Aug. 8, 2001
Proving my point about Anglos
Mike Dempsey's July 26 letter in response to my "Anglos don't get it" simply proves my point. He does not seem to have read the Washington Post piece that I referenced, which established quite completely that Anglos do not "get it" on discrimination. Anglos consistently, and inaccurately, see discrimination as less serious than those discriminated against. I did not invent this information but put if forward, foolishly perhaps, to inform the issue. The response, unfortunately too typical in this space, was not, as one would hope, some counter evidence, but an "ad hominem" attack on me. Mr. Dempsey claims to be sad; he comes across as mad. I refer Mr. Dempsey to the July 25 letter from Mr. Vanden Plas for an example of a more reasonable, and therefore more useful, letter.
Moving on to the nut of the issue, the ~$8,000,000 annual subsidy for Los Alamos schools, a good bit of information is available at http://www.lanlfoundation.org/docs/2000state_of_edu.pdf online. The data therein shows that Mr. Dempsey has his facts, or assumptions, quite wrong. The Los Alamos schools do not benefit from more financial support from their county, they benefit directly from the federal subsidy, which is provided not by local taxpayers, but the United States taxpayers, via the Department of Energy budget. Española expended (1998-99) $4,393 per school child vs. $6,883 per child for Los Alamos. Given the Los Alamos "head count" of 3,705 for the period the subsidy was $2,159 which explains the funding difference between the schools. While it is true that some parents make "extraordinary" efforts to get their kids into Los Alamos schools, the fact is that many Laboratory employees can't afford to live "on the hill." I suggest that attaching the subsidy to children of Lab employees would be much more just, and could help Española schools greatly. Another approach could be to offer bus service to Los Alamos schools from the Valley. As things stand today we have the richest county ($32,095 per capita) in New Mexico (84.1 percent Anglo), getting a subsidy for its schools from, among others, one of the poorest counties, Rio Arriba ($12,858 per capita) (73.5 percent Hispanic). I suggest that we send the subsidy to Española for a while, and see whether it makes a difference. Los Alamos certainly seems to think it makes a difference.
In closing, I suggest that we end another huge subsidy, the University of California exemption from the New Mexico "Gross Receipts Tax." This ~$60,000,000 subsidy seems pure stupidity. Sandia Labs gets no such subsidy, and the subsidy serves no purpose. It has one of the poorest states, New Mexico, subsidizing the Federal Government. Why should we do this? End the exemption and DOE would simply make up the difference; our powerful senators can see to that. Put the money towards increasing the funding of all New Mexico schools. Why does the Laboratory and UC management lobby the New Mexico Legislature to keep this subsidy, which New Mexico can ill afford? End the subsidies! End the discrimination!
--Chris Mechels