Barack Obama's jobs record on job growth is pretty miserable, and people generally understand that fact, even if they don't know the specific numbers. Under Obama's tenure, the nation as a whole has netted job losses of 1,987,800. Texas, meanwhile, has added 105,100 jobs since Obama was sworn in. The other 49 states combined plus Washington, D.C. (excluding Texas) lost 2,180,800 jobs under Obama. Among the handful of states that have added jobs in the Obama era, Texas has added 62.56% of the 168,000 net new jobs.

Here's a graph of this latest data, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Well, you might say, that's just under 3 years. Data can be skewed over such a short period of time.

Okay. Rick Perry has been Governor for 11 years. Let's take a gander at his job creation record compared to the rest of the nation over that full time in office.

Bam:

As you might expect, it's a little lower than the three year range, but it's still nearly half of all jobs. This in a state with about 8% of the nation's population. Nearly as many new jobs as all other positive job growth states combined. Under Rick Perry, Texas has added 1,091,400 jobs. The rest of the nation combined has lost 2,082,100 jobs.

Flashback: data through the end of October 2011, just last month.

Meanwhile, BizJournals.com just noted that over the past decade, there are only five cities among the largest 100 in America to regain jobs lost during the recession. Four of them are in Texas. And San Antonio has nearly at its all-time peak, as well:

Rick Perry helped guide Texas to greatness, even in this economic situation we're in today. He can do the same for the nation. 2012 will be a jobs election. Rick Perry is America's jobs Governor. It's time for Rick Perry.

If you'd like to learn more about Rick Perry, you can sign up for the Perry Almanac, a daily email with the latest campaign news and facts (like the facts in this post).

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Texas Job Growth Still Dominating.

Tweet

Some facts about Texas job growth over the past year (.pdf):

Texas added 20,800 jobs in November, bringing the total for the past year to 226,000 jobs. The private sector fared better, adding 22,700 jobs last month and 289,900 over the past year. Texas has experienced 19 consecutive months of positive job growth. And, unlike the national labor force, which is shrinking as people give up and drop out (which ultimately makes the national unemployment rate look better than it actually is), Texas continued to grow its labor force. Even the manufacturing sector added 3,900 jobs last month, bringing the total to 25,200 for the year.

Of course, in addition, Texas cities also make up two of the top four for manufacturing jobs. Plus, five of the top twenty least miserable cities. And four of the top five and nine of the top twenty-five cities for job growth. Moreover, Texas is overperforming on job growth:

There were 23 under-performing states and 27 over-performing states (plus Washington, DC). The over-performers had 1,781,984 more jobs than expected, and the under-performers had 1,781,984 fewer jobs than expected.
Texas' more-than-expected 880,586 jobs account for 49.4% of the entire national over-performance.

Rick. Perry. 2012.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Dallas Versus Detroit.

Tweet

Two Texas metro areas, Houston and Dallas, lead the nation in new jobs over the past year:

The largest over-the-year employment increase occurred in Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, Texas (+79,500), followed by Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Texas (+48,800).

What makes certain cities win and other cities lose?

Cato knows:

In 1980, Austin, Texas, and Syracuse, New York, were roughly the same size. The Austin metro area had a population of about 590,000, and the Syracuse metro area had about 643,000 residents. By 2007, Austin’s population had increased by more than 1 million while Syracuse’s population had been stagnant. That same disparity exists when one examines the growth of employment and real personal income. Another disparity between the two areas is the tax burden. State and local taxes accounted for nearly 13 percent of personal income in Syracuse but only about 9 percent in Austin.

Check out Dallas versus Detroit, Austin versus Syracuse, San Antonio versus Buffalo, and McAllen (TX) versus El Centro (CA).

You can also find the Cato study here.

A good visual of Dallas versus Detroit:

Between 1980 and 2007, jobs and income grew dramatically in Dallas, while you can see what happened in Detroit.

In 1980, Dallas and Detroit were similarly sized cities. By 2007, Dallas had grown dramatically, while Detroit actually lost population:

Go read the whole Cato study, and then try to tell me that policies don't matter.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Texas' Truly Amazing Job Numbers.

Tweet

This year (2011) so far, Texas is more than doubling the rest of the nation, in terms of job growth:

...through October 2011, year-to-date annualized Texas job growth was 2.1 percent, compared with a U.S. rate of 1.2 percent. Without the Texas gains, U.S. employment would have expanded 1.0 percent.

