From the Washington Posts Answer Sheet
By Gregory Michie
When President Obama used a Baltimore middle school last week as the setting to talk about his plans for education spending, his visit was short and sweet. He watched kids do a science experiment, delivered some prepared remarks, chatted with a few students, and headed for the exits. In and out in less than an hour.
This sort of quickie school visit is nothing new for elected officials. Politicians of all stripes, especially at the local level, like to take photos with smiling students in hopes of bolstering their education credentials. As with Obama's middle school appearance, their stays are typically brief and tightly choreographed.
To be fair, it's not just politicians who duck in and out of classrooms in a hurry. In recent years some school administrators have embraced the idea of short, focused observations of teachers. Three-minute "pop-ins" and "walk-throughs" are routinely used in some districts as a means of monitoring teacher effectiveness or engaging in conversations about classroom practice. Some administrators insist they are immensely useful. "You can see a lot in three minutes," an assistant principal once told me.
Maybe. But you can miss a lot, too -- especially if, as is the case with most elected officials, you have no background as an educator and little context in which to place what you see and hear.
Pop your head into a room of first-graders for a few minutes and all may seem well. Stay awhile longer and your observations may paint a different picture - one that reveals some of the pernicious ways that current test-and-punish policies distort teaching and learning.
Take the following fictionalized scenarios, for example, based on things I've seen firsthand or heard from teachers and student teachers in my classes:
Scenario 1
• As understood via a "pop-in": A fourth grade teacher is meeting in a small group with seven students, working on comprehension skills. The teacher is enthusiastic about helping the students make "text to self" connections in order to better understand a passage from a short story. All is well.
• As understood via sustained observations: The group of seven students gets additional time and attention from the teacher every day, along with small-group tutoring from a school aide, while other students in the classroom do not. Why?
The seven are "bubble kids" -- or "strategic kids," as they're known in some districts -- those whose test results from the previous year are close to "meeting the standard" and could help the school make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) if they make modest improvements. The principal has directed all the school's teachers to make the bubble kids their primary focus. What about the other students -- those who scored well above or well below the standard the previous year? "I do my best to reach them, too," the teacher says. "I really do. But it's been made pretty clear to us who matters most."
Scenario 2
• As understood via a "pop-in": Sixth graders at an urban elementary school are working individually on multiplying and dividing fractions. A student raises her hand and the teacher, who is attentively circulating around the room, goes to answer her question. The classroom is orderly and the students are well behaved. What more could we want in an "inner city" school? All is well.
• As understood via sustained observations: Virtually the entire educational experience of these sixth graders consists of two subjects: reading and math. They have just 40 minutes of science and 40 minutes of social studies scheduled per week -- and even these sometimes get canceled in favor of additional time with the Reading Mastery program.
The rest of the class's day - except for a 20-minute lunch and a physical education or computer class -- is wholly devoted to math and reading. The school has no art teacher and no library. Still, the 6th-grade teacher says things could be worse: at a nearby school, the principal directed teachers to ditch science and social studies altogether until standardized testing is completed in March.
Scenario 3
• As understood via a "pop-in": In a third-grade classroom, a teacher is guiding his students through a story from a reading series. Several kids volunteer to read aloud, even though the story itself seems rather dull and uninteresting. One wall of the classroom is lined with a collection of drawings --students' representations of challenges their community faces, along with research about each issue and ideas about how it might be tackled. Their insights are impressive. All is well.
• As understood via sustained observations: Two weeks of observations in this classroom reveal a certain mechanical quality to the day. Lots of workbooks and routine assignments.
Why not try more projects like the one displayed on the wall? "I'll be honest," the young teacher says. "We did that at the beginning of the year. Those papers have been up there for months. Don't get me wrong - I'd love to do more projects like that. I think that's how kids learn best. But with the way things are now, there's no space for creativity, there's no time for delving into issues. It's all I can do to get these kids ready for the test. Projects take lots of time -- and we don't have it."
For anyone who wonders why so many teachers are opposed to the test-driven, market-based reforms of the moment, it's at least in part because they bear witness on a daily basis to situations like these.
They don't disagree with the democratic impulse of No Child Left Behind: that all children can learn, and that all -- especially those who have been historically ill-served by public schools -- deserve our best efforts. In fact, they roundly applaud it. But they also see the twisted ways that current policies play out at ground level. And they despair over the unintended consequences.
Most lawmakers who weigh in on education issues say they want to do right by children. Those who are serious might consider spending more time in classrooms. They might begin modestly: a full day of observations -- including the 20-minute lunch -- in a single classroom at a school that’s struggling to meet AYP. But no media, photo ops, or speeches. None of the hoopla that accompanies the yearly "Principal for a Day" visits. Just a pen, a notepad, and a chair at the back of the room.
It wouldn't be enough. But for some of our elected officials, it could be the beginning of a ground-level education on what's at stake in the reform debate, and what's really happening in test-crazy schools after the three-minute pop-ins are over.
-0-
Showing posts with label public school teachers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public school teachers. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Rhee starts push to get paid
From the Washington Posts Answer Sheet
By Valerie Strauss
Former D.C. Chancellor Michelle Rhee likes to say that everything she does is for kids. But the first big campaign of her “Students First” organization, announced Wednesday, isn't really about them.
Rhee announced today what she is calling the national Save Great Teachers campaign.
What it’s not about: Giving great teachers what they say they want -- more support to do their jobs in school.
What it is about: Getting state legislatures to eliminate policies that require school districts, in the event of layoffs, to let the last-hired employees go first. This way, principals can supposedly save great young teachers and get rid of lousy older teachers.
Rhee’s intentions become transparent when one considers how to really protect great teachers: a reliable, valid, multi-part assessment system. If Rhee were so concerned about saving great teachers of any age, she would be more interested in immediately pursuing a valid assessment tool. If teachers were properly evaluated and those who don't belong in the classroom really removed, then the last-hired first-fired wouldn't be an issue, and the kids and adults would benefit.
Rhee did create a new teacher assessment system while she was D.C. schools chancelleor, called IMPACT, but after millions of dollars put into it, the system has been sharply criticized.
Among the problems cited about IMPACT are that it is highly punitive though provides little support for teachers, and that it relies on student standardized test scores, which research has shown are prone to error and ignore the fact that the quality of teaching isn’t the only factor that goes into how well a student performs on a single test. The system, unveiled in 2009, has undergone revisions though teachers still say it is unfair.
It is now common currency in school reform circles to blame teachers unions for pretty much everything wrong in schools, except for those things that can be laid at the steps of bad parents and lazy students. It doesn’t matter to people who want to union bash that the problems in schools are identical in states with unionized teachers and with non-unionized teachers, and that, perhaps, whatever one thinks about unions, the basic problems lie elsewhere.
It's tiring to hear the mantra “it’s for the kids,” or “students first” every time someone takes an anti-union step, but that any teacher who fights for his/her rights is only thinking about themselves and not the kids.
That is what is being said of the protesting teachers in Wisconsin by their critics, because they are fighting to keep their collective bargaining rights, which the Republican governor, Scott Walker, has vowed to eliminate.
Why shouldn’t the teachers protest? They already made monetary concessions and the governor still wants to strip them of the right to bargain in the future.
Why didn’t anybody say that plans just announced in Detroit to close half of the schools, a move that will create high school classes of about 60 students, is all about the adults and their failure to properly budget? Where is the concern for the kids here? Why isn’t someone figuring out how to protect the kids from humongous classes?
Maybe Michelle Rhee could have offered financial help to reduce class size in Detroit. Now THAT would be kid-friendly.
Meanwhile, the assault on teachers and their unions continues. As an example: In Amelia Island, Fla., last week, the Philanthropy Roundtable, a national association of individual donors, corporate giving officers, and foundation trustees and staff, held its annual conference and there was a session entitled “How to End Teacher Tenure.” That's what's on the minds of the rich folks who are dabbling in education policy with their millions.
It is true that over time teachers and their unions haven’t done themselves any great favors by saving the ultimate tool -- taking to the streets and shutting down schools -- to save their own collective bargaining rights.
How come teachers did not actively protest the imposition of a standardized testing dominated accountability system hen they knew that it would narrow curriculum and perpetuate invalid notions of success and failure?
It is safe to say that had they taken to the streets over No Child Left Behind, they would have been been accused of being obstructionist, lazy and afraid of being held accountable.
Oh wait. That happened anyway.
If they didn't loudly protest before over the shape of school reform as they should have, teachers are now worked up. Teachers and parents are planning a march on Washington July 28-31 in an effort to “organize and reclaim control of our schools.” That’s what the Save Our Schools March Web site says.
They can only hope that someone will be listening listening, and that they aren't too lat
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/michelle-rhee/rhees-new-initiative-not-all-a.html?wprss=answer-sheet
By Valerie Strauss
Former D.C. Chancellor Michelle Rhee likes to say that everything she does is for kids. But the first big campaign of her “Students First” organization, announced Wednesday, isn't really about them.
Rhee announced today what she is calling the national Save Great Teachers campaign.
What it’s not about: Giving great teachers what they say they want -- more support to do their jobs in school.
What it is about: Getting state legislatures to eliminate policies that require school districts, in the event of layoffs, to let the last-hired employees go first. This way, principals can supposedly save great young teachers and get rid of lousy older teachers.
Rhee’s intentions become transparent when one considers how to really protect great teachers: a reliable, valid, multi-part assessment system. If Rhee were so concerned about saving great teachers of any age, she would be more interested in immediately pursuing a valid assessment tool. If teachers were properly evaluated and those who don't belong in the classroom really removed, then the last-hired first-fired wouldn't be an issue, and the kids and adults would benefit.
Rhee did create a new teacher assessment system while she was D.C. schools chancelleor, called IMPACT, but after millions of dollars put into it, the system has been sharply criticized.
Among the problems cited about IMPACT are that it is highly punitive though provides little support for teachers, and that it relies on student standardized test scores, which research has shown are prone to error and ignore the fact that the quality of teaching isn’t the only factor that goes into how well a student performs on a single test. The system, unveiled in 2009, has undergone revisions though teachers still say it is unfair.
It is now common currency in school reform circles to blame teachers unions for pretty much everything wrong in schools, except for those things that can be laid at the steps of bad parents and lazy students. It doesn’t matter to people who want to union bash that the problems in schools are identical in states with unionized teachers and with non-unionized teachers, and that, perhaps, whatever one thinks about unions, the basic problems lie elsewhere.
It's tiring to hear the mantra “it’s for the kids,” or “students first” every time someone takes an anti-union step, but that any teacher who fights for his/her rights is only thinking about themselves and not the kids.
That is what is being said of the protesting teachers in Wisconsin by their critics, because they are fighting to keep their collective bargaining rights, which the Republican governor, Scott Walker, has vowed to eliminate.
Why shouldn’t the teachers protest? They already made monetary concessions and the governor still wants to strip them of the right to bargain in the future.
Why didn’t anybody say that plans just announced in Detroit to close half of the schools, a move that will create high school classes of about 60 students, is all about the adults and their failure to properly budget? Where is the concern for the kids here? Why isn’t someone figuring out how to protect the kids from humongous classes?
Maybe Michelle Rhee could have offered financial help to reduce class size in Detroit. Now THAT would be kid-friendly.
Meanwhile, the assault on teachers and their unions continues. As an example: In Amelia Island, Fla., last week, the Philanthropy Roundtable, a national association of individual donors, corporate giving officers, and foundation trustees and staff, held its annual conference and there was a session entitled “How to End Teacher Tenure.” That's what's on the minds of the rich folks who are dabbling in education policy with their millions.
It is true that over time teachers and their unions haven’t done themselves any great favors by saving the ultimate tool -- taking to the streets and shutting down schools -- to save their own collective bargaining rights.
How come teachers did not actively protest the imposition of a standardized testing dominated accountability system hen they knew that it would narrow curriculum and perpetuate invalid notions of success and failure?
It is safe to say that had they taken to the streets over No Child Left Behind, they would have been been accused of being obstructionist, lazy and afraid of being held accountable.
Oh wait. That happened anyway.
If they didn't loudly protest before over the shape of school reform as they should have, teachers are now worked up. Teachers and parents are planning a march on Washington July 28-31 in an effort to “organize and reclaim control of our schools.” That’s what the Save Our Schools March Web site says.
They can only hope that someone will be listening listening, and that they aren't too lat
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/michelle-rhee/rhees-new-initiative-not-all-a.html?wprss=answer-sheet
The David V Goliath battle for public schools
From the Huffington Post
by Rita M. Solnet
It wasn't just the type of slingshot or the shape of rock David used when he defeated Goliath. David's determination was steadfast, his belief system so strong, that it shaped his do or die mindset. David courageously pressed forward and defeated Goliath. But why did he win when others just as determined and just as brave do not?
This question seized my thoughts this weekend as I watched events unfold in Wisconsin and elsewhere. What helps you win when all the power and the money and legislative rule is stacked against you?
My search began. I discovered that despite the odds "Davids" win nearly one third of the time!
Two years ago, political scientist Ivan Arreguin-Toft studied every war fought in the past 200 years between strong and weak combatants. He analyzed cases where one side was as at least 10 times more powerful than the other and determined that Goliaths win 71 percent of the time. Under the circumstances, this was encouraging, but I still wondered what mystical quality the "Davids" possessed which enabled them to win against the odds?
When the underdogs acknowledged their weakness and employed unanticipated strategies, they won, according to Professor Arreguin-Toft. It wasn't just David's determination and fearlessness alone. David did the unexpected. Goliath laughed at the absurdity of David approaching him without armor. David unpredictably broke the rhythm of battle. He acted quickly with one rock and fortuitously lunged forward. He interrupted Goliath's pace. That's how David won.
Teachers were not expected to organize parents and students as allies and close down schools in Wisconsin; but, they did. Senators were not expected to leave the state to avoid a quorum; but, they did. The "Davids" are breaking the rhythm of this combat and atypically they're doing the unexpected. They are, in my opinion, on their way to winning this war!
I read articles last week detailing nearly a half dozen states who plan to launch legislative actions which will severely impact public education. With a spotlight beaming on the Wisconsin turmoil, I wondered if it would be days or weeks before Ohio, Tennessee, Florida, Illinois, Indiana would erupt similarly.
Seeking common ground and compromise is always my preference. But common sense does not appear to prevail in some states where egregious proposals are introduced to strip workers of bargaining rights and to drastically impact the stability of the teaching profession as well as reduce teachers' salaries. This is not a highly paid profession to begin with. I hasten to add, I am not a teacher.
Initiatives now disguised as "education reforms" are malignant attempts to gain increased power over unions. As I wrote two weeks ago on Huffington Post, "Who's Kidding Who With These Reforms," this fight does not belong in the classroom. Parents Across America www.ParentsAcrossAmerica.org are fed up watching this disaster unfold as children are sentenced to yet another year of reduced education funds, overcrowded classrooms, and a narrowed, unenriched curriculum due to riveting focus on a senseless standardized bubble test.
Methods concocted by lawmakers and policymakers today (non educators and non parents of public school children for the most part) are the opposite of what academically high performing countries employ. Finland, for example, is nearly 100 percent unionized. Finland strengthened their social welfare programs for children and families and invested in teachers decades ago. (Dr. Diane Ravitch's article, in December's Bridging Differences). That investment paid off. Teaching is a highly respected profession in Finland where only the best and the brightest with the highest credentials are chosen. I have yet to read where Finland chose to run weeks of anti-teacher promotions on film and tv networks and demoralize an entire profession incessantly. Nor does Finland set up competitive, non collegial environments by attaching teacher's salaries to student performance. But, I digress.
Parents will not allow their children to be the casualties in this war on unions. It is time for involved parents to react atypically as well. Children's futures are at stake. Visit, write, and phone your legislators, your school boards, your chancellors, your mayors, your governors to take this fight once and for all outside the classroom. Plead with them to stop using the education of our nation's children as leverage in their war with unions.
Parents have been disenfranchised in the effort to improve the quality of public education. As "Davids" ourselves, that is no longer acceptable. Parents are joining forces to break the rhythm of this war.
Our schools. Our children. Our voices.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rita-m-solnet/david-v-goliath-battle-ov_b_826281.html?ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=uopx
by Rita M. Solnet
It wasn't just the type of slingshot or the shape of rock David used when he defeated Goliath. David's determination was steadfast, his belief system so strong, that it shaped his do or die mindset. David courageously pressed forward and defeated Goliath. But why did he win when others just as determined and just as brave do not?
This question seized my thoughts this weekend as I watched events unfold in Wisconsin and elsewhere. What helps you win when all the power and the money and legislative rule is stacked against you?
My search began. I discovered that despite the odds "Davids" win nearly one third of the time!
Two years ago, political scientist Ivan Arreguin-Toft studied every war fought in the past 200 years between strong and weak combatants. He analyzed cases where one side was as at least 10 times more powerful than the other and determined that Goliaths win 71 percent of the time. Under the circumstances, this was encouraging, but I still wondered what mystical quality the "Davids" possessed which enabled them to win against the odds?
When the underdogs acknowledged their weakness and employed unanticipated strategies, they won, according to Professor Arreguin-Toft. It wasn't just David's determination and fearlessness alone. David did the unexpected. Goliath laughed at the absurdity of David approaching him without armor. David unpredictably broke the rhythm of battle. He acted quickly with one rock and fortuitously lunged forward. He interrupted Goliath's pace. That's how David won.
Teachers were not expected to organize parents and students as allies and close down schools in Wisconsin; but, they did. Senators were not expected to leave the state to avoid a quorum; but, they did. The "Davids" are breaking the rhythm of this combat and atypically they're doing the unexpected. They are, in my opinion, on their way to winning this war!
I read articles last week detailing nearly a half dozen states who plan to launch legislative actions which will severely impact public education. With a spotlight beaming on the Wisconsin turmoil, I wondered if it would be days or weeks before Ohio, Tennessee, Florida, Illinois, Indiana would erupt similarly.
Seeking common ground and compromise is always my preference. But common sense does not appear to prevail in some states where egregious proposals are introduced to strip workers of bargaining rights and to drastically impact the stability of the teaching profession as well as reduce teachers' salaries. This is not a highly paid profession to begin with. I hasten to add, I am not a teacher.
Initiatives now disguised as "education reforms" are malignant attempts to gain increased power over unions. As I wrote two weeks ago on Huffington Post, "Who's Kidding Who With These Reforms," this fight does not belong in the classroom. Parents Across America www.ParentsAcrossAmerica.org are fed up watching this disaster unfold as children are sentenced to yet another year of reduced education funds, overcrowded classrooms, and a narrowed, unenriched curriculum due to riveting focus on a senseless standardized bubble test.
Methods concocted by lawmakers and policymakers today (non educators and non parents of public school children for the most part) are the opposite of what academically high performing countries employ. Finland, for example, is nearly 100 percent unionized. Finland strengthened their social welfare programs for children and families and invested in teachers decades ago. (Dr. Diane Ravitch's article, in December's Bridging Differences). That investment paid off. Teaching is a highly respected profession in Finland where only the best and the brightest with the highest credentials are chosen. I have yet to read where Finland chose to run weeks of anti-teacher promotions on film and tv networks and demoralize an entire profession incessantly. Nor does Finland set up competitive, non collegial environments by attaching teacher's salaries to student performance. But, I digress.
Parents will not allow their children to be the casualties in this war on unions. It is time for involved parents to react atypically as well. Children's futures are at stake. Visit, write, and phone your legislators, your school boards, your chancellors, your mayors, your governors to take this fight once and for all outside the classroom. Plead with them to stop using the education of our nation's children as leverage in their war with unions.
Parents have been disenfranchised in the effort to improve the quality of public education. As "Davids" ourselves, that is no longer acceptable. Parents are joining forces to break the rhythm of this war.
Our schools. Our children. Our voices.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rita-m-solnet/david-v-goliath-battle-ov_b_826281.html?ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=uopx
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
John Thrasher goes after public worker's unions
From the Miami Herald's Naked Politics
by Marc Caputoo
Sen. John Thrasher, former state GOP chairman, looks like he has filed a bill (SB830) to starve unions like the Florida Education Association, SEIU, AFL-CIO, firefighters, police unions or AFSCME by banning the Democratic-leaning organizations from using salary deductions for political purposes. The legislation also says any "public employer may not deduct or collect" union dues, etc. Lastly, it says that any public employee who didn't specifically authorize the use of his money could be entitled to a partial refund.
The bill doesn't seem to go as far as Wisconsin's by ending collective bargaining rights in Florida, though in a right-to-work state there's only so much union bargaining that can take place. Still, the language about union dues sure looks like it's right out of the play book of the tea party/Wisconsin's Gov. Scott Walker (who incidentally is not a high-speed rail fan, either).
Here are some excerpts from Thrasher's bill, SB 830, which doesnn't seem to have a house sponsor. Yet.
"Deductions may not be made for purposes of political activity, including contributions to a candidate, political party, political committee, committee of continuous existence, electioneering communications organization, or organization exempt from taxation under s. 501(c)(4) or s. 527 of the Internal Revenue Code."
"A public employer may not deduct or collect the dues, uniform assessments, fines, penalties, or special assessments of an employee organization from the compensation of any person employed by the public employer..."
"Unless an employee has executed a written authorization, the employee is entitled to a pro rata refund of any dues, uniform assessments, fines, penalties, or special assessments paid by the employee and used by the labor organization of which the employee is a member to make contributions or expenditures, as defined in s. 106.011. The written authorization must be executed by the employee separately for each fiscal year of the labor organization and shall be accompanied with a detailed account, provided by the labor organization, of all contributions and expenditures made by the labor organization in the preceding 24 months."
Read more: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2011/02/wisconsin-pt-2-john-thrasher-goes-after-union-cheddar.html#ixzz1EgZMOWv7
by Marc Caputoo
Sen. John Thrasher, former state GOP chairman, looks like he has filed a bill (SB830) to starve unions like the Florida Education Association, SEIU, AFL-CIO, firefighters, police unions or AFSCME by banning the Democratic-leaning organizations from using salary deductions for political purposes. The legislation also says any "public employer may not deduct or collect" union dues, etc. Lastly, it says that any public employee who didn't specifically authorize the use of his money could be entitled to a partial refund.
The bill doesn't seem to go as far as Wisconsin's by ending collective bargaining rights in Florida, though in a right-to-work state there's only so much union bargaining that can take place. Still, the language about union dues sure looks like it's right out of the play book of the tea party/Wisconsin's Gov. Scott Walker (who incidentally is not a high-speed rail fan, either).
Here are some excerpts from Thrasher's bill, SB 830, which doesnn't seem to have a house sponsor. Yet.
"Deductions may not be made for purposes of political activity, including contributions to a candidate, political party, political committee, committee of continuous existence, electioneering communications organization, or organization exempt from taxation under s. 501(c)(4) or s. 527 of the Internal Revenue Code."
"A public employer may not deduct or collect the dues, uniform assessments, fines, penalties, or special assessments of an employee organization from the compensation of any person employed by the public employer..."
"Unless an employee has executed a written authorization, the employee is entitled to a pro rata refund of any dues, uniform assessments, fines, penalties, or special assessments paid by the employee and used by the labor organization of which the employee is a member to make contributions or expenditures, as defined in s. 106.011. The written authorization must be executed by the employee separately for each fiscal year of the labor organization and shall be accompanied with a detailed account, provided by the labor organization, of all contributions and expenditures made by the labor organization in the preceding 24 months."
Read more: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2011/02/wisconsin-pt-2-john-thrasher-goes-after-union-cheddar.html#ixzz1EgZMOWv7
Monday, February 21, 2011
Teachers deserve decent wages too
From Momma Politico
You've all heard me say it before: an educated populace is the cornerstone of our democracy. When I received a comment on my last post with the idea that education should be treated like a business, well, my comment became more than a comment, as you can well imagine. Blame it on Limbaugh, already getting me worked up by calling teachers "whiners" and "freeloaders." My thanks to the commenter, as we are always open to discussion here at Momma Politico. And here, I submit my comment here for your perusal, my fellow Politico, with a little spit-polish.
...You make some good points. Public education, however, is a very different market than that of the business sector. I don't know of any business in the private sector that has to take whatever customers it is given, or make a perfect product with whatever "raw materials" they are given. A steel plant would seek out quality ore, and Apple would not, for example, accept an order of processing chips that were not up to the industry standard. Education is a different beast than business, and not able to go "door to door," as you suggest, to gain our customers. Parents send us the best kids they have, all deserving a free and public education. And in some neighborhoods, those best kids have not had the advantages that kids in other neighborhoods may have had. If merit pay was the law of the land, there would be no one of quality who could afford to stay behind and teach the students in those underprivileged neighborhoods. And very few would be able to afford to stay and teach the ever-growing special ed populations, whose scores are now compounded into our federal growth measures. No Child Left Behind has left behind an inordinate number of students. And the so-called Race to The Top is leaving far too many schools financially at the bottom by attempting to link test scores to teacher pay.
Teaching is a thankless job, with long hours. I don't know a teacher that leaves when the kids do or arrives when they arrive. And it involves much work brought home each night - that's why you see teachers pulling those little crates on wheels behind them all the time. The planning, the grading and all the rest does not end when they close the classroom door for the day. If pro-rated, including summer vacations, the wage teachers earn would be unacceptable to anyone who has an equal amount of postgraduate education.
A National Association of Colleges and Employers study found that teachers start at a national average salary of $30,377. By contrast, computer programmers start at an average of $43,635, public accounting professionals start at $44,668 and registered nurses start at $45,570. The study also found that the more years teachers put into teaching, the bigger the gap became. Using U.S. Census data, the study found that teachers’ annual pay has fallen dramatically over the past 60 years in comparison to that of other workers with college degrees. Nationally, the average earnings of workers with at least four years of college are over 50 percent higher than the average earnings of teachers. (from edvoters.org)
Thankfully, most of us do it for the satisfaction of seeing our kids grow, knowing (as cliche as it sounds) that every day we make a difference in kids' lives, and not for the paycheck. That's for certain.
Wisconsin was set for a surplus under their Democratic governor, until such time as their new Republican governor gave huge tax cuts to business and the wealthy. Now, they are facing a deficit of nearly the same amount as was their surplus. I don't buy the "tax cuts to corporations create jobs" line. Besides all the evidence that shows that tax cuts are the least stimulative measure, it serves to reason that if it were true, we'd have come out of the eight years of the Bush Administration with a surplus greater than that under Bill Clinton...and we all know how that turned out.
There seems to be a myth out there that the WI teachers union is not willing to negotiate pay. The teachers in question are willing to sit at the table an discuss pay and benefits. It's been stated over and over. What's at question here is the basic right of unions to collectively bargain. While the union system may have its flaws, (as if the private sector is without sin?), the protections it offers provide us with teachers willing to teach the poorest of the poor, the disabled, they child who has never held a book before going to school (yes, there are many) and the child who needs to learn English, right along with all the rest. The right to collectively bargain gives those teachers an opportunity to protect what little they have in the way of salary, benefits and working conditions. These are not the Cadillac benefits of yesteryear, and the salaries are certainly not commensurate to their counterparts in the general workforce.
Despite all this, teachers teach, every day. Despite the punitive measures of the federal government, teachers continue to teach their kids. No matter what child walks in the door, they are assured a free and public education. No matter the budget cuts, the teacher layoffs, the higher class sizes, the lack of supplies, those children are still given their teachers' best efforts and skills. And I can tell you first-hand, teachers are working harder than ever before to make sure their kids realize the American dream of a good education. No matter the obstacles, teachers continue to have high expectations for their students. Without raises, taking more and more out of their own pockets for supplies each year (an average of $1.3 billion a year nationwide), teachers continue to look for better and better ways to deliver curriculum to their kids. And teach them values. And feed them breakfast and lunch. And tutor them after school. And motivate even the least of our kids to succeed. And counsel them about their family situations (divorce, homelessness). And have parent conferences at 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. because that's when parents can meet. And watch them at recess, because there's no money for a recess supervisor. And actually, literally, deeply care for every one of the little ones in their classes. And, yes, still be willing to negotiate regarding benefits and pay. Collective bargaining is the least we can provide for these everyday heroes. For all the heroes who are firefighters and nurses, police officers and custodians and oh-so-many more.
Education is the silver bullet. Education is everything. We don't need little changes. We need gigantic monumental changes. Schools should be palaces. The competition for the best teachers should be fierce. They should be getting six-figure salaries. Schools should be incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge to its citizens, just like national defense. That's my position. I just haven't figured out how to do it yet.
And that's my position, too. Figuring out how to do it every day at my school, with the collaboration of my teachers and our custodians and our kids' parents and the members of the community in which we teach. Businesses that step up and join us in this effort are few and far-between, and God bless the few that do. But as a nation, our priorities are way out of whack when it comes to education. Business is the first to complain if we do not produce a product that meets their needs, and the first to want to take a knife to our budgets to provide tax cuts for themselves. I've seen it here in California and across our country.
Educating our next generation is more than just a business proposition. If we want a positive future for our country, then by God, we'd better give our educators the respect they are due by providing enough pay and benefits to live a decent life. We owe it to our kids, our nation and our future.
Well, my fellow Politicos, thanks for allowing me to expound on a topic that is near and dear to my heart. Next time you get a spare minute, send a quick email to your kids' teachers to thank them for all that they do, every day. If you don't have kids, thank your neighborhood school's principal or one of your old teachers for doing all that she/he can for the kids in your community - I'd bet they're still at your old school, doing the amazing job that they did for you for a new generation of kids. Or better yet, go in and volunteer to read with a child for half an hour. I don't know a single school that can't use the help. If you disagree with everything I've said, it's even more important for you to volunteer - just for one day, to experience what it's like for the educators on the front lines. Maybe you'll come away able to see with different eyes how important it is to treat our teachers well.
http://mommapolitico.blogspot.com/2011/02/our-kids-are-not-products-why-public.html
You've all heard me say it before: an educated populace is the cornerstone of our democracy. When I received a comment on my last post with the idea that education should be treated like a business, well, my comment became more than a comment, as you can well imagine. Blame it on Limbaugh, already getting me worked up by calling teachers "whiners" and "freeloaders." My thanks to the commenter, as we are always open to discussion here at Momma Politico. And here, I submit my comment here for your perusal, my fellow Politico, with a little spit-polish.
...You make some good points. Public education, however, is a very different market than that of the business sector. I don't know of any business in the private sector that has to take whatever customers it is given, or make a perfect product with whatever "raw materials" they are given. A steel plant would seek out quality ore, and Apple would not, for example, accept an order of processing chips that were not up to the industry standard. Education is a different beast than business, and not able to go "door to door," as you suggest, to gain our customers. Parents send us the best kids they have, all deserving a free and public education. And in some neighborhoods, those best kids have not had the advantages that kids in other neighborhoods may have had. If merit pay was the law of the land, there would be no one of quality who could afford to stay behind and teach the students in those underprivileged neighborhoods. And very few would be able to afford to stay and teach the ever-growing special ed populations, whose scores are now compounded into our federal growth measures. No Child Left Behind has left behind an inordinate number of students. And the so-called Race to The Top is leaving far too many schools financially at the bottom by attempting to link test scores to teacher pay.
Teaching is a thankless job, with long hours. I don't know a teacher that leaves when the kids do or arrives when they arrive. And it involves much work brought home each night - that's why you see teachers pulling those little crates on wheels behind them all the time. The planning, the grading and all the rest does not end when they close the classroom door for the day. If pro-rated, including summer vacations, the wage teachers earn would be unacceptable to anyone who has an equal amount of postgraduate education.
A National Association of Colleges and Employers study found that teachers start at a national average salary of $30,377. By contrast, computer programmers start at an average of $43,635, public accounting professionals start at $44,668 and registered nurses start at $45,570. The study also found that the more years teachers put into teaching, the bigger the gap became. Using U.S. Census data, the study found that teachers’ annual pay has fallen dramatically over the past 60 years in comparison to that of other workers with college degrees. Nationally, the average earnings of workers with at least four years of college are over 50 percent higher than the average earnings of teachers. (from edvoters.org)
Thankfully, most of us do it for the satisfaction of seeing our kids grow, knowing (as cliche as it sounds) that every day we make a difference in kids' lives, and not for the paycheck. That's for certain.
Wisconsin was set for a surplus under their Democratic governor, until such time as their new Republican governor gave huge tax cuts to business and the wealthy. Now, they are facing a deficit of nearly the same amount as was their surplus. I don't buy the "tax cuts to corporations create jobs" line. Besides all the evidence that shows that tax cuts are the least stimulative measure, it serves to reason that if it were true, we'd have come out of the eight years of the Bush Administration with a surplus greater than that under Bill Clinton...and we all know how that turned out.
There seems to be a myth out there that the WI teachers union is not willing to negotiate pay. The teachers in question are willing to sit at the table an discuss pay and benefits. It's been stated over and over. What's at question here is the basic right of unions to collectively bargain. While the union system may have its flaws, (as if the private sector is without sin?), the protections it offers provide us with teachers willing to teach the poorest of the poor, the disabled, they child who has never held a book before going to school (yes, there are many) and the child who needs to learn English, right along with all the rest. The right to collectively bargain gives those teachers an opportunity to protect what little they have in the way of salary, benefits and working conditions. These are not the Cadillac benefits of yesteryear, and the salaries are certainly not commensurate to their counterparts in the general workforce.
Despite all this, teachers teach, every day. Despite the punitive measures of the federal government, teachers continue to teach their kids. No matter what child walks in the door, they are assured a free and public education. No matter the budget cuts, the teacher layoffs, the higher class sizes, the lack of supplies, those children are still given their teachers' best efforts and skills. And I can tell you first-hand, teachers are working harder than ever before to make sure their kids realize the American dream of a good education. No matter the obstacles, teachers continue to have high expectations for their students. Without raises, taking more and more out of their own pockets for supplies each year (an average of $1.3 billion a year nationwide), teachers continue to look for better and better ways to deliver curriculum to their kids. And teach them values. And feed them breakfast and lunch. And tutor them after school. And motivate even the least of our kids to succeed. And counsel them about their family situations (divorce, homelessness). And have parent conferences at 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. because that's when parents can meet. And watch them at recess, because there's no money for a recess supervisor. And actually, literally, deeply care for every one of the little ones in their classes. And, yes, still be willing to negotiate regarding benefits and pay. Collective bargaining is the least we can provide for these everyday heroes. For all the heroes who are firefighters and nurses, police officers and custodians and oh-so-many more.
Education is the silver bullet. Education is everything. We don't need little changes. We need gigantic monumental changes. Schools should be palaces. The competition for the best teachers should be fierce. They should be getting six-figure salaries. Schools should be incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge to its citizens, just like national defense. That's my position. I just haven't figured out how to do it yet.
And that's my position, too. Figuring out how to do it every day at my school, with the collaboration of my teachers and our custodians and our kids' parents and the members of the community in which we teach. Businesses that step up and join us in this effort are few and far-between, and God bless the few that do. But as a nation, our priorities are way out of whack when it comes to education. Business is the first to complain if we do not produce a product that meets their needs, and the first to want to take a knife to our budgets to provide tax cuts for themselves. I've seen it here in California and across our country.
Educating our next generation is more than just a business proposition. If we want a positive future for our country, then by God, we'd better give our educators the respect they are due by providing enough pay and benefits to live a decent life. We owe it to our kids, our nation and our future.
Well, my fellow Politicos, thanks for allowing me to expound on a topic that is near and dear to my heart. Next time you get a spare minute, send a quick email to your kids' teachers to thank them for all that they do, every day. If you don't have kids, thank your neighborhood school's principal or one of your old teachers for doing all that she/he can for the kids in your community - I'd bet they're still at your old school, doing the amazing job that they did for you for a new generation of kids. Or better yet, go in and volunteer to read with a child for half an hour. I don't know a single school that can't use the help. If you disagree with everything I've said, it's even more important for you to volunteer - just for one day, to experience what it's like for the educators on the front lines. Maybe you'll come away able to see with different eyes how important it is to treat our teachers well.
http://mommapolitico.blogspot.com/2011/02/our-kids-are-not-products-why-public.html
Is Teaching Making Teachers Sick
From SighonSanDiego.com
By Mindy Sloan
The personal cost of teaching may be becoming too high. In my 10 years as a teacher of teachers, more and more of my students are reporting headaches, sleepless nights, irritated stomachs, chronic illness and even cancer. As someone who cares about children, and sees the necessity of having healthy teachers to support them, I can’t help but feel compelled to understand why teachers are getting sick.
Here are the reasons I have identified thus far.
Unrealistic expectations. One reason may be that we place unrealistic expectations on teachers. Classrooms are a place in which every societal challenge presents itself. If a community is impoverished, violent or drug infested, it is expressed through the children in the classroom. It is society’s expectation that the teacher in the classroom must be prepared to remediate any societal problem we present, and teach each child to read at the same time.
Changing requirements. The requirements to keep a teaching credential keep changing. As the needs of California’s children change, the training required to teach changes as well. For example, you may be a special-education teacher who has been effectively teaching children with autism for 20 years, but unless you go back to school and earn the new Added Authorization, Autism Spectrum Disorders, you will not be able to continue.
Debt. To earn a preliminary teaching credential in California, you will need a bachelor’s degree and at least one to two more years of college. The expectation for most teachers is that one should eventually earn a master’s or higher degree as well. By the time you have “finished” your education, you will have student loans that will take a large chunk of your paycheck over many years.
Teacher bashing. Teacher bashing has become politically correct. In an instant, knowing that teachers may be our greatest hope to improve student learning and ultimately prepare our nation to become more competitive on the global market changed to blaming teachers for the current economic condition. Teacher failures can’t explain the Wall Street bailout, mortgage foreclosures, violence in our streets, child abuse, homelessness or drug wars. We as a society must take responsibility for those conditions.
Teacher evaluation. Teacher evaluation has become personal. Many of you may be aware of the Los Angeles Times articles last summer, “Grading the Teachers: Valued-Added Analysis.” New York City Schools has followed suit, releasing ratings of 12,000 teachers. In both cases, each individual teacher was ranked based on the performance of the students in his/her classroom. While some ineffective teachers may be identified using this approach, there is no distinction between ineffectiveness and those competent teachers who are willing to take on the most challenging learners. Indeed, the message of the approach is clear. If you care about all learners, even those who have the most challenges, you will be identified as a bad teacher. For those who choose the profession because they love children and teaching, such a label is devastating.
Lack of support systems. There is no argument that the focus of our educational system should be on children, first and foremost. Caring for our children, however, means we must do what we can to give them the kind of adults they need to succeed. Some of these adults must be teachers, teachers who are not only academically prepared, but teachers who are emotionally and physically healthy as well. Thus far, teacher preparation programs focus on academic knowledge and skills. There is little to no mention of self-care or preparing for the emotional realities of working in today’s schools. Likewise, district funding does not include teacher support groups or systems to facilitate emotional health in current teachers. It should stand to reason that teachers who struggle with their own emotional and physical health cannot provide the kinds of environments students need to succeed. Indeed, one may consider that it is the emotionally unhealthy teacher who can be the most damaging to children.
In my experience, teachers are internalizers. They do not tend to complain and are not particularly good at advocating for themselves. They tend to put their own needs on the back burner, considering others first. The importance of healthy and effective teachers cannot be overly stated. As a group, they see every child. They impact every child. If we want to support our children, we must support their teachers.
Sloan is director of accreditation and associate professor of special education at Brandman Univeristy, part of the Chapman University System. She is the author of “Say It Now: Thank You to a Teacher.” Her e-mail address is msloan@brandman.edu
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/feb/20/is-teaching-making-our-teachers-sick/
By Mindy Sloan
The personal cost of teaching may be becoming too high. In my 10 years as a teacher of teachers, more and more of my students are reporting headaches, sleepless nights, irritated stomachs, chronic illness and even cancer. As someone who cares about children, and sees the necessity of having healthy teachers to support them, I can’t help but feel compelled to understand why teachers are getting sick.
Here are the reasons I have identified thus far.
Unrealistic expectations. One reason may be that we place unrealistic expectations on teachers. Classrooms are a place in which every societal challenge presents itself. If a community is impoverished, violent or drug infested, it is expressed through the children in the classroom. It is society’s expectation that the teacher in the classroom must be prepared to remediate any societal problem we present, and teach each child to read at the same time.
Changing requirements. The requirements to keep a teaching credential keep changing. As the needs of California’s children change, the training required to teach changes as well. For example, you may be a special-education teacher who has been effectively teaching children with autism for 20 years, but unless you go back to school and earn the new Added Authorization, Autism Spectrum Disorders, you will not be able to continue.
Debt. To earn a preliminary teaching credential in California, you will need a bachelor’s degree and at least one to two more years of college. The expectation for most teachers is that one should eventually earn a master’s or higher degree as well. By the time you have “finished” your education, you will have student loans that will take a large chunk of your paycheck over many years.
Teacher bashing. Teacher bashing has become politically correct. In an instant, knowing that teachers may be our greatest hope to improve student learning and ultimately prepare our nation to become more competitive on the global market changed to blaming teachers for the current economic condition. Teacher failures can’t explain the Wall Street bailout, mortgage foreclosures, violence in our streets, child abuse, homelessness or drug wars. We as a society must take responsibility for those conditions.
Teacher evaluation. Teacher evaluation has become personal. Many of you may be aware of the Los Angeles Times articles last summer, “Grading the Teachers: Valued-Added Analysis.” New York City Schools has followed suit, releasing ratings of 12,000 teachers. In both cases, each individual teacher was ranked based on the performance of the students in his/her classroom. While some ineffective teachers may be identified using this approach, there is no distinction between ineffectiveness and those competent teachers who are willing to take on the most challenging learners. Indeed, the message of the approach is clear. If you care about all learners, even those who have the most challenges, you will be identified as a bad teacher. For those who choose the profession because they love children and teaching, such a label is devastating.
