‘At Hope’ kids or who do you think you are fooling?

Array

As if Washington State didn’t have enough problems with trying to make up their revenue shortfalls of over $2.5 billion, nine Senators have decided that it would be better to focus on “control of minutiae.” These nine; Franklin, Kauffman, McAuliffe, McDermott, Regala, Fraser, Keiser, Hatfield and Kilmer have introduced a 61-page bill to remove aka “ban” terms like “at risk,” “in poverty,” or “disadvantaged” and replace every one of those phrases with “at hope.” (SB6249)

First, let’s review the cost of this inane legislation. According to the Senate Accounting and HR Dept., the monthly salary for a Senator is $3,508.84, and monthly Senatorial benefits are about $951.

So, a total of $481,662.72 per year or $1,319.62 per day for the nine Senators is spent.

Based upon about 10 days work, the payroll expense would be $13,196.23. For the paper, copying, support staff, etc., the bill itself probably costs between $3,000 and $6,000. So just to get this idea to the floor costs $17,696.23 (bill plus payroll).

The cost of each day on the Senate floor being about $17,200 (without salaries and benefits), the actual cost of this bill is probably between $20,000 and $25,000 of taxpayer monies. (Not a huge amount by itself, but 700 – 800 Senate bills alone in one session begin to cost all of us lots of money.)

Second, what did the taxpayer get? A suggested ban against describing some children’s real challenges/problems with some politically correct mumbo jumbo which makes absolutely no sense. Their assertion that if you describe a child’s circumstance as “disadvantaged” it will create an adult who manifests ‘a self-fulfilling prophecy of “disadvantaged”’ is simply ridiculous to most common-sense adults.

Kids actually know who may be poor and who isn’t and who is running with the wrong crowd and who isn’t. They don’t need labels. And, a child who is living in a chaotic home with not enough to eat and no support from a “family” will hardly believe him/herself to have no problems simply because a bunch of politicians decided to label him/her “at hope.”

Finally, if the legislature really wanted to do something useful, why not “re-fund” all the medical insurance Gov. Gregoire removed in order to reduce the State deficits. That insurance was for kids and unemployed or underemployed families. The term “at hope” means absolutely nothing concrete to a hungry, abused, neglected child.

If these Senators have nothing better to do, then I suggest they resign and save all of us some money, and since they don’t seem to represent any sane constituency — we don’t want them replaced either.

Catherine Paxton

Arlington

More in Letters to the Editor

Arlington Times brings back great memories

I was doing some searching for archives online and stumbled on the… Continue reading

Thank you letters

The Arlington High School Class of 2018 Parent Group would like to… Continue reading

Where did all the strawberries go?

Where have all the strawberries gone? While I am new to Washington… Continue reading

Letter to the editor

M’ville needs to place a moratorium on development

Letters in support of library levy

We’re urging you to vote yes for libraries on April 24 and… Continue reading

Why some people voted against M’ville school levies

In response to your recent editorial in support of school levies, I… Continue reading

6 Letters to the Editor support M’ville school levies

As a mom of five children who are either current, former or… Continue reading

Vote for Arlington schools

Vote for bonds Arlington voters on Feb. 13 will be asked to… Continue reading

Letters to the editor

Miller best pick My personal interaction with Ray Miller veteran to veteran… Continue reading

Letters to the editor

King a neighbor for everyone I am writing this to encourage the… Continue reading

Vote for Jesica Stickles

Elect Stickles This is my recommendation for the re-election of Jesica Stickles… Continue reading