Let's look at some other time periods.

DECEMBER 2000-

Since Perry became Texas Governor in December of 2000, Texas has added 1,078,600 net new jobs, while the other forty-nine states have lost 2,190,100 net jobs (1,111,500 lost net lost jobs, nationally). Looking at only the job-adding states over that time, 2,392,900 new jobs were created. 1,078,600 is 45.08% of 2,392,900.

In other words, since Perry has been Governor, Texas has added more than 45% of the entire nation's net new jobs among job-adding states. Keep in mind that Texas has about 8.1% of the nation's population. You could also say that Texas, during Rick Perry's tenure as Governor, has added more jobs than the other 49 states combined.

OCTOBER 2006-
Now, let's look at the past half-decade. Five years, from October 2006 to October 2011. Over that time, Texas has added 463,800 jobs. The nation as a whole lost 4,790,600 jobs. Remove Texas, and the rest of the nation lost 5,254,400 jobs over the past five years. Looking at just the job-adding states over the past five years, those ten states plus DC added 676,400 total net new jobs.

So, over the past half decade, Texas added 68.57% of all new jobs in America, among states with job gains. Texas also-- obviously-- added more new jobs than all other 49 states combined over this five year time frame.

JANUARY 2009-

Since Obama has been in office, Texas has added 92,300 net new jobs. The nation has lost 2,108,600 jobs, and the nation minus Texas has lost even more-- 2,200,900 jobs. The nation's job-adding states have added 155,200 net new jobs over that time.

In other words, under Barack Obama's time in office, Rick Perry's Texas has added more new jobs than the other 49 states combined, and Texas is home to 59.47% of all the new jobs among job-adding states in America.

There's also the official beginning of the most recent recession (began December 2007 and officially ended June 2009).

DECEMBER 2007-

Texas added 58.38% of the nation's new jobs among job-adding states since the beginning of the recession. Plus, more jobs than all other 49 states combined.

These are all net, non-farm, seasonally-adjusted jobs in these comparisons. Public and private sector jobs are both included. The data has been culled from the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics.

OCTOBER 2010-
Over the past year, Texas has added tons of private sector jobs while shedding government jobs:

click image for larger version

A lot of ways to slice this. And when you look at only private sector jobs, Texas fares even better, relative to the rest of the nation.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Domestic Migration.

Tweet

Let's compare domestic migration patterns from some major counties in America, courtesy of a really, really cool interactive tool from Forbes.

First, your big blue cities.

Los Angeles, California:

Detroit, Michigan:

Chicago, Illinois:

Then there's Texas cities. Let's just take Fort Worth, America's largest Republican city. Plus Austin. And San Antonio.

Fort Worth, Texas:

Austin, Texas:

San Antonio, Texas:

The result of all of this domestic migration?

Texas is adding four new Congressional seats:

Texas for the win.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Compared to the rest of the U.S., Texas is a jobs juggernaut.

Tweet

New data from the Texas Workforce Commission this morning (.pdf):

click image for larger version

Texas' unemployment rate fell this month after adding 2,500 net jobs in October 2011 (adding 13,500 private sector jobs and shedding 11,000 government jobs). Texas has shed 54,600 government jobs since October 2010, while adding 286,200 private sector jobs. The net result of that, obviously, is 231,600 total net new jobs over the past year.

UPDATE:
JOB ADDITIONS (OR LOSSES) BY INDUSTRY SECTOR
Mining and Logging (includes oil and gas related jobs): 43,300
Construction: 17,500
Manufacturing: 18,000
Trade, Transportation, and Utilities: 53,900
Information: -7,300
Financial Activities: 12,700
Professional and Business Services: 59,000
Education and Health Services: 41,300
Leisure and Hospitality: 35,600
Other Services: 12,200
Government: -54,600

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Busting False Memes About Texas Jobs.

Tweet

A central conclusion of a recent study by the Center for Immigration Studies falsely claims that “40 percent of all the job growth in Texas since 2007 went to newly arrived illegal immigrants” (.pdf).

This finding is-- quite simply-- false. The numbers don’t add up.

Since January of 2007, Texas has created 384,700 net new jobs, according to the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Forty percent of 384,700 jobs is 153,880 jobs.

The Department of Homeland Security data (.pdf) cited in the false study estimates that 60,000 illegal immigrants have arrived in Texas since 2007.

So if Texas created 384,700 jobs since 2007 and 40 percent of that is 153,880 – the false study claims that 60,000 illegal immigrants arrived in Texas since 2007 – then the study’s conclusion must be false and numerically impossible.

The data, laid out in graphic form:

Even if you assume every single newly arrived illegal immigrant took one of the 384,700 new jobs in Texas (a silly notion in and of itself), that's still only 15.6%.

Moreover, let's look at the six cities that added jobs since 2007. Five of them are in Texas:

Indeed, and over the past five years, Texas has added three times more private sector jobs than all other states combined:

Even if 40% of Texas' jobs had gone to illegals (again, not a true statement), Texas still would have added nearly as many net new jobs just for citizens as all other states combined.

Next, let's take note of U.S. domestic in-migration (Americans moving from one state to another), which has also boosted Texas' population:

Texas added more than 125,000 domestic migrants annually from 2007-2009.

Former California assemblyman Chuck DeVore, now with the Texas Public Policy Foundation, had another analysis of how the numbers from the Center for Immigration Studies make no sense (.pdf).

Has immigration been a net plus for Texas in employment? Probably so. Have 40% of the new jobs in Texas been claimed by new illegal immigrants? No. That's just stupid.

Attacking the Texas jobs story from this angle is asinine.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Texas Leads Nation In Exports.

Tweet

Let's talk about exports.
Texas has led the nation in exports to foreign countries for nine straight years. Think about that for a moment.
Texas has around 25 million people. California has more than 37 million people. Yet, Texas is America's top exporting state, by a fairly big and growing margin.

TEXAS has roughly 8.1% of America's population, but accounts for 16.2% of U.S. exports (up from 14.7% in 2007).
CALIFORNIA, with about 12.1% of America's population, accounts for 11.2% of U.S. exports (down from 11.7% in 2007).

TEXAS EXPORT/POPULATION RATIO: 2.00 (overperform by double)
CALIFORNIA EXPORT/POPULATION RATIO: 0.93 (underperform)

Again, think about that. Texas and California both have natural resources. Both are located on coasts.Both touch Mexico. Both have agriculture, oil and gas under the ground and offshore, computer chips, financial services, tourism, aerospace industry, manufacturing, etcetera, etcetera. California has nicer weather and scenery, fewer natural disasters, and touches the Pacific Ocean (which means it's closer to growing markets in Australia and Asia). Yet, Texas is growing faster, exporting more goods and services, adding more jobs, and gaining more Electoral College votes. Texas is busy dethroning California as America's shining city on a hill. America's America.

From the Dallas Fed, a look at Texas exports versus American exports:

More details on Texas' exports:

Texas' exports in 2010 totaled more than $206.6 billion, up 26.7 percent from $162.9 billion in 2009, outperforming overall U.S. exports, which grew by 20.9 percent in 2010. The state's top export recipients were Mexico, Canada, China, Brazil and South Korea, which respectively imported $72.3 billion, $18.6 billion, $10.2 billion, $7.1 billion and $6.4 billion in Texas-manufactured goods. Additionally, Texas' top exporting industries in 2010 were computers and electronics, chemicals, petroleum and coal, machinery, and transportation equipment.

RELATED: Texas Enjoys an Export Boom:

"Just this past week, the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) announced that in its preliminary Fiscal Year 2011 (FY’11) figures, more than $512 million in export credit was authorized for Texas small businesses, making Texas the top state in the country for all Ex-Im small business financing."

These outcomes didn't happen in a vacuum. They weren't some accident, fated to happen no matter what.
Ideas matter. Records matter. Policy choices matter. The Texas success story under Rick Perry absolutely matters.

NOTE: I also posted this in today's Perry Almanac email. Sign up here. Lots of info and data and the latest goings-on.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Texas Jobs.

Tweet

Over at newgeography, there's a very cool interactive map showing job gains and losses by county, across various economic sectors.

