Fully annoying
Just a personal peeve, but it annoys me when people call for this program or that project to be "fully funded." Nothing less will do.
You hear that a lot at this time of year, when governments are working on their new budgets.
But what the heck does it mean for a program to be fully funded? That it has all the dollars some people think are necessary to provide a certain level of service to a certain number of people? Does it also mean that everyone running the program has to receive an acceptable pay raise, that the increased cost of their health-care insurance has to be covered, that there has to be room in the budget for two or three out-of-town conferences somewhere, that mileage reimbursement rates have to be raised? Who knows?
It's always assumed that fully funding various pet programs is so important that taxpayers should be willing to provide more money from their own wallets to achieve this state of desired support -- even if it means those taxpayers might not be able to fully fund some of their own plans.
Like taking a trip to the beach.
Or putting more money into a retirement account.
Or even keeping up with the necessities -- food, housing, utilities, transportation, clothing and other expenses. Shouldn't someone care about full funding for those things?
What would it be like if you could fully fund your life? Well, don't think too hard because the taxpayers aren't going to fork over the money to indulge all your desires.
Comments (10)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Doug,
Have you been watching the School Board meetings lately? To find out the definition of "fully funded", please ask Dot Kearns as she uses that term everytime there is a discussion of NCLB.
Posted on May 31, 2007 8:45 AM
I do hear that term in connection with NCLB with aggravating frequency. I've concluded that there actually is no amount of money that could ever fully fund NCLB to everyone's satisfaction.
Posted on May 31, 2007 8:52 AM
I agree completely, Doug.
The Guilford County school board is perhaps the worst offender of crying "fully funded." Every year, they seem to have their hand out for more and more of our money, even though they haven't exactly done a stellar job of handling the money we've already given them.
Posted on May 31, 2007 11:51 AM
The nomenclature of politics is abysmal. "Fully funded" is a classic example, but so are "Patriot Act" and "Operation Enduring Freedom." Who would oppose full funding or patriotism? There should be a non-partisan, CBO-style language office that vets such stuff. Rule #1 should be to ban, minus a special dispensation, the phrase "the children."
Posted on May 31, 2007 12:04 PM
No Child Left Behind is one of those names.
The titles for military actions are ludicrous. Did Bush I start the trend with Operation Just Cause, the invasion of Panama, in 1989?
Posted on May 31, 2007 12:10 PM
The titles for military actions are ludicrous. Did Bush I start the trend with Operation Just Cause, the invasion of Panama, in 1989?* Doug
Naw! Naming military operations go way back. In moderm times within the last 35 years. Jimmy Carter name the hostage Iran operation. " Free the Blue Goose Goats" and remember when Reagan in the Grenada operation when he free our American medical students from a communist banana tourist grower, had it name " Free the Red Doc discount Bananas"
Recently another secret ops operation was expose when Bush 2 had a personal war with a Communist Drug and Oil dealer name " I'm a clear and present Danger to myself and the American people"
Posted on May 31, 2007 1:05 PM
Doug, I think the Bushes are largely responsible. Didn't the norm used to be Operation Condor or whatever? If Operation Overlord was good enough for D-day, its equivalent should be good enough today.
On NCLB, I think it should be changed to NMTTPOACLB ("No More Than Ten Percent of All Children Left Behind"), just as a nod to the real world.
Posted on May 31, 2007 3:06 PM
Our 30 percent dropout rate makes your 10 percent left behind allowance look very ambitious.
Posted on May 31, 2007 3:17 PM
Call me an idealist.
Posted on May 31, 2007 3:26 PM
"Fully funded" has a different and more specific meaning in federal funds. Congress has to pass an authorization to spend money. Then it must pass a separate bill, an appropriation, to actually spend the money authorized. Fully funded programs are those for which the amount appropriated matches the amount authorized.
Posted on May 31, 2007 5:17 PM