So writes Diane Vespa, a local parent of two children who attend Peoria Public Schools. She works as a volunteer in the classrooms and advocates for sound child-focused district policy. She also works as a realtor and her husband, John, a judge, is running for election in November.
Her article appears in the August Issue of InterBusiness Issues magazine. She is right in all areas including school board members with little background to run an $150 million system. She says not to be too hard on the unions. Unions in Peoria Public School District #150 have gained their power through the public general dis-interest in who serves on the (thankless 5 year, no pay, my comments), school board.
Diane tells it pretty much like it is which is rare in a publication like IB that generally selects article writers who are only positive and optimistic about the "goings on" in this community.
Diane says new buildings are nice but it's what the kids learn that is more important than new steel and concrete (and debt, I might add).
Her article can be found on pages 64-66. Good reading, and thanks, Diane, for telling it like it is while holding hope for the future of the Peoria Public Schools with less interference from the government such as the highly questionable NCLB.
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
Liberal Piety and the Memory of 9/11
This the title of a column in today's WSJ by one of my favorite columnists, Dorothy Rabinowitz. Among supporters of the location of the Islamic Mosque is New York Mayor, Michael Bloomberg who states, "Ground Zero is a 'very appropriate place' for a (15 story) mosque. It 'tells the world' that in America, we have freedom of religion for everyone."
Rabinowitz writes, "Here was an idea we have been hearing more and more of lately--the need to show the world America's devotion to democracy and justice, also cited by the administration as a reason to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in NY City. Who is it, we can only wonder, that requires these proof? What occasions these regular brayings on the need to show the world the United States is a free nation?
Bloomberg and Cuomo resort to the pious battle cries, the claim that antagonists of the plan stand against religious freedom. Why have the builders insisted on building this 15 story mosque within 2 blocks of Ground Zero? It is an insistence that calls to mind the Flying Inmans, whose ostentatious prayers-apparently designed to call attention to themselves on a U.S. Airways flight to Phoenix in November 2006-ended in a lawsuit. The inmans sued. The airlines lost.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser-devout Muslim, physician, former U.S. Nay Lt. Commander and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy-says there is every reason to investigate the center's funding under the circumstance. Of the mosque so near the site of the 0/11 attacks, he notes 'It will certainly be a seen as a victory for political Islam.'
The center may be built where planned (at least one lawsuit has been filled to stop it) but it will not be without consequences on the political intent on jamming the project down the public throat, in the name of principle. Liberal piety may have met its match in the raw memory of 9/11, and in citizens who have come to know pure demagoguery when they hear it. They have had, of late, plenty of practice."
Don't expect our current administration to come to the support of the the families of the victims of 9/11. He is too busy making "nice' to all the oppressive regimes in the world while they laugh at him behind his back.
Rabinowitz writes, "Here was an idea we have been hearing more and more of lately--the need to show the world America's devotion to democracy and justice, also cited by the administration as a reason to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in NY City. Who is it, we can only wonder, that requires these proof? What occasions these regular brayings on the need to show the world the United States is a free nation?
Bloomberg and Cuomo resort to the pious battle cries, the claim that antagonists of the plan stand against religious freedom. Why have the builders insisted on building this 15 story mosque within 2 blocks of Ground Zero? It is an insistence that calls to mind the Flying Inmans, whose ostentatious prayers-apparently designed to call attention to themselves on a U.S. Airways flight to Phoenix in November 2006-ended in a lawsuit. The inmans sued. The airlines lost.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser-devout Muslim, physician, former U.S. Nay Lt. Commander and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy-says there is every reason to investigate the center's funding under the circumstance. Of the mosque so near the site of the 0/11 attacks, he notes 'It will certainly be a seen as a victory for political Islam.'
The center may be built where planned (at least one lawsuit has been filled to stop it) but it will not be without consequences on the political intent on jamming the project down the public throat, in the name of principle. Liberal piety may have met its match in the raw memory of 9/11, and in citizens who have come to know pure demagoguery when they hear it. They have had, of late, plenty of practice."
Don't expect our current administration to come to the support of the the families of the victims of 9/11. He is too busy making "nice' to all the oppressive regimes in the world while they laugh at him behind his back.
Aaron Schock on H.R. 5175
Forwarded to me by a friend. An intelligent answer from an intelligent public servant.
Merle
August 3, 2010
Dear Mr. McWilliams,
Thank you for contacting me regarding, H.R. 5175, the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act. I certainly appreciate hearing your views on this issue, and welcome the opportunity to respond.
Currently all groups funding political advertisements must disclose their identities in each ad and file spending reports with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). Donors who contribute toward funding the ads must also be disclosed. Furthermore, foreign corporations are prohibited from making donations or supporting electioneering communications.
As you may know, H.R. 5175, was introduced by Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) on April 29, 2010, and subsequently passed the House of Representatives on June 24, 2010. However, this bill has recently stalled in the Senate. Passage of this bill would impose absurd disclosure requirements that could take up more than half of an ad's time. It is a bill that was craftily designed to serve the interests of the current majority in Congress.
This bill is so objectionable to adherents of the First Amendment, that disparate groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have united in opposition.
