Christie’s Lying Statistics: A Recap

promoted by Rosi

Cross-posted from Jersey Jazzman.

Before I push ahead to look at Chris Christie’s corporate-based education reform proposal, let’s recap his distortions, deceptions, and outright lies when laying out his case for the need for reform:

– Christie: Teacher pay increased 5.9% in two years, which is obviously outrageous!

Here’s the Truth: Recent teacher pay raises are well in line with pay raises throughout the workforce. Teacher pay has lagged behind the average wage in New Jersey for years. And recently settled contracts are in line with the decreasing pay found in the rest of the workforce.

– Christie: Teacher salaries in New Jersey are the 4th highest in the nation.

Here’s the Truth: It’s completely deceptive to compare teacher salaries without taking into account the cost of living in different regions of the county. When adjusted, teacher salaries in New Jersey are actually comparatively LOW.  

more below…

– Christie: New Jersey spends more per pupil than any other state.

Here’s the Truth: Again, you need to take regional differences in costs into account when making these comparisons – when adjusted, NJ is NOT #1 in the nation. Further, New Jersey is one of the best states in the nation at equitably distributing school funding between wealthier and poorer districts.

– Christie: New Jersey students show poor achievement, as evidenced by the gap between wealthier students and poorer students, or between white students and black or Hispanic students.

Here’s the Truth: Actually, black, Hispanic, and poorer students do relatively well in New Jersey compared to the rest of the nation. The reason for the “achievement gap” is that white, wealthier (not “wealthy”) students do exceedingly well compared to the rest of the nation. Time and again, using many different measure and standards, New Jersey public schools are consistently among the very best in the nation.

Once again: any reasonable and honest governor would be heaping praise on the students, teachers, and parents of New Jersey for the remarkably fine job they do in making our pubic schools some of the best in the entire world. Yes, we have much work to do in bringing poorer, black, and Hispanic students up to the very, very high bar set here in New Jersey; however, we are already making excellent progress.

Chris Christie continues to distort, deceive, and lie about the great things that are happening in New Jersey’s schools to push a radical corporate reform agenda. His real motives are to destroy pubic sector unions, make New Jersey’s taxes even more regressive, and privatize as many education functions as possible, turning our schools into Halliburton Highs, ripe with money ready for the plucking by private contractors.

He can not be allowed to get away with this.

Comments (14)

  1. theman

    You are correct about Christie wanting to privatize as many education functions as possible. But, He doesn’t want to limit privatization on education functions. He wants to privatize everything. He has many friends and cronies he needs to grease.  

  2. William Weber (WjcW)
  3. nkromann

    This is a way for Christie to pass a racist agenda.  By affording education only for the rich and destroying public education for the middle class and the poor, the fat pig and his corporate friends get exactly what they want.

  4. Jersey Jazzman (Post author)

    You are so correct. I use the term “Halliburton High” to describe what he wants to do in education, because this all started in the military. Education is the next step, but it won’t stop there.

    And it’s not just him – it’s his entire party. They are kleptocrats, blustering about personal responsibility yet living off the government dime worse than any alleged “welfare queen.”

    Cheney and Rummy showed you could be absolutely brazen about this and get away with it.

  5. Jersey Jazzman (Post author)

    It’s all in the links, babe.

  6. William Weber (WjcW)

    everyone understands the income adjustment. I’m questioning ‘adjusted for achievement gap’. What does that mean exactly?

  7. Jersey Jazzman (Post author)

    Where did I say ‘adjusted for achievement gap”?

  8. William Weber (WjcW)


    ‘Adjusted for Regional Incomes and Cost of Closing Achievement Gap for Children in Poverty’

    What does that mean? (and I’m not saying it’s not legit. Just that I don’t know what it is)

  9. Jersey Jazzman (Post author)

    Again – it’s all there in the links. Click through to Bruce Baker’s post. He is very thorough in explaining his calculations – though technical, it’s not beyond an educated layperson.

  10. Rosi Efthim

    Argue on the merits against anyone, but leave personal remarks and name calling out of it here, please.  

  11. Bertin Lefkovic

    That’s definitely not kosher.

  12. nkromann

    the fat fits, wear it!

  13. William Weber (WjcW)

    I’d mostly agree with Mr. Baker’s method. My only comment would be that his poverty model is based on a study that says it takes 150% to 200% of funding to educate a child in poverty and achieve comparable results.

    I don’t think we’ve proven that funding levels are the magic bullet. In our Abbot districts, we have those funding levels and have yet to achieve comparable results.

    I think Freakonomics had a pretty good explanation of this. Parents in poverty are most likely uneducated (why they’re in poverty) and because of this don’t possess the knowledge or will to motivate their children to learn or foster a learning environment. I think this more than school funding levels has to be addressed before we will make real gains.

    I just don’t know how to address it.

  14. nkromann

    But who’s going to stop him?


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *