SENATE BILL: Education for the Future Bill 2013 (Law'd)

[tmthforu94]

I'd be fine with specifying how we use the current funding, but I am extremely reluctant to tack on more education funding when we already have so much at both the federal and regional level. I also question whether clause 2 and 3 should be handled at the federal level. Section 4 and 5 look good to me, though.

I'll hold off on introducing an amendment until Napoleon or Polnut speaks on this. Hopefully they will be able to address some of my concerns.

[tmthforu94]

If we could use funds already designated for education to carry out this task, I would support that as a compromise. I still don't understand the need for additional funds when so much is already available.

[tmthforu94]

Nay

[tmthforu94]

Proposing my first amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[tmthforu94]

Aye!

[tmthforu94]

Can statistics not be considered part of mathematics?

[tmthforu94]

I am going to respectfully object, in part because I know Statistics was considered part of mathematics in my school and state and also because I don't necessarily think it should be a required class. Sorry

[tmthforu94]

With all due respect, Tyrion, regardless of what you might personally think, statistics is already covered under mathematics. I'm looking at my own university now, and all stats classes are listed under the Math department. Regardless of my opinion on statistics being a requirement, this amendment just isn't necessary.

[tmthforu94]

I withdraw my objection, though I still believe this all would be better handled at the regional level.

[tmthforu94]

Abstain

[tmthforu94]

Nay

This isn't smart policy when we already have a large education budget and are running a deficit.

[tmthforu94]

And someone finally comes to my defense on that...