The DISCLOSE Act is the result of a recent Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. FEC. The Court held that funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment. The Court struck down a provision of the Campaign Reform Act that prohibited both for-profit, not-for-profit entities, and unions from broadcasting commercials within 60 days of a general election and within 30 days of a primary election. The ruling became even more infamous, after President Obama gave an unprecedented rebuke to the Supreme Court during his State of the Union address.
The DISCLOSE Act is nothing more than a punitive measure against associations of persons who choose to exercise their right to free political speech; as guaranteed by the Constitution and affirmed in the Citizens United v. FEC case. The bill's new limits on spending and endless disclosure requirements target only the political speech of businesses and non-profits, with no effect on unions - including foreign-influenced labor unions, public-employee unions or government grant recipients.
Alarmingly, the DISCLOSE Act represents a significant departure from past campaign-finance legislation, which sought to treat unions and businesses comparably and was framed in a genuinely bi-partisan manner. The legislation's sponsors admit that the bill's purpose is to deter their potential enemies from participating in the political process. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has said that the bill will make organizations "think twice" before attempting to influence election outcomes, and that this "deterrent effect should not be underestimated."
While the authors of the bill claim their provisions are necessary for voters to know who is paying for political advertising, the truth is they want to intimidate concerned groups into not expressing their views about incumbent lawmakers without fear of retaliation.
By attempting to silence voices in the political process, while enabling unions to retain their enormous influence, the DISCLOSE Act is patently unconstitutional and a political threat to the election process. Its partisan intent is clear. The bill's principal sponsor in the House, Congressman Van Hollen, is the Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC); its other principal sponsor has previously held the equivalent position in the Senate. The sponsors have openly admitted their intent to enact the bill quickly to influence the elections this fall.
While I understand the concerns many may have with the Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC, I believe the decision preserves the free speech protections of the First Amendment and ensures that these protections are applied evenly. I voted against the DISCLOSE measure when it was passed by the House this past June.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please don't hesitate to contact me in the future regarding this, or any other issue. Also, to stay informed on what's happening in Washington, please feel free to sign up for my electronic newsletter, The Schock Report, at www.schock.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Aaron Schock
Member of Congress
Merle
August 3, 2010
Dear Mr. McWilliams,
Thank you for contacting me regarding, H.R. 5175, the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act. I certainly appreciate hearing your views on this issue, and welcome the opportunity to respond.
Currently all groups funding political advertisements must disclose their identities in each ad and file spending reports with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). Donors who contribute toward funding the ads must also be disclosed. Furthermore, foreign corporations are prohibited from making donations or supporting electioneering communications.
As you may know, H.R. 5175, was introduced by Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) on April 29, 2010, and subsequently passed the House of Representatives on June 24, 2010. However, this bill has recently stalled in the Senate. Passage of this bill would impose absurd disclosure requirements that could take up more than half of an ad's time. It is a bill that was craftily designed to serve the interests of the current majority in Congress.
This bill is so objectionable to adherents of the First Amendment, that disparate groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have united in opposition.
The DISCLOSE Act is the result of a recent Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. FEC. The Court held that funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment. The Court struck down a provision of the Campaign Reform Act that prohibited both for-profit, not-for-profit entities, and unions from broadcasting commercials within 60 days of a general election and within 30 days of a primary election. The ruling became even more infamous, after President Obama gave an unprecedented rebuke to the Supreme Court during his State of the Union address.
The DISCLOSE Act is nothing more than a punitive measure against associations of persons who choose to exercise their right to free political speech; as guaranteed by the Constitution and affirmed in the Citizens United v. FEC case. The bill's new limits on spending and endless disclosure requirements target only the political speech of businesses and non-profits, with no effect on unions - including foreign-influenced labor unions, public-employee unions or government grant recipients.
Alarmingly, the DISCLOSE Act represents a significant departure from past campaign-finance legislation, which sought to treat unions and businesses comparably and was framed in a genuinely bi-partisan manner. The legislation's sponsors admit that the bill's purpose is to deter their potential enemies from participating in the political process. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has said that the bill will make organizations "think twice" before attempting to influence election outcomes, and that this "deterrent effect should not be underestimated."
While the authors of the bill claim their provisions are necessary for voters to know who is paying for political advertising, the truth is they want to intimidate concerned groups into not expressing their views about incumbent lawmakers without fear of retaliation.
By attempting to silence voices in the political process, while enabling unions to retain their enormous influence, the DISCLOSE Act is patently unconstitutional and a political threat to the election process. Its partisan intent is clear. The bill's principal sponsor in the House, Congressman Van Hollen, is the Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC); its other principal sponsor has previously held the equivalent position in the Senate. The sponsors have openly admitted their intent to enact the bill quickly to influence the elections this fall.
While I understand the concerns many may have with the Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC, I believe the decision preserves the free speech protections of the First Amendment and ensures that these protections are applied evenly. I voted against the DISCLOSE measure when it was passed by the House this past June.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please don't hesitate to contact me in the future regarding this, or any other issue. Also, to stay informed on what's happening in Washington, please feel free to sign up for my electronic newsletter, The Schock Report, at www.schock.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Aaron Schock
Member of Congress
Islamic Mosque Near Ground Zero
We must not fool ourselves in the true intent of this "religious" mosque. If it is built at this location, at some point it should come down. As an American senior student of Islam, I have concluded that just as in Germany, Italy, Japan, the Balkans, Somalia, Pakistan, India, Iran, etc., most of the citizenry did not nor do they want war. Nor do they want the destruction of certain ethnic groups. But the radical elements, though much smaller in numbers, seize power through forcing their ideology on the largely unsuspecting and sometimes fearful inhabitants of these countries.
Among the dozens of books I have read is a book of "real" fiction; "American Taliban" by by Pearl Abraham that is best described in the cover as 'provocative, unsettling' in describing how a typical upper-middle class family became snared by the forces of history, politics and faith and whose son finds his destination in Islam destructive web.
As liberal Columnist Leonard Pitts writes on November 12, 2009, "Not fair to judge U.S. Muslims by Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood Killer", it is not fair to believe that all Muslims believe in the writings in the Quran such as 'O ye who believed! Take not the Jews and Christians as friends. They are friends to one another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoers.' Pickthall translation, Quran 5:51 and "Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that what Allah has forbidden by his messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low' (9.29).
Islam preaches an intolerance of non-believers. My grandson, who is in the Armed Forces and has served in the Middle East says most Muslims will smile at you but beneath the surface, they do not like non-believers. Of course, not liking and killing non-believers is a gap bridged by millions of radicals of Islamic faith.
All countries have native born radicals. We moderates do not tolerate them and take action to remove them from our street without nearly enough success. We rail against their cowardly actions.
I have blogged "What's Happening in the Muslim World," 2/01/08 and "Geert Wilders Trial", 2/19/10. I refer you to hundreds of articles such as about the terrorist Yousesf who is quoted as saying, "The problem is not in Muslims," "The problem is with their God. He is their biggest enemy. It has been 1400 years they have been lied to."
On July 10, 2007, R. James Woolsey, then Co-chair of the Committee on Present Danger, Director of Intelligence from 1993-5 and Nina Shea, then director of the Center for Religious Freedom of the Hudson Institute, wrote in the WSJ, "What about Muslim Moderates?' Yes, what about them? We hear from them far to seldom and without much conviction despite the liberal press in this county. Yes, what about the Muslim Brotherhood whose motto is "Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, jihad is our way, dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
Among the dozens of books I have read is a book of "real" fiction; "American Taliban" by by Pearl Abraham that is best described in the cover as 'provocative, unsettling' in describing how a typical upper-middle class family became snared by the forces of history, politics and faith and whose son finds his destination in Islam destructive web.
As liberal Columnist Leonard Pitts writes on November 12, 2009, "Not fair to judge U.S. Muslims by Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood Killer", it is not fair to believe that all Muslims believe in the writings in the Quran such as 'O ye who believed! Take not the Jews and Christians as friends. They are friends to one another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoers.' Pickthall translation, Quran 5:51 and "Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that what Allah has forbidden by his messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low' (9.29).
Islam preaches an intolerance of non-believers. My grandson, who is in the Armed Forces and has served in the Middle East says most Muslims will smile at you but beneath the surface, they do not like non-believers. Of course, not liking and killing non-believers is a gap bridged by millions of radicals of Islamic faith.
All countries have native born radicals. We moderates do not tolerate them and take action to remove them from our street without nearly enough success. We rail against their cowardly actions.
I have blogged "What's Happening in the Muslim World," 2/01/08 and "Geert Wilders Trial", 2/19/10. I refer you to hundreds of articles such as about the terrorist Yousesf who is quoted as saying, "The problem is not in Muslims," "The problem is with their God. He is their biggest enemy. It has been 1400 years they have been lied to."
On July 10, 2007, R. James Woolsey, then Co-chair of the Committee on Present Danger, Director of Intelligence from 1993-5 and Nina Shea, then director of the Center for Religious Freedom of the Hudson Institute, wrote in the WSJ, "What about Muslim Moderates?' Yes, what about them? We hear from them far to seldom and without much conviction despite the liberal press in this county. Yes, what about the Muslim Brotherhood whose motto is "Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, jihad is our way, dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
Mixed up Priorities in the U.S.
Forwarded to me by a friend.
Real news
Lindsay Lohan, 24, gets her name and face all over the news because she went to jail.
Justin Allen, 23, Brett Linley, 29, Matthew Weikert, 29, Justus Bartett, 27, Dave Santos, 21, Chase Stanley, 21, Jesse Reed, 26,Matthew Johnson, 21, Zachary Fisher, 24, Brandon King, 23, Christopher Goeke, 23, and Sheldon Tate, 27, are all Marines that gave their lives for YOU this week. Honor THEM by forwarding this.
Real news
Lindsay Lohan, 24, gets her name and face all over the news because she went to jail.
Justin Allen, 23, Brett Linley, 29, Matthew Weikert, 29, Justus Bartett, 27, Dave Santos, 21, Chase Stanley, 21, Jesse Reed, 26,Matthew Johnson, 21, Zachary Fisher, 24, Brandon King, 23, Christopher Goeke, 23, and Sheldon Tate, 27, are all Marines that gave their lives for YOU this week. Honor THEM by forwarding this.