Lack of support systems. There is no argument that the focus of our educational system should be on children, first and foremost. Caring for our children, however, means we must do what we can to give them the kind of adults they need to succeed. Some of these adults must be teachers, teachers who are not only academically prepared, but teachers who are emotionally and physically healthy as well. Thus far, teacher preparation programs focus on academic knowledge and skills. There is little to no mention of self-care or preparing for the emotional realities of working in today’s schools. Likewise, district funding does not include teacher support groups or systems to facilitate emotional health in current teachers. It should stand to reason that teachers who struggle with their own emotional and physical health cannot provide the kinds of environments students need to succeed. Indeed, one may consider that it is the emotionally unhealthy teacher who can be the most damaging to children.
In my experience, teachers are internalizers. They do not tend to complain and are not particularly good at advocating for themselves. They tend to put their own needs on the back burner, considering others first. The importance of healthy and effective teachers cannot be overly stated. As a group, they see every child. They impact every child. If we want to support our children, we must support their teachers.
Sloan is director of accreditation and associate professor of special education at Brandman Univeristy, part of the Chapman University System. She is the author of “Say It Now: Thank You to a Teacher.” Her e-mail address is msloan@brandman.edu
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/feb/20/is-teaching-making-our-teachers-sick/
Sunday, February 20, 2011
The Attacks on Teachers and Unions Should Concern Everyone
From Lilly's blackboard
by Lilly
Fifty years ago saying you were a “poor teacher” was redundant. Teachers were mostly women who wanted to teach, not to get rich, but because they loved kids.
However, 50 years ago, teachers and education support staff such as school secretaries and lunch ladies were expected to be polite and obedient and accept what they were given. They had no power to come together and bargain a better salary with administrators, who were, coincidently, mostly men. They were constantly exploited and underpaid.
Wisconsin, 50 years ago, became the first state in the country to do something about that.
They gave public employees, like teachers, the right to come together and negotiate for something better. When you negotiate, you have to work within a budget; you don’t get everything you want, but it stopped the exploitation of individuals. It meant that teachers and school support staff could move into the middle class and be treated with respect. Wisconsin should be proud of that.
And Wisconsin should be ashamed of a governor who threatens to reverse that proud history.
Governor Scott Walker says it’s all about the budget. But that doesn’t make sense. The teachers and support staff and their unions have already agreed to sit down and work together for what schools need, acknowledging that it will have to fit within an austere budget. They’re not at impasse. No unreasonable demands have been made.
This is about politics and payback. This is about punishing people who didn’t support his election, and it’s shameful.
Teachers today are still mostly women. They are still modestly paid. They still become teachers because they love kids. But because they have had a voice in education issues, they have become a powerful force in making Wisconsin public schools some of the best in the country.
What possible good can come from silencing that voice?
And all of us, whether in a union or not, should care about what’s happening here. In fact, maybe it’s more important for those who don’t have a union. The ability of modestly paid people to collectively bargain something better has helped build the great middle class of our great country, even among non-union members.
Because of the collective action of unions over the past 50 years, all of us enjoy a 40 hour work week, overtime, a weekend! We have a minimum wage. We have health and safety protections in our work places and protections against discrimination because of our age, our gender, our religion or our race. Who will provide the balance – the check – to the power of politicians if our unions are silenced?
Many with corporate and political power supported Governor Walker. Many of these powerful supporters don’t like unions. They don’t like the check and balance unions provide for the middle class on their power.
They believe they have found a pretext to destroy it by gutting unions that have been the most powerful voice standing up for the middle class. Laugh when these politicians tell you it’s about the budget. Wisconsin has balanced tight budgets before without destroying the rights of ordinary people to come together. This is a partisan attack. This is about punishing certain unions for having the temerity to speak truth to power.
In Wisconsin, the good people who work for public schools will never give up their responsibility to challenge the powerful when they are wrong. We will never give up our responsibility to fight for a better life for our children and our communities’ children.
We may seem an easy target to powerful politicians. We are mostly women. We work with children. We are not wealthy. But we have a treasure worth fighting for. We have each other. We will never give up our collective voice to speak the truth.
http://lilysblackboard.org/2011/02/wisconsin-teachers-union-struggle/
by Lilly
Fifty years ago saying you were a “poor teacher” was redundant. Teachers were mostly women who wanted to teach, not to get rich, but because they loved kids.
However, 50 years ago, teachers and education support staff such as school secretaries and lunch ladies were expected to be polite and obedient and accept what they were given. They had no power to come together and bargain a better salary with administrators, who were, coincidently, mostly men. They were constantly exploited and underpaid.
Wisconsin, 50 years ago, became the first state in the country to do something about that.
They gave public employees, like teachers, the right to come together and negotiate for something better. When you negotiate, you have to work within a budget; you don’t get everything you want, but it stopped the exploitation of individuals. It meant that teachers and school support staff could move into the middle class and be treated with respect. Wisconsin should be proud of that.
And Wisconsin should be ashamed of a governor who threatens to reverse that proud history.
Governor Scott Walker says it’s all about the budget. But that doesn’t make sense. The teachers and support staff and their unions have already agreed to sit down and work together for what schools need, acknowledging that it will have to fit within an austere budget. They’re not at impasse. No unreasonable demands have been made.
This is about politics and payback. This is about punishing people who didn’t support his election, and it’s shameful.
Teachers today are still mostly women. They are still modestly paid. They still become teachers because they love kids. But because they have had a voice in education issues, they have become a powerful force in making Wisconsin public schools some of the best in the country.
What possible good can come from silencing that voice?
And all of us, whether in a union or not, should care about what’s happening here. In fact, maybe it’s more important for those who don’t have a union. The ability of modestly paid people to collectively bargain something better has helped build the great middle class of our great country, even among non-union members.
Because of the collective action of unions over the past 50 years, all of us enjoy a 40 hour work week, overtime, a weekend! We have a minimum wage. We have health and safety protections in our work places and protections against discrimination because of our age, our gender, our religion or our race. Who will provide the balance – the check – to the power of politicians if our unions are silenced?
Many with corporate and political power supported Governor Walker. Many of these powerful supporters don’t like unions. They don’t like the check and balance unions provide for the middle class on their power.
They believe they have found a pretext to destroy it by gutting unions that have been the most powerful voice standing up for the middle class. Laugh when these politicians tell you it’s about the budget. Wisconsin has balanced tight budgets before without destroying the rights of ordinary people to come together. This is a partisan attack. This is about punishing certain unions for having the temerity to speak truth to power.
In Wisconsin, the good people who work for public schools will never give up their responsibility to challenge the powerful when they are wrong. We will never give up our responsibility to fight for a better life for our children and our communities’ children.
We may seem an easy target to powerful politicians. We are mostly women. We work with children. We are not wealthy. But we have a treasure worth fighting for. We have each other. We will never give up our collective voice to speak the truth.
http://lilysblackboard.org/2011/02/wisconsin-teachers-union-struggle/
Florida teacher salaries headed to No. 47 in the nation
For a teacher with a bachelors degree, here in Jacksonville it would take 18 years to meet the average. -cpg
From the St. Petersburg Times
by Ron Matus
Florida teachers are on their way to becoming among the worst-paid in the nation.
For the 2009-10 school year, average teacher salaries in Florida fell to No. 37 among the 50 states and the District of Columbia, and estimates for 2010-11 show them falling to No. 47, according to a national report released this week.
Florida's average teacher salary last year was $46,708. The national average was $55,202.
The unfavorable ranking comes as state lawmakers prepare to make sweeping changes to how teachers are hired, fired, paid and evaluated. They may also require teachers to chip in up to 5 percent of their pay towards their pensions.
All of that combined with relatively low pay "has a real impact that will really drive people away" from the teaching profession, said Marshall Ogletree, executive director of the Pinellas teachers union.
A key lawmaker agreed Florida teachers need to be paid better. But he said tough times made that unlikely.
"I am not happy with the average teacher salary in the state of Florida. I want teacher pay to increase," said Sen. David Simmons, R-Altamonte Springs, who chairs the Senate Education Appropriations Committee and once filed a bill to bring Florida teacher salaries up to the national average. "I am also a realist in this brutal economic time."
Florida teacher pay, which is set at the district level, has been stagnant for several years. It has dropped in rank as teachers in most other states continue to get small raises.
Compared to other states, Florida was No. 28 in 2006-07, No. 29 in 2007-08 and No. 34 in 2008-09, according to annual reports from the National Education Association.
Florida's estimated average teacher salary for 2010-11 ($6 lower than last year's average) puts it behind every state in the Southeast and ahead of only Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota and Utah. In the past, the finalized numbers did not change much from the estimates.
