Voters said no to possible wasteful spending
Sheldon Rossman complains about the defeat of the East Brunswick school budget and amuses himself by disparaging those of us who voted against it ("Defeat of School Budget Demonstrates Social Irresponsibility," Letters to the Editor, Sentinel, June 12). Yet, if the school budget passed by 31 votes or even by one vote, and someone who voted against it complained, would Mr. Rossman be reminding us that "majority rules"? I have no doubt. No matter, Mr. Rossman's respect for the democratic process and his fellow citizens is obvious and is precisely not the way to ensure future cooperation.

Be that as it may, Mr. Rossman has several preconceived notions that need dispelling.

Mr. Rossman states that he "knows the arguments," yet he never mentions several key ones - we lack confidence that the job the school system is doing justifies the increase; we lack confidence that the financial decisions being made are in the best interests of the children and the taxpayer; and we have a great deal of confidence that nepotism and cronyism, as well as waste, exist in no small measure within the educational bureaucracy.

Mr. Rossman states that because we keep voting the incumbents in "we like what the school board members are doing." He ignores the lack of people trying to get on the school board and the apathy of the general public. It's not that we like what the school board is doing as much as, like finding an alternative way to fund the school budget, there aren't a lot of alternatives out there.

Mr. Rossman claims that "We elect our representatives and trust them to spend our money wisely." Again, this is more of an issue of poor choices (we almost always vote for the lesser of the evils), voter apathy and the vested interests of the entrenched bureaucracy to avoid accountability.

Mr. Rossman claims that since we "cannot afford to fully fund our children's education," we can't afford other services. He ignores the possibility that it's not that we can't afford our children's education (although taxes in East Brunswick are impossible to afford for many, especially those on a fixed income), but that we choose not to support the possible wasteful spending of our tax dollars with poor accountability.

Lastly, Mr. Rossman suggests that those of us who voted against the budget "stop a parent and child on the street" and explain to them our "frivolous" attitude. I would be happy to explain to anyone that my money is earned by me, and they are not entitled to it simply because they submit a "wish list." I'd like to know that my money is spent wisely and facilitates the proper (not politicallycorrect) education of our children.

As noted, Mr. Rossman's attitudes toward the democratic process and his fellow citizens who dare to feel differently from him are not conducive to resolving anything. But finding a solution or working with others is not what he wants. It seems that Mr. Rossman wants all of us to be just like him: ignore any possibility of waste and school board/administration mismanagement and fork over as much of our hard-earned money as possible. I have little doubt his opinion reflects the attitude of most, if not all, of the present board members. Heaven help us.

Benjamin Feigenbaum

East Brunswick