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Obama Propagandist - Keith Olbermann
I listen to him just to see how crazy this guy is. A couple of years ago I blogged that he would have made a good propagandist for the Nazi regime. My opinion hasn't changed. No, I don't read or listen to Rush, either.
Find more about his nuttiness by emailing THeditor@TownHallmail.org and Membership@MyHeritage.org
Find more about his nuttiness by emailing THeditor@TownHallmail.org and Membership@MyHeritage.org
Stephanie Aaron is Back in the Area
Hey there everyone -
Hope you are all keeping cool as we round the last lap of summer. It's hot as blazes up here in Chicago, but we're moving the heat downstate as I join Larry Harms for what will be my last regularly scheduled appearances in Central Illinois for awhile. Don't miss me with the Larry Harms Trio at Basta O'Neill's Restaurant on Cummings Lane in Washington this Thursday, August 5 from 6 - 9pm - we love this place with its great food and wonderful people. On Friday, August 6, I will be at the Contemporary Arts Center on Water Street from 5:30 - 7:30 in Peoria...this will be a very special night for Larry and me as we get back to basics with some duo work, plus we're bringing along some of our old and dear friends that we started out with! Bring a nice bottle of wine with you, maybe some cheese and crackers, some friends, etc. This is going to be a lovely evening and we want to pack the house. On Saturday, August 7, we'll hit Swinger's Grille in Bloomington from 8 - 11pm - we want to make sure we don't leave out our Twin Cities fans! Again, I won't be scheduling regular gigs outside of Chicago in the immediate future, so don't miss this chance to come and hang out and swing with me!! Over the next few months I'll be working on my next recording and revamping my website, pictures, and gigs, so make sure you bookmark my website (www.stephanieaaron.com) and check in with me to see what's happening.
Hope to see you all this weekend!!
~Stephanie
Hope you are all keeping cool as we round the last lap of summer. It's hot as blazes up here in Chicago, but we're moving the heat downstate as I join Larry Harms for what will be my last regularly scheduled appearances in Central Illinois for awhile. Don't miss me with the Larry Harms Trio at Basta O'Neill's Restaurant on Cummings Lane in Washington this Thursday, August 5 from 6 - 9pm - we love this place with its great food and wonderful people. On Friday, August 6, I will be at the Contemporary Arts Center on Water Street from 5:30 - 7:30 in Peoria...this will be a very special night for Larry and me as we get back to basics with some duo work, plus we're bringing along some of our old and dear friends that we started out with! Bring a nice bottle of wine with you, maybe some cheese and crackers, some friends, etc. This is going to be a lovely evening and we want to pack the house. On Saturday, August 7, we'll hit Swinger's Grille in Bloomington from 8 - 11pm - we want to make sure we don't leave out our Twin Cities fans! Again, I won't be scheduling regular gigs outside of Chicago in the immediate future, so don't miss this chance to come and hang out and swing with me!! Over the next few months I'll be working on my next recording and revamping my website, pictures, and gigs, so make sure you bookmark my website (www.stephanieaaron.com) and check in with me to see what's happening.
Hope to see you all this weekend!!
~Stephanie
Monday, July 26, 2010
The Governor of Arizona is SO RIGHT
Forwarded to me by a friend. I wouldn't walk accross the street to see those over paid, mostly non-voting, jocks play.
The owner of the Phoenix Suns basketball team, Robert Sarver, opposes AZ's new immigration laws. Arizona's Governor, Jan Brewer, released the following statement in response to Sarver's criticism of the new law:
"What if the owners of the Suns discovered that hordes of people were sneaking into games without paying? What if they had a good idea who the gate-crashers are, but the ushers and security personnel were not allowed to ask these folks to produce their ticket stubs, thus non-paying attendees couldn't be ejected. Furthermore, what if Suns' ownership was expected to provide those who sneaked in with complimentary eats and drink? And what if, on those days when a gate-crasher became ill or injured, the Suns had to provide free medical care and shelter?" -Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer
The owner of the Phoenix Suns basketball team, Robert Sarver, opposes AZ's new immigration laws. Arizona's Governor, Jan Brewer, released the following statement in response to Sarver's criticism of the new law:
"What if the owners of the Suns discovered that hordes of people were sneaking into games without paying? What if they had a good idea who the gate-crashers are, but the ushers and security personnel were not allowed to ask these folks to produce their ticket stubs, thus non-paying attendees couldn't be ejected. Furthermore, what if Suns' ownership was expected to provide those who sneaked in with complimentary eats and drink? And what if, on those days when a gate-crasher became ill or injured, the Suns had to provide free medical care and shelter?" -Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
News Media Sources - Three of the Best
Wall Street Journal - my top source of information
Fox news medias
Newsmax.com
All conservative to offset the liberal and left-wing press.
Fox news medias
Newsmax.com
All conservative to offset the liberal and left-wing press.