Texas is undeniably a hot spot for jobs over the past five years:

Western North Dakota and Eastern Wyoming (plus some of Utah, and a handful of other hot spots) have seen an oil and gas shale boom, but Texas' job growth has been more broad-based:

The Texas skeptics often invoke high energy prices, as if Texas were some sheikdom next to Mexico. But according to the Dallas Fed study, energy jobs accounted for only 10.6% of the new positions. The state economy today is far more broadly based than it was before the early-1980s oil-and-gas bust. For the last nine years, Texas has led the states in exports.

To put a finer point on it, the energy industry isn't expanding merely because of rising oil prices or new natural resources. Technological innovation is also driving the business, such as the horizontal drilling that has enabled shale oil and gas fracking. New ideas are how an economy expands.

Nearly 31% of the new Texas jobs are in health care, many of which are no doubt the product of federal entitlements that go to every state. But the state is also making progress filling in historical access gaps in west and south Texas and the panhandle, where Mr. Perry's 2003 malpractice caps have led to an influx of doctors, especially high-risk specialists. The Texas Public Policy Foundation estimates that the state has netted 26,000 new physicians in the wake of reform, most from out of state.

So, nationally, jobs are only really being created in the energy sector, it seems, yet just about one-tenth of the new jobs in Texas are oil and gas jobs. The job creation in Texas has been incredibly broad-based and centered around the private-sector. Indeed, there are fewer government jobs per capita in Texas now than when Rick Perry took office ten years ago.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Texas Under Rick Perry Versus Massachusetts Under Mitt Romney.

Tweet

Mitt Romney really needs to shut his yapper on the issue of jobs. Here's why:

The fact is that Rick Perry’s Texas created more private sector jobs in the past two months than Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts did during his entire four years as governor.

With this lousy jobs record and new confirmation of RomneyCare serving as the blueprint for ObamaCare, Romney's just not the guy to take on Obama in 2012.

Go with Rick Perry:

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Texas Debt Versus U.S. Debt.

Tweet

Disingenuous attacks on the Texas success story abound these days from every which direction. One of these attacks is that the Texas debt situation is somehow terrible. I've written on how Texas' debt per capita is among the lowest in the nation here, here, and here, but there is a misleading line of attack that keeps popping up about how Texas' debt has doubled under Perry and is therefore worse than the national debt situation.

Here are some facts:

→ Per capita state government debt in Texas ranks 2nd best in the nation (an improvement from 6th best when Governor Perry took over).

→ Interest on Texas' debt as a percentage of its direct spending ranks as the third lowest in the nation.

→ Taking the $37.71 billion in Texas debt and dividing it by the Texas Gross State Product of $1.332 trillion, Texas' debt as a percentage of the annual Texas economy is only 2.83%, while the nation's debt is just below 100% of the nation's annual economy. Some sources actually peg the Texas figure at 1.05%, and the debt to personal income ratio at 1.4%.

Meanwhile, the national debt has grown and is growing at a frightening clip.

From the authoritative source on Texas debt, the Texas Bond Review Board:

Texas had a total of $37.71 billion in state debt outstanding. Texas' general obligation debt is split rated at Aaa/AA+/AAA by the three credit rating agencies, Moody's Investors Service, Standard & Poor's and Fitch Ratings.

Interestingly, if you compare some of the debt figures in Texas to the seven AAA rated states, Texas seems to beat those states pretty easily:

Compared to the seven “AAA” rated states, Texas’ net tax-supported debt per capita and net tax-supported debt as a percentage of personal income are the lowest.

While Moody's and Fitch both give Texas an AAA rating, one explanation about S&P's rating I've heard from smart people who follow this stuff closely is that Texas actually didn't have enough of a history of having and thus paying back debt to warrant more than a AA rating from S&P until recently, when S&P upgraded Texas to AA+ status.

Moreover, as I've noted before, the vast majority of debt in Texas is voter-approved.

The attacks just keep coming, though. Indeed, others have incorrectly suggested that Texas is actively going deeper ("AS WE SPEAK!!! OMG!!!") into debt because of some routine cash-flow management tools that have been in practice for nearly a quarter of a century:

The state’s recent sale of Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANs) is a cash-flow management tool that dates back to 1987. These notes are sold every fiscal year to manage cash flow and to provide up-front payments to public schools. They are repaid within the fiscal year with tax revenue that comes in after the upfront school payments are made. Texas earned the highest possible ratings in anticipation of this offering, receiving a rating of SP-1+ by Standard & Poor’s, MIG 1 by Moody’s Investors Service and F1+ by Fitch Inc. Texas’ net interest rate of .27 percent is down from last year’s rate of .34 percent, representing the state’s lowest net rate ever for these notes.

