From: matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu (J. Morgan Morris)
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 18:51:04 GMT

ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac) writes:


>In a previous article, lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) says:

>> ...
>>FACT: Arkansas students went from 50th to 20th in standardized test
>>scores under Clinton's education reforms.

>Now this would interest me.  What tests are you talking about?

Richard, since my mother is an educator in Arkansas, I can find out if you
really want to know. I can also state that education in Arkansas has improved 
tremendously under Clinton. The NEA, which at first opposed Clinton's educational 
reforms, supported Clinton perhaps more strongly than any other group.

If you want more facts, I can get them....


>>FACT: Arkansas went from 50th to 47th in manufacturing.

>Ooooh!  This I don't consider worth bragging about.

In a state like Arkansas, it is. Most southern states that were members
of the Confederacy suffered during Reconstruction, with industries 
moving in and money flowing out of the state. The states who have
thrived have major industrial centers or other sources of revenue to boost
them. The lack of major industry kept Arkansas back while other states
(e.g. Georgia) have improved their economy. 

In order to improve conditions in Arkansas, two things were needed: (1)
improvements in education to lure industry, and (2) industry to provide
jobs. Clinton certainly improved education and worked to provide an 
attractive atmosphere for industry. 

If the jump from 50th to 47th were random, or due to other states getting
worse, I'd agree that it wasn't worth bragging about. As is stands, it is 
an indicator that the reforms of the early 1980's made by Clinton are paying
off, and should continue to pay off.


>>FACT: Arkansas has made modest to great strides in several catagories
>>despite having little in natural resources or state revenue.

>Great strides in polluting the state and attracting low wage jobs.

Yes, part of making the atmosphere attractive for industry often 
involved looking the other way where pollution is involved. But I can
honestly say that nowhere that I've ever been in Arkansas suffered
extensively from environmental problems. Perhaps I just haven't been
to the polluted places yet...

Low wage jobs help those with lower educational levels to care for 
their families. Arkansans are used to low wage jobs, and after
12 years of Reaganomics, having *any* job is a major status symbol.


>>FACT: The governors (Repub and Demo) voted Clinton to be the MOST
>>EFFECTIVE GOVERNOR in the country.

>This is meaningless.

Who has more influence: the governors of the fifty states, or Richard Mulac?
Perhaps we could say that what you say is meaningless...

>>...
>>> I would really like to hear from Clinton supporters on which Clinton
>>> policies were responsible for attracting their votes.  I would
>>> expect most of them to deal with THE ECONOMY (STUPID!), since Clinton
>>> himself said he would exert 'laser-like' focus on that issue.
>>
>>And it is the subject he has spent the most time on since election day.

>Huh?  He's spent the majority of his time on social tinkering.

I don't fully understand economics, and I doubt that anyone fully understands
it. I believe that it will take a few months to put the full economic package
together, and I am willing to wait on it.

Later,
Morgan
-- 

John Morgan Morris
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
Georgia State University
University Plaza
Atlanta, GA. 30303-3083

Internet: matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu
Telephone: (404) 651-2253
FAX: (404) 651-2246

Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:20990 misc.education:6090 talk.politics.misc:69270 sci.edu:1456