An Educators Attack on Our American Capitalistic System
As of 2004, there were over 7,000,000, that’s seven million corporations in the U.S.A. and if they were all run like the public school system, they would all be bankrupt. I allow this letter on my blog site to show how well educated people like Jerry Becker have empathy for the populist bent that is destroying a large part of the educational system in this country. Or maybe Dr. Becker is just publishing another teacher's opinion.
Yes, I agree, that many large Corporations had and have boards made up of "good old boys and girls" but what would one expect out of 7 millions corporate businesses? Most anyone also realizes that many school boards make decisions that are detrimental to our system. But many of these board members are elected because better qualified people do not want to put their established reputations attacked by unqualified journalists and liberal editorial boards. Unfortunately, people are elected who are not qualified to run large school systems. Especially in non-community based schools like School District #150 in Peoria.
This 28 year union member teacher, tries to defend the promotion by seniority that seldom works in more than 7 million corporations in this country, many of these corporations being small businesses and not at all like the few large corporations that sometimes abuse the system. He tries to defend the ugly, lengthy and costly legal process to fire teachers. A system that allows many teachers who should not be teaching others to make more money every year and accumulate more retirement and health care benefits.
He is absolutely opposed to incentives which are the backbone of the private sector. The private sector overall does not support tenure nor promote on tenure. They do support performance and loyalty as long as economic conditions permit. That some large corporations with "tort" CEO's went bankrupt for failing to perform. Hand picked boards failed to ask the right questions yet picked up their "tort" pay. But to brand the more than 7 million corporations and their boards; most of them do not have boards, as incompetent is extreme populism and ignorance. This man taught kids for 28 years. No wonder this country IS on a downward slant to socialism.
Since much of the problems in society, both public and private, are the result of incompetent but well meaning Board of Directors. The question here is how to correct the public school system, the foremost priority of all communities. Here is an idea that I've pointed out in numerous blogs:
Elected school boards should be small, maybe as few as three. If three was the number decided by a volunteer committee, redistricting would be necessary to allow all of the citizens to be represented. The positions should be full time and and elected board members must be well paid. They should each have a small office and share a common secretary. Elected terms should be 3 years with a 9 year limit of consecutive service. Three years after the first election, one board member must leave the board; I suggest that member be the one who drew the least number of votes. This would leave two experienced members on the board. In the sixth year or 2nd election; possibly by lottery or least number of votes, a six year or 2nd term member must leave the board and a new member elected. This process would then continue with 2 experienced board member serving at election time. This system would allow new talent to come aboard. Any board member could re-run for office three years after completion of their elected term.
Under no circumstances should this board hire an educator to administrate systems the size of Peoria with a budget over $150 million. Look what education administrators have done to Peoria Public School District #150 financial system and business administration. Superintendents must have a background based on business administration, marketing and finance. Educators would be hired as Associate Administrators.
The current system in Peoria School District #150 elects school board members to 5 year terms with no pay, no office, and with little secretarial help. The new system would allow a member to serve as long as nine years but that member could be removed as could any elected official in the public sector who fails to perform as per contract. Public officials in say, Peoria County or City, can be voted out of office so admittedly there is only job security for the term for which they were elected.
These high paying positions would attract a better quality of board members. This is no insult to current board members or superintendents. The current system in place for a couple of centurys must be changed similar to the change made in D.C This system established a couple of years ago appears to be working as best it can under extremely difficult conditions.
A volunteer committee appointed by the Mayor would oversee the whole system and would appoint someone to fill the unexpired term of any board member leaving their elected position before their term of office was completed. This committee would also be composed of rotating members to here again bring fresh ideas to the system.
Sounds impossible to change laws and systems because resistance to change? Sure, but better to try some well thought out and planned changes than to continue on our path to mediocrity. Change has to start with new ideas. Has this country run out of innovation in our public sector as some intellects believe?
Here is the widely circulated letter.
Merle
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Becker
To: JERRY-P-BECKER-USA-L@listserv.siu.edu
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 12:59 PM
Subject: Corporate Criticism of Teacher Pay Is Sheer Hypocrisy
*************************
From Education Week [American Education's Newspaper of Record], Monday, July 19, 2010. See http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/walt_gardners_reality_check/2010/07/corporate_criticism_of_teacher_pay_is_hypocrisy.html
*************************
Corporate Criticism of Teacher Pay Is Sheer Hypocrisy
By Walt Gardner
Corporate leaders have repeatedly demanded that teachers be paid strictly on the basis of the performance of their students because that's how the "real world" works. Yet even when they miss their goals, top executives continue to receive fat paychecks, including generous bonuses. Curiously, this double standard is given short shrift in the debate over school reform.
In the summer and fall of 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission sent letters to 350 corporations to gather information about how executive pay is determined. The SEC expected full cooperation in light of of public anger over the issue. But instead, it had to send second letters to a majority of the same companies because of the unsatisfactory replies it received. Their lackadaisical response raised some eyebrows at the time, but nothing much beyond that reaction. What has emerged since then, however, is a three-part pattern of hypocrisy about corporate remuneration that can no longer be ignored.