Yeah. That looks really troubling. The lowest rates ever. The second lowest debt per capita in America. Upgraded credit ratings for the state government. Oh dear!

Under some rankings, Texas is around 9th or 10th best in the country, while in other rankings, it is in the 4th or 5th range, while in still others, it is in the top 2 or 3 range.

The Texas debt situation is unequivocally a winning contrast for Rick Perry against President "Downgrade" Obama.

Context matters. Texas' state government debt situation is among the best in the country, almost no matter which way you slice it. The national debt crisis, meanwhile, threatens the very fabric of our society and undermines the future of this nation. It's one thing for liberals to disingenuously attack the Texas model, as that is what they do, but it is beyond the pale for so-called conservatives, using misleading or out-of-context stats, to attack the prime example of conservative governance and success in the nation.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Texas Forest Service Budget As High As It Has Ever Been..

Tweet

There's plenty of (almost joyful, schadenfreude-inspired) chatter out there on the left, relishing the wildfires in Texas. One of the arguments liberals are making right now is that Texas "slashed" its wildfire fighting budget. So, is that so?

No:

The Volunteer Firefighter Assistance Account appropriation for the 2012-13 biennium is comparable to amounts included in previous budgets signed by Gov. Perry. A one-time increase in funding for the 2010-11 biennium included funding for recommended capital costs like new equipment. Included below are the appropriations amounts for the Texas Forest Service for each budget signed by Gov. Perry. The Volunteer Firefighter Service Account is included in the total Texas Forest Service appropriation.

The Texas legislature traditionally makes supplemental appropriations to provide additional funding to cover unexpected costs related to disasters, including wildfires. This year, the legislature approved $121 million in supplemental spending of this sort. The threat of unpredictable natural disasters including as wildfires is precisely why Gov. Perry insisted that Texas’ 2012-13 budget not include any spending from the state’s Rainy Day Fund, which currently has an estimated balance of $6.5 billion.

Texas Forest Service appropriations

Biennium Total (in millions)

2002 – 2003 $43.5

2004 – 2005 $70.6

2006 – 2007 $72.4

2008 – 2009 $75.2

2010 – 2011 $109.2

2012 – 2013 $75.4

This bunk about wildfires and "slashed" budgets reminds me a lot of the other bogus, misleading, and ignorant reporting about the Texas budget, usually by non-Texans, over the past several months.

Texas didn't "slash" anything. If anything, the state firefighting budget is as high as it has ever been, and the Texas Forest Service is as well-equipped and well-prepared as it has ever been, with more recently-trained volunteer firefighters than ever before. There was a one-time surge in Texas Forest Service spending for equipment, from 2009 stimulus dollars, into the 2010-2011 biennial budget. That temporary surge was never intended to be a new baseline. It was for one-time capital expenditures.

You wonder why there's a spending problem in Washington? This mentality of never, ever being able to return to the normal baseline of spending after a supposedly temporary injection of stimulus is a perfect example of why budgets are out of control in Washington and balanced in Texas.

UPDATE:
And here's a video version of this graphic:

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Shattering Texas Education Myths.

Tweet

Barack Obama's Secretary of Education Arne Duncan decided to weigh in on Texas' education system last week, making a politically driven attack on Rick Perry on behalf of a feckless President whose numbers are tanking. It was an epic failure.

Education reporter Rodger Jones of the Dallas Morning News, certainly no conservative, blasted Duncan:

Education Secretary Arne Duncan's insult to Texas public education was a politically motivated distortion that doesn't become a federal official in his position.

What a load this guy is.

We shouldn't hear lies come out of the mouth of the nation's top education official...

"Lies" is a pretty strong word. After all, Andrew J. Rotherham of Time magazine took issue with Duncan, but being a Time magazine writer, he gave the Education Secretary the benefit of the doubt, saying he was "confused" by the politically motivated attack on Texas.

So what was the deal? What did Duncan say that was so egregious as to raise the ire of even the left-leaning education press?

More from Rodger Jones of the DMN:

The tipoff that Duncan doesn't care about facts was his statement about "massive increases in class size in Texas" during Rick Perry's time in the governor's office.