The reports do not include comparisons of beginning teacher pay or teacher benefits. They do not consider potentially mitigating factors such as state income taxes or variations in cost of living.
Both Ogletree and Simmons cited a recent Education Week report that put Florida's school system at No. 5 in the country, in part because Florida kids are making big academic gains on national tests.
Both said Florida teachers have been key to those gains. Both said there was a connection between pay and quality.
"My goal is for teachers to make more money," Simmons said. "That's what we're trying to do this spring by injecting performance pay into the system."
Ogletree's response: "You can talk about performance pay until you're blue in the face. But there has to be a base salary where a person can change their mortgage and take care of their kids."
Ron Matus can be reached at matus@sptimes.com or (727) 893-8873.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/florida-teacher-salaries-headed-to-no-47-in-the-nation/1152211
From the St. Petersburg Times
by Ron Matus
Florida teachers are on their way to becoming among the worst-paid in the nation.
For the 2009-10 school year, average teacher salaries in Florida fell to No. 37 among the 50 states and the District of Columbia, and estimates for 2010-11 show them falling to No. 47, according to a national report released this week.
Florida's average teacher salary last year was $46,708. The national average was $55,202.
The unfavorable ranking comes as state lawmakers prepare to make sweeping changes to how teachers are hired, fired, paid and evaluated. They may also require teachers to chip in up to 5 percent of their pay towards their pensions.
All of that combined with relatively low pay "has a real impact that will really drive people away" from the teaching profession, said Marshall Ogletree, executive director of the Pinellas teachers union.
A key lawmaker agreed Florida teachers need to be paid better. But he said tough times made that unlikely.
"I am not happy with the average teacher salary in the state of Florida. I want teacher pay to increase," said Sen. David Simmons, R-Altamonte Springs, who chairs the Senate Education Appropriations Committee and once filed a bill to bring Florida teacher salaries up to the national average. "I am also a realist in this brutal economic time."
Florida teacher pay, which is set at the district level, has been stagnant for several years. It has dropped in rank as teachers in most other states continue to get small raises.
Compared to other states, Florida was No. 28 in 2006-07, No. 29 in 2007-08 and No. 34 in 2008-09, according to annual reports from the National Education Association.
Florida's estimated average teacher salary for 2010-11 ($6 lower than last year's average) puts it behind every state in the Southeast and ahead of only Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota and Utah. In the past, the finalized numbers did not change much from the estimates.
The reports do not include comparisons of beginning teacher pay or teacher benefits. They do not consider potentially mitigating factors such as state income taxes or variations in cost of living.
Both Ogletree and Simmons cited a recent Education Week report that put Florida's school system at No. 5 in the country, in part because Florida kids are making big academic gains on national tests.
Both said Florida teachers have been key to those gains. Both said there was a connection between pay and quality.
"My goal is for teachers to make more money," Simmons said. "That's what we're trying to do this spring by injecting performance pay into the system."
Ogletree's response: "You can talk about performance pay until you're blue in the face. But there has to be a base salary where a person can change their mortgage and take care of their kids."
Ron Matus can be reached at matus@sptimes.com or (727) 893-8873.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/florida-teacher-salaries-headed-to-no-47-in-the-nation/1152211
Are you there Mr. President?
From Education Week Teacher, Living in Dilogue
Peggy Robertson
When I was twelve I read a book that changed my life. It was titled Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret. I read it again and again. In that book, I finally saw that someone out there understood me. Ultimately, we all desperately desire to be heard and understood. Expert teachers know this; they spend every waking moment trying to figure out what makes their students tick. We watch, we observe, we truly listen and we make changes based on our students' needs.
When I was in my twenties, and a new teacher, I read another book, The Dreamkeepers, by Gloria Ladson-Billings. It rocked my world. It made me cry. The book came at a crucial time in my career as a teacher. I worked at a school "across the tracks," in a town in southern Missouri. My students were mainly African-American and many were very poor. I, like many new teachers today, got placed in a school with high need, high poverty students. It was the best job I ever had. Gloria was the voice in my head helping me along the way. She was my mentor but never knew it. She understood.
On February 17th, I attended a presentation by Diane Ravitch here in Denver, Colorado. I wanted to have her sign my copy of her book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, but I honestly couldn't do it. I was feeling so emotional and I knew I might unravel. Diane hears me; my experience is simply an echo of the voices of many educators out there today. She knows what today's teachers are going through. If Diane and I did talk, she would understand what was beautiful about my fifteen years in the education field as well as what was haunting. She would know why I am debating whether I should return to the education field or not. She reports the facts accurately. She is our collective voice. She listens.
Are you there, President Obama? It's me, Peggy Robertson, the voice of a former teacher. Are you truly listening? I must say, with respect, that it does not feel as though you are. I have felt hopeless during your presidency. This week, for the first time, I have hope. Watching the public workers of Madison, Wisconsin protest and ask to be heard made me sit up a bit straighter. The American people have a voice! I saw democracy in action. But are you listening? I now hear that they are asking you to join them. I hope you do.
But this is about more than Madison, Wisconsin. Madison is the first snowball. Once it starts rolling, it may be unstoppable. We've got a lot of mountains here in Colorado and I hope that snowball heads our way. The corporate education reform going on here is devastating.
My fifteen years as an educator were spent teaching in the elementary grades as well as supporting teachers and administrators in developing and refining effective instructional practices. During my five final years I suddenly became jaded. NCLB destroyed my spirit. I watched it's evil hand touch children, teachers, schools and districts.
I saw the strangle hold NCLB had on everyone. I tried to support teachers with all of the obstacles NCLB placed in our way. I watched Reading First fail. I saw principals come and go and schools get closed. I saw students caught in the crossfire. I saw the light go out in children's eyes when they were drilled continually for the state test. I worked with teachers who told me we needed to hurry up and help that child read (in kindergarten mind you) before a negative label was placed on that child; we were in a pressure cooker. I supported administrators in knowing what to look for when they observed and evaluated teachers; many of them did not know what they were seeing because they had not actually spent much time teaching. Or, they had spent time teaching subjects, such as Spanish, in a high school classroom and they were now being asked to evaluate elementary school teachers who were focusing on developing readers and writers. Such an irony - teachers evaluated by administrators who haven't taught what the teachers are teaching. The administrators were under immense pressure as they are today. The scores simply had to be good.
When I left the education profession I left angry. My beliefs about education had been trampled on. I didn't believe in what I was being required to do. Too much testing. Too many young children not being allowed to be children. Too much data being shoved down everybody's throats. I have stayed home the last four years with my youngest son, and I have watched the destruction of our American school system continue. My youngest child is ready to start school, and I wonder if I should re-enter the education profession. But, do I really want to enter the lion's den? I want to work in the education field again, but I also want to be heard and respected.
The current corporate reform taking over our public schools is handing us many more teachers, administrators and superintendents who will need immense support to do their jobs well. If the new administrators haven't taught, then how in the world can you expect them to evaluate teachers? How is a former army sergeant, now made superintendent, supposed to evaluate and support administrators? How is a teacher with five weeks training expected to support our neediest students? And, (lucky us) we have the Bush Institute training principals, in cooperation with Teach for America of course! It's insulting. All of it - it's a slap in the face to students, educators and parents.
It appears there is no point in getting a degree in education with the TFA program leading the way. And then we are told that our master's degrees are pointless too? I think about that every month when I pay my student loan bill. And this week, my eyes rolled back in my head when I heard that the U.S. Department of Education just gave fifty million dollars to the TFA program. The TFA program is a band-aid. And it hurts the neediest children when those teachers leave after their two-year contract has ended.
In your State of the Union Address you asked for more college students to go in to education. I'm sorry, but I seriously laughed when you said that. I would pay both my children money to stay out of the education field right now. It's a hostile environment. Teachers have to teach to the test. The new common core standards are developmentally inappropriate. Children get labeled as failures before they've even finished kindergarten thanks to the pressures of NCLB. And let's not forget that those five year olds don't get a nap or a recess or time for imaginative play. RTTT is punishing to teachers and to schools. Encourage my children to enter the lion's den to teach? No thank you. Your administration has shown no respect for educators, parents or students.
Are you listening Obama? The strangle hold of RTTT may result in the death of public education. Have you read Ravitch's book? Have you followed any of the research being shared on expert educator blogs across the country? What do you really know about TFAs? Merit pay? Value-added assessment? Standardized Testing?
News Flash - it's all bad. Why are you listening to Gates? What educational credentials does he have? It is so difficult to have a voice as a teacher. We don't have a lot of money so we can't buy the media, such as the new Media Bullpen, like Gates can. But we can march. And march we will. July 28th to July 31st concerned citizens will find their way to Washington D.C. to take part in the Save our Schools March and National Call to Action. Will you join us? Will you listen?