First, corporate leaders reluctantly admit there are unquantifiable elements that determine their individual compensation packages. This, of course, is precisely what teachers have maintained all along about teaching. But teachers are accused of making excuses when they argue that non-cognitive outcomes, for example, are not as easily measured as numeracy and literacy.
Second, the same corporate leaders claim that linking their remuneration to earnings and stock prices would force them to excessively focus on short-term results, which are bad for stockholders. But when teachers say that judging their effectiveness disproportionately on standardized test scores would be bad for students because this metric narrows the curriculum and turns classrooms into test preparation factories, their claim is met with utter disdain.
Third, corporate leaders finally play their trump card. They huff that they can be ultimately fired when they don't deliver, whereas public school teachers cannot because of union rules. What they don't admit, however, is that in the boardroom, symbiosis exists on a scale rarely seen elsewhere. As a result, it's the exception, rather than the rule, that ineffectiveness leads to dismissal.
Here's why: the pay of the CEO is set by the board of directors - usually the compensation committee. Although the directors are elected by the stockholders via proxies, most are not returned. Therefore, the board is chosen essentially by the CEO. Once directors are on the board, they don't leave. Why should they? They get handsome pay for sitting in meetings, generous insurance, and a comfortable pension. Moreover, they fly on private jets to luxury resorts to attend conferences. Even if a CEO is finally fired by the board, he/she can walk away in one year with more money than 50 teachers earn in a lifetime. It's not called a golden parachute for nothing. As Mel Brooks quipped in The History of the World, "It's good to be the king."
Stockholders, of course, are free to turn to the courts for a remedy, but the odds are stacked against them. Big business has deep pockets and wears down plaintiffs. Yet the same coddled executives are quick to attack teachers unions for trying to protect their members' right of due process. It's enough to make any fair-minded person sick.
---------------------------
PHOTO SIDEBAR: Walt Gardner taught for 28 years in the Los Angeles Unified School District and was a lecturer in the UCLA Graduate School of Education.
*******************************************
--
Yes, I agree, that many large Corporations had and have boards made up of "good old boys and girls" but what would one expect out of 7 millions corporate businesses? Most anyone also realizes that many school boards make decisions that are detrimental to our system. But many of these board members are elected because better qualified people do not want to put their established reputations attacked by unqualified journalists and liberal editorial boards. Unfortunately, people are elected who are not qualified to run large school systems. Especially in non-community based schools like School District #150 in Peoria.
This 28 year union member teacher, tries to defend the promotion by seniority that seldom works in more than 7 million corporations in this country, many of these corporations being small businesses and not at all like the few large corporations that sometimes abuse the system. He tries to defend the ugly, lengthy and costly legal process to fire teachers. A system that allows many teachers who should not be teaching others to make more money every year and accumulate more retirement and health care benefits.
He is absolutely opposed to incentives which are the backbone of the private sector. The private sector overall does not support tenure nor promote on tenure. They do support performance and loyalty as long as economic conditions permit. That some large corporations with "tort" CEO's went bankrupt for failing to perform. Hand picked boards failed to ask the right questions yet picked up their "tort" pay. But to brand the more than 7 million corporations and their boards; most of them do not have boards, as incompetent is extreme populism and ignorance. This man taught kids for 28 years. No wonder this country IS on a downward slant to socialism.
Since much of the problems in society, both public and private, are the result of incompetent but well meaning Board of Directors. The question here is how to correct the public school system, the foremost priority of all communities. Here is an idea that I've pointed out in numerous blogs:
Elected school boards should be small, maybe as few as three. If three was the number decided by a volunteer committee, redistricting would be necessary to allow all of the citizens to be represented. The positions should be full time and and elected board members must be well paid. They should each have a small office and share a common secretary. Elected terms should be 3 years with a 9 year limit of consecutive service. Three years after the first election, one board member must leave the board; I suggest that member be the one who drew the least number of votes. This would leave two experienced members on the board. In the sixth year or 2nd election; possibly by lottery or least number of votes, a six year or 2nd term member must leave the board and a new member elected. This process would then continue with 2 experienced board member serving at election time. This system would allow new talent to come aboard. Any board member could re-run for office three years after completion of their elected term.
Under no circumstances should this board hire an educator to administrate systems the size of Peoria with a budget over $150 million. Look what education administrators have done to Peoria Public School District #150 financial system and business administration. Superintendents must have a background based on business administration, marketing and finance. Educators would be hired as Associate Administrators.
The current system in Peoria School District #150 elects school board members to 5 year terms with no pay, no office, and with little secretarial help. The new system would allow a member to serve as long as nine years but that member could be removed as could any elected official in the public sector who fails to perform as per contract. Public officials in say, Peoria County or City, can be voted out of office so admittedly there is only job security for the term for which they were elected.
These high paying positions would attract a better quality of board members. This is no insult to current board members or superintendents. The current system in place for a couple of centurys must be changed similar to the change made in D.C This system established a couple of years ago appears to be working as best it can under extremely difficult conditions.
A volunteer committee appointed by the Mayor would oversee the whole system and would appoint someone to fill the unexpired term of any board member leaving their elected position before their term of office was completed. This committee would also be composed of rotating members to here again bring fresh ideas to the system.