Does that sound right to you -- considering the fact that the 22-1 class-size cap has been in place that whole time for primary grades?

I checked TEA records on statewide class size averages. Primary grades held steady, of course, while most secondary class averages went down during the Perry years.

Examples: Secondary math classes averaged 20.3 students in 2000-01 and dropped to 18.5 by last year. Average size of secondary English/language arts classes fell from 20.2 students in 2000-01 to 17.8 by last year.

Anybody could look this stuff up. It's right there on the TEA website. Duncan surely has a few thousand employees who could help him find it.

Class sizes fell under Rick Perry. Period. And, yet, Duncan asserted "massive increases" in class size. That really does seem to cross the line from "confused" into just "flat out lying," as Ed Morrissey put it over at Hot Air.

Even the New York Times got in on the action, in Paul Krugman's usual spot (he's sort of on vacation), imploring people not to mess with Texas:

When a 2009 McKinsey study contrasted Perry’s home state to the similarly sized and situated California, it found that Texas students were “one to two years of learning ahead of California students of the same age, even though Texas has less income per capita and spends less per pupil than California.”

When it comes to minority achievement, Texas looks even better: On the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress math exam, black eighth graders in Texas outscored black eighth graders in every other state.

This is incredibly important. Texas has been a sponge for migrants both from inside the country and from foreign countries, particularly Mexico. Texas is now a minority-majority state. This is important when averaging the score of millions of people together. As I've noted before here (with a great assist from Iowahawk), Texas' white kids outperform the nation's white kids, Texas' black kids outperform the nation's black kids, and Texas' Hispanic kids outperform the nation's Hispanic kids.

Some numbers and graphics to ruminate on:

2009 4th Grade Math
White students: Texas 254, Wisconsin 250 (national average 248)
Black students: Texas 231, Wisconsin 217 (national 222)
Hispanic students: Texas 233, Wisconsin 228 (national 227)

Fourth grade math scores, sorted by state:

Fourth grade math scores, sorted by race:

2009 8th Grade Math
White students: Texas 301, Wisconsin 294 (national 294)
Black students: Texas 272, Wisconsin 254 (national 260)
Hispanic students: Texas 277, Wisconsin 268 (national 260)

Eighth grade math scores, sorted by state:

Eighth grade math scores, sorted by race:

2009 4th Grade Reading
White students: Texas 232, Wisconsin 227 (national 229)
Black students: Texas 213, Wisconsin 192 (national 204)
Hispanic students: Texas 210, Wisconsin 202 (national 204)

Fourth grade reading scores, sorted by state:

Fourth grade reading scores, sorted by race:

2009 8th Grade Reading
White students: Texas 273, Wisconsin 271 (national 271)
Black students: Texas 249, Wisconsin 238 (national 245)
Hispanic students: Texas 251, Wisconsin 250 (national 248)

Eighth grade reading scores, sorted by state:

Eighth grade reading scores, sorted by race:

2009 4th Grade Science
White students: Texas 168, Wisconsin 164 (national 162)
Black students: Texas 139, Wisconsin 121 (national 127)
Hispanic students: Wisconsin 138, Texas 136 (national 130)

Fourth grade science scores, sorted by state:

Fourth grade science scores, sorted by race:

2009 8th Grade Science
White students: Texas 167, Wisconsin 165 (national 161)
Black students: Texas 133, Wisconsin 120 (national 125)
Hispanic students: Texas 141, Wisconsin 134 (national 131)

Eighth grade science scores, sorted by state:

Eighth grade science scores, sorted by race:

The RAND Corporation studied this phenomenon, as well, and confirmed that Texas students outperform their national counterparts.

Texas can boast the top 2 public high schools in America. Plus 6 of the top 14. 7 of the top 20. And 13 of the top 38:

The next time someone claims Texas ranks "near the bottom" in education, ask them to read this post and get back with you.

The Heritage Foundation mocks Duncan's "crocodile tears" and explains how mediocrity has become the name of the game in the national education discussion:

68 percent of districts across the United States are below the 50th percentile in mathematics achievement. In more than half of states, no more than three districts have average student math performance that would place students in the upper third of math achievement in international comparisons.

