millions of dollars of PCs they bought with e-rate, having allowed students and staff to pilfer them with a wink and a nod.

If we are to have government that is responsible and accountable, we must be willing to pull the plug, to stop the funding outright, when there is abuse.

If there are rural schools that need assistance, that should be handled at a local level, not from Washington.

mj3431

join:2003-04-21
STL, MO
Reviews:
·Charter
Should we handle social security and health care at the local level also? Every student needs an education and it is up to the government to see that they get it with programs that aid based on needs like e-rate does. It truly sounds like the schooling in your area has some major issues and I can see your frustration, but I can assure that it is not that way everywhere. The STL metro area is closing schools instead of building new ones because they cannot afford to keep them all open, and class sizes are growing.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
said by mj3431:

Should we handle social security and health care at the local level also? Every student needs an education and it is up to the government to see that they get it with programs that aid based on needs like e-rate does. It truly sounds like the schooling in your area has some major issues and I can see your frustration, but I can assure that it is not that way everywhere. The STL metro area is closing schools instead of building new ones because they cannot afford to keep them all open, and class sizes are growing.
E-Rate demonstrates exactly why we must keep things at a state or local level. Once such a program is enacted, it never goes away, regardless of how corrupt it is. At the city/county/state level, we have a chance of reversing such tomfoolery, and prosecuting the offenders. At the national level, it is the offenders who write the law, and they protect their own.

There is nothing wrong with requiring schools to operate on a reasonable budget. $8K per kid is more than enough - private schools do well on half that amount. If that means closing buildings you don't need, so be it. Class size is not particularly relevant - LA has had "small class size" funding for over a decade, but still cranks out 50% dropouts.

Show us schools that allegedly are underfunded, make the budget completely transparent, so we can click open on every single payment made, as our new president promised us, and we'll find ways to make the available funds work. But such decisions should be made in a local context, at the grass-roots level, where folks "on the ground" actually know whats going on, not made by staffers in the beltway 2000 miles away based on testimony from lobbyists.

Homemakers across the nation make such decisions every month, and manage to squeak by. Just because you're a guvmint entity doesn't mean you have the right to infinite funding.

As for social security and healthcare, you're right. We shouldn't "handle" them at the local level. They shouldn't be "handled" at ANY level. By expecting a big nanny government to "handle" these things, they treble in cost and complexity, and only the bureaucrats and party regulars benefit, while the rest of us pay.