Sounds impossible to change laws and systems because resistance to change? Sure, but better to try some well thought out and planned changes than to continue on our path to mediocrity. Change has to start with new ideas. Has this country run out of innovation in our public sector as some intellects believe?
Here is the widely circulated letter.
Merle
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Becker
To: JERRY-P-BECKER-USA-L@listserv.siu.edu
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 12:59 PM
Subject: Corporate Criticism of Teacher Pay Is Sheer Hypocrisy
*************************
From Education Week [American Education's Newspaper of Record], Monday, July 19, 2010. See http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/walt_gardners_reality_check/2010/07/corporate_criticism_of_teacher_pay_is_hypocrisy.html
*************************
Corporate Criticism of Teacher Pay Is Sheer Hypocrisy
By Walt Gardner
Corporate leaders have repeatedly demanded that teachers be paid strictly on the basis of the performance of their students because that's how the "real world" works. Yet even when they miss their goals, top executives continue to receive fat paychecks, including generous bonuses. Curiously, this double standard is given short shrift in the debate over school reform.
In the summer and fall of 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission sent letters to 350 corporations to gather information about how executive pay is determined. The SEC expected full cooperation in light of of public anger over the issue. But instead, it had to send second letters to a majority of the same companies because of the unsatisfactory replies it received. Their lackadaisical response raised some eyebrows at the time, but nothing much beyond that reaction. What has emerged since then, however, is a three-part pattern of hypocrisy about corporate remuneration that can no longer be ignored.
First, corporate leaders reluctantly admit there are unquantifiable elements that determine their individual compensation packages. This, of course, is precisely what teachers have maintained all along about teaching. But teachers are accused of making excuses when they argue that non-cognitive outcomes, for example, are not as easily measured as numeracy and literacy.
Second, the same corporate leaders claim that linking their remuneration to earnings and stock prices would force them to excessively focus on short-term results, which are bad for stockholders. But when teachers say that judging their effectiveness disproportionately on standardized test scores would be bad for students because this metric narrows the curriculum and turns classrooms into test preparation factories, their claim is met with utter disdain.
Third, corporate leaders finally play their trump card. They huff that they can be ultimately fired when they don't deliver, whereas public school teachers cannot because of union rules. What they don't admit, however, is that in the boardroom, symbiosis exists on a scale rarely seen elsewhere. As a result, it's the exception, rather than the rule, that ineffectiveness leads to dismissal.
Here's why: the pay of the CEO is set by the board of directors - usually the compensation committee. Although the directors are elected by the stockholders via proxies, most are not returned. Therefore, the board is chosen essentially by the CEO. Once directors are on the board, they don't leave. Why should they? They get handsome pay for sitting in meetings, generous insurance, and a comfortable pension. Moreover, they fly on private jets to luxury resorts to attend conferences. Even if a CEO is finally fired by the board, he/she can walk away in one year with more money than 50 teachers earn in a lifetime. It's not called a golden parachute for nothing. As Mel Brooks quipped in The History of the World, "It's good to be the king."
Stockholders, of course, are free to turn to the courts for a remedy, but the odds are stacked against them. Big business has deep pockets and wears down plaintiffs. Yet the same coddled executives are quick to attack teachers unions for trying to protect their members' right of due process. It's enough to make any fair-minded person sick.
---------------------------
PHOTO SIDEBAR: Walt Gardner taught for 28 years in the Los Angeles Unified School District and was a lecturer in the UCLA Graduate School of Education.
*******************************************
--
Yes, May God Bless Our Troops
Forwarded to me by a friend.
Merle
*When the Music Stopped...*
When the Music Stopped...
(For those who are unaware: At all military base theaters, the National Anthem is played before the movie begins.)
This is written from a Chaplain in Iraq :
I recently attended a showing of 'Superman 3' here at
LSA Anaconda. We have a large auditorium we use for movies, as well as memorial services and other large gatherings. As is the custom at all military bases, we stood to attention when the National Anthem began before the main feature. All was going well until three-quarters of the way through The National Anthem, the music stopped.
Now, what would happen if this occurred with 1,000 18-22
year-olds back in the States? I imagine there would be
hoots, catcalls, laughter, a few rude comments, and everyone would sit down and yell for the movie to begin. Of course, that is, if they had stood for the National Anthem in the first place.
Here in Iraq, 1,000 Soldiers continued to stand at attention,
eyes fixed forward. The music started again and the Soldiers continued to quietly stand at attention. But again, at the same point, the music stopped. What would you expect 1000 Soldiers standing at attention to do?? Frankly, I expected some laughter, and everyone would eventually sit down and wait for the movie to start.
But No!!... You could have heard a pin drop, while every
Soldier continued to stand at attention.
Suddenly,there was a lone voice from the front of the auditorium, then a dozen voices, and soon the room was filled with the voices of a thousand soldiers, finishing where the recording left off: *"And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air, gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. Oh, say does that Star Spangled Banner yet wave, o'er the land of the free, and the home of the brave."*
It was the most inspiring moment I have had in Iraq and I wanted you to know what kind of Soldiers are serving you.