Indeed, while beating national averages is not necessarily anything to write home about, it is still critical to acknowledge that the Texas model, far from perfect, has beaten the Chicago model. The Texas model may even very well may be a model for closing the minority achievement gap in other states, as well.

Knowing all of this, watch the hackery from the Obama lackey for yourself:

Texas Commissioner of Education Robert Scott fired back with some facts:

-- In 2009, Texas ranked 7th in a 26 state comparison of the only states reporting four-year on-time graduation rates. That year Texas' on-time graduation rate was 80.6%. The Texas on-time graduation rate for 2010 is now 84.3%, an amazing 3.7 percentage point increase in a single year on the dropout indicator that you are now requiring all states to report to the Department.

-- The Texas class of 2011 posted a record-high math score on the ACT college entrance exam. The Texas average math score was 21.5 and was higher than the national average of 21.1. ACT scores from 2007 to 2011 showed increases in all four subjects.

-- The 2009 NAEP Science results were impressive, as well. Texas' African American eighth-grade students earned the highest score in the nation and our Hispanic eighth-grade students were eighth. Only eighth-grade students attending the Department of Defense schools scored higher than Texas' white students who were tied with white students in Massachusetts. On the fourth-grade test, Texas' African American students out-performed their peers in every state accept Virginia and those students attending Department of Defense Schools. Texas' fourth-grade white students were ranked third behind only Virginia and Massachusetts.

This Duncan guy was chosen because he was a loyal player in the Chicago political machine, not because he is competent or innovative.

The smackdown he has received from even reporters who tend to sympathize with his team may mean we won't be hearing much from Arne Duncan for a while. This really blew up in Team Obama's face.

Texas has major education challenges, no doubt, both in K-12 and higher ed. The growth of local school district spending on extraneous facilities and administrators is a serious problem, for example. But if you want to bring weak sauce about Texas, as Obama's education guru did, prepare to look foolish.

Myth(s): debunked.

UPDATE: Didn't even notice this before. Arne Duncan used incorrectical grammars when criticizing Texas and Rick Perry.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Texas State Government Debt Is Among The Lowest In America.

Tweet

From the Tax Foundation:

With so much recent discussion of the fiscal outlook of the federal government, it's worth looking at the solvency of state governments as well. Today's map shows how much interest on their debt the states pay as a percentage of their direct spending.

Texas also has the second lowest debt per capita at the state government level:

Texas also has the second lowest state debt as a percentage of personal income.

While it is true that voters in Texas have approved far more bond debt, mostly for roads, in the past decade (voters, even conservative Texas voters, tend to vote "yes" to almost any shiny objects on the ballot), those bonds are at least paid for with fees and assessments, and they are targeted and temporary, for specific purposes like infrastructure.

Texas has seen its non-self-supporting debt (the kind that gets you in trouble because the money is spent on who-knows-what and there's no mechanism for paying back the borrowing) fall significantly in recent years, to the tune of roughly 16%.

Forbes ranks Texas number four (meaning, one of the best) on its debt weight scorecard, and gives Texas four stars out of four for avoiding a state debt disaster. All this, and Texas remains a donor state, contributing more in taxes to Washington than it receives back in federal benefits.

Moreover, while America got downgraded under President Obama, Texas got a credit upgrade under Rick Perry.

So, to recap:

Texas has the second lowest debt per capita in America, as well as the third lowest interest payments on the debt of any state, despite it being a donor state, according to the Tax Foundation.

Forbes gives Texas four stars for its debt situation, and ranks Texas fourth in the country for the best handling of debt.

Texas also has the second lowest debt in the country, as a percentage of personal income, has reduced its non-self-supporting debt substantially over the past decade, and had its bond rating recently upgraded.

While Texans ought to keep an eye on all of that voter-approved local debt, and possibly make it harder for bond issues to make it onto the ballot in the first place, Texas' debt situation under Governor Rick Perry is a great story to tell, relative to America's debt explosion under Barack Obama.

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Five Amazing Facts About Texas' Economy.

Tweet

Will Governor Perry take the leap and get into the race, perhaps even in the next few weeks? I wholeheartedly hope so. No other candidate in the race provides this sort of contrast with President Obama on jobs and the economy.

With the market just tanking today and the jobs figures for July coming out tomorrow, this is a timely video from Students for Perry, indeed.