When I voted for you I voted with my heart and soul. I believed everything you said. I thought you heard me. I thought we had found a president that truly understood the needs of the American people. I don't believe that anymore. There has been too much damage done. We now have Arne Duncan (a non-educator) leading the way with the corporate reformers whispering in his ear. We have more testing, more teacher bashing and more children being hurt at the hands of corporate reform.
Are you there President Obama? Did you hear Stephen Krashen talk about poverty? Again and again? Did you hear that our international test scores are actually excellent when we look at the scores of the children not living in poverty? Do you really believe poverty has nothing to do with the woes of our public schools? Have you read the research? I could provide all the links but it doesn't seem necessary considering they are all over the internet on every single education blog I read. I don't think you are listening. I think it's going to take an uprising for you to hear us. Madison, Wisconsin, is speaking.
I am placing my faith in the American people. I am listening Madison, Wisconsin. I signed the letter. You are speaking for all of us. President Obama, please listen. Please renew the hope we all had when we elected you.
Peggy Robertson
Former Educator
Centennial, Colorado
Peggy Robertson taught kindergarten, first, second, fourth, fifth and sixth grade, beginning her career in Missouri and continuing in Kansas, for a total of ten years. She was hired by Richard C. Owen Publishers in 2001 to serve as a Learning Network Coordinator and spent the next three years training teacher leaders and administrators in educational theory and practice in the state of Colorado, as well as around the country during the summer months. In 2004 she was hired as the Literacy Coordinator by the Adams 50 School District in Westminster, Colorado. While working in Adams 50 she mentored teachers and administrators and supported them in the writing and implementation of school development plans.
http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2011/02/are_you_there_mr_president_mad.html?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4d604596cdef1ba4%2C0
Peggy Robertson
When I was twelve I read a book that changed my life. It was titled Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret. I read it again and again. In that book, I finally saw that someone out there understood me. Ultimately, we all desperately desire to be heard and understood. Expert teachers know this; they spend every waking moment trying to figure out what makes their students tick. We watch, we observe, we truly listen and we make changes based on our students' needs.
When I was in my twenties, and a new teacher, I read another book, The Dreamkeepers, by Gloria Ladson-Billings. It rocked my world. It made me cry. The book came at a crucial time in my career as a teacher. I worked at a school "across the tracks," in a town in southern Missouri. My students were mainly African-American and many were very poor. I, like many new teachers today, got placed in a school with high need, high poverty students. It was the best job I ever had. Gloria was the voice in my head helping me along the way. She was my mentor but never knew it. She understood.
On February 17th, I attended a presentation by Diane Ravitch here in Denver, Colorado. I wanted to have her sign my copy of her book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, but I honestly couldn't do it. I was feeling so emotional and I knew I might unravel. Diane hears me; my experience is simply an echo of the voices of many educators out there today. She knows what today's teachers are going through. If Diane and I did talk, she would understand what was beautiful about my fifteen years in the education field as well as what was haunting. She would know why I am debating whether I should return to the education field or not. She reports the facts accurately. She is our collective voice. She listens.
Are you there, President Obama? It's me, Peggy Robertson, the voice of a former teacher. Are you truly listening? I must say, with respect, that it does not feel as though you are. I have felt hopeless during your presidency. This week, for the first time, I have hope. Watching the public workers of Madison, Wisconsin protest and ask to be heard made me sit up a bit straighter. The American people have a voice! I saw democracy in action. But are you listening? I now hear that they are asking you to join them. I hope you do.
But this is about more than Madison, Wisconsin. Madison is the first snowball. Once it starts rolling, it may be unstoppable. We've got a lot of mountains here in Colorado and I hope that snowball heads our way. The corporate education reform going on here is devastating.
My fifteen years as an educator were spent teaching in the elementary grades as well as supporting teachers and administrators in developing and refining effective instructional practices. During my five final years I suddenly became jaded. NCLB destroyed my spirit. I watched it's evil hand touch children, teachers, schools and districts.
I saw the strangle hold NCLB had on everyone. I tried to support teachers with all of the obstacles NCLB placed in our way. I watched Reading First fail. I saw principals come and go and schools get closed. I saw students caught in the crossfire. I saw the light go out in children's eyes when they were drilled continually for the state test. I worked with teachers who told me we needed to hurry up and help that child read (in kindergarten mind you) before a negative label was placed on that child; we were in a pressure cooker. I supported administrators in knowing what to look for when they observed and evaluated teachers; many of them did not know what they were seeing because they had not actually spent much time teaching. Or, they had spent time teaching subjects, such as Spanish, in a high school classroom and they were now being asked to evaluate elementary school teachers who were focusing on developing readers and writers. Such an irony - teachers evaluated by administrators who haven't taught what the teachers are teaching. The administrators were under immense pressure as they are today. The scores simply had to be good.
When I left the education profession I left angry. My beliefs about education had been trampled on. I didn't believe in what I was being required to do. Too much testing. Too many young children not being allowed to be children. Too much data being shoved down everybody's throats. I have stayed home the last four years with my youngest son, and I have watched the destruction of our American school system continue. My youngest child is ready to start school, and I wonder if I should re-enter the education profession. But, do I really want to enter the lion's den? I want to work in the education field again, but I also want to be heard and respected.
The current corporate reform taking over our public schools is handing us many more teachers, administrators and superintendents who will need immense support to do their jobs well. If the new administrators haven't taught, then how in the world can you expect them to evaluate teachers? How is a former army sergeant, now made superintendent, supposed to evaluate and support administrators? How is a teacher with five weeks training expected to support our neediest students? And, (lucky us) we have the Bush Institute training principals, in cooperation with Teach for America of course! It's insulting. All of it - it's a slap in the face to students, educators and parents.
It appears there is no point in getting a degree in education with the TFA program leading the way. And then we are told that our master's degrees are pointless too? I think about that every month when I pay my student loan bill. And this week, my eyes rolled back in my head when I heard that the U.S. Department of Education just gave fifty million dollars to the TFA program. The TFA program is a band-aid. And it hurts the neediest children when those teachers leave after their two-year contract has ended.
In your State of the Union Address you asked for more college students to go in to education. I'm sorry, but I seriously laughed when you said that. I would pay both my children money to stay out of the education field right now. It's a hostile environment. Teachers have to teach to the test. The new common core standards are developmentally inappropriate. Children get labeled as failures before they've even finished kindergarten thanks to the pressures of NCLB. And let's not forget that those five year olds don't get a nap or a recess or time for imaginative play. RTTT is punishing to teachers and to schools. Encourage my children to enter the lion's den to teach? No thank you. Your administration has shown no respect for educators, parents or students.
Are you listening Obama? The strangle hold of RTTT may result in the death of public education. Have you read Ravitch's book? Have you followed any of the research being shared on expert educator blogs across the country? What do you really know about TFAs? Merit pay? Value-added assessment? Standardized Testing?
News Flash - it's all bad. Why are you listening to Gates? What educational credentials does he have? It is so difficult to have a voice as a teacher. We don't have a lot of money so we can't buy the media, such as the new Media Bullpen, like Gates can. But we can march. And march we will. July 28th to July 31st concerned citizens will find their way to Washington D.C. to take part in the Save our Schools March and National Call to Action. Will you join us? Will you listen?
When I voted for you I voted with my heart and soul. I believed everything you said. I thought you heard me. I thought we had found a president that truly understood the needs of the American people. I don't believe that anymore. There has been too much damage done. We now have Arne Duncan (a non-educator) leading the way with the corporate reformers whispering in his ear. We have more testing, more teacher bashing and more children being hurt at the hands of corporate reform.
Are you there President Obama? Did you hear Stephen Krashen talk about poverty? Again and again? Did you hear that our international test scores are actually excellent when we look at the scores of the children not living in poverty? Do you really believe poverty has nothing to do with the woes of our public schools? Have you read the research? I could provide all the links but it doesn't seem necessary considering they are all over the internet on every single education blog I read. I don't think you are listening. I think it's going to take an uprising for you to hear us. Madison, Wisconsin, is speaking.
I am placing my faith in the American people. I am listening Madison, Wisconsin. I signed the letter. You are speaking for all of us. President Obama, please listen. Please renew the hope we all had when we elected you.
Peggy Robertson
Former Educator
Centennial, Colorado
Peggy Robertson taught kindergarten, first, second, fourth, fifth and sixth grade, beginning her career in Missouri and continuing in