Remember them as they fight for us!
Pass this along as a reminder to others to be ever in prayer for all our soldiers serving us here at home and abroad. Many have already paid the ultimate price.
Written by Chaplain Jim Higgins.
LSA Anaconda is at the Ballad Airport in Iraq , north of Baghdad.
Please share only if you are so inclined.
God Bless America and all of our troops serving through out the world.
--
Merle
*When the Music Stopped...*
When the Music Stopped...
(For those who are unaware: At all military base theaters, the National Anthem is played before the movie begins.)
This is written from a Chaplain in Iraq :
I recently attended a showing of 'Superman 3' here at
LSA Anaconda. We have a large auditorium we use for movies, as well as memorial services and other large gatherings. As is the custom at all military bases, we stood to attention when the National Anthem began before the main feature. All was going well until three-quarters of the way through The National Anthem, the music stopped.
Now, what would happen if this occurred with 1,000 18-22
year-olds back in the States? I imagine there would be
hoots, catcalls, laughter, a few rude comments, and everyone would sit down and yell for the movie to begin. Of course, that is, if they had stood for the National Anthem in the first place.
Here in Iraq, 1,000 Soldiers continued to stand at attention,
eyes fixed forward. The music started again and the Soldiers continued to quietly stand at attention. But again, at the same point, the music stopped. What would you expect 1000 Soldiers standing at attention to do?? Frankly, I expected some laughter, and everyone would eventually sit down and wait for the movie to start.
But No!!... You could have heard a pin drop, while every
Soldier continued to stand at attention.
Suddenly,there was a lone voice from the front of the auditorium, then a dozen voices, and soon the room was filled with the voices of a thousand soldiers, finishing where the recording left off: *"And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air, gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. Oh, say does that Star Spangled Banner yet wave, o'er the land of the free, and the home of the brave."*
It was the most inspiring moment I have had in Iraq and I wanted you to know what kind of Soldiers are serving you.
Remember them as they fight for us!
Pass this along as a reminder to others to be ever in prayer for all our soldiers serving us here at home and abroad. Many have already paid the ultimate price.
Written by Chaplain Jim Higgins.
LSA Anaconda is at the Ballad Airport in Iraq , north of Baghdad.
Please share only if you are so inclined.
God Bless America and all of our troops serving through out the world.
--
Monday, July 19, 2010
Bill Spears is Right On
Councilman Bill Spears, in citing a constituents email to him suggesting elected officials eliminate Department heads from the city budget said, "They (the emailer) have at least come up with an alternate of keeping $1 million." Spears made his comments while Public Works Director David Barber was at the podium. "Maybe we should look at that instead." (Been paying attention to the sorry condition of so many city streets or are you so worried about the economy and a job or your job that he bumps are just another series of bad bounces for us in these times of Obama's 'Change'?)
Evidently the Sharp of the JS, did not completely cover the City Council meeting as Sharp said "he didn't return a phone call for comment".
Union workers need not worry about their jobs, if they are competent, as the private sector has to use union or at least prevailing wages on all public works. They might have to work a little harder, more efficient and a little quicker in the for-profit private sector.
After serving most of my life in the private sector and then moving into the slow and OPM public sector, I say Bill is right on. We could do the same in the County and never miss a beat. After all, Peoria County offered voluntary early retirement with other incentives to County employees and 73 accepted. As far as I have heard, the public continued to be served. (that's what we are supposed to be there to do)
How can that be? Did we have more employees than we needed? Do we have more elected officials and department heads then we need. Probably so. Is our job as elected officials to hire and guarantee public jobs no matter what indignities the private sector is suffering? If not, explain how we are still functioning without myself as an elected County Board Member never receiving a complaint? Sorry, we did. Bobby Spears indicated he was short but we rewarded his department combined with others $6+ million of more in new software, etc.
Anyway the WSJ ran an article today about how cities are turning to the privatize some of their activities. All I can say, is way to go and that may even come to pass in heavily unionized Peoria.
Evidently the Sharp of the JS, did not completely cover the City Council meeting as Sharp said "he didn't return a phone call for comment".
Union workers need not worry about their jobs, if they are competent, as the private sector has to use union or at least prevailing wages on all public works. They might have to work a little harder, more efficient and a little quicker in the for-profit private sector.
After serving most of my life in the private sector and then moving into the slow and OPM public sector, I say Bill is right on. We could do the same in the County and never miss a beat. After all, Peoria County offered voluntary early retirement with other incentives to County employees and 73 accepted. As far as I have heard, the public continued to be served. (that's what we are supposed to be there to do)
How can that be? Did we have more employees than we needed? Do we have more elected officials and department heads then we need. Probably so. Is our job as elected officials to hire and guarantee public jobs no matter what indignities the private sector is suffering? If not, explain how we are still functioning without myself as an elected County Board Member never receiving a complaint? Sorry, we did. Bobby Spears indicated he was short but we rewarded his department combined with others $6+ million of more in new software, etc.
Anyway the WSJ ran an article today about how cities are turning to the privatize some of their activities. All I can say, is way to go and that may even come to pass in heavily unionized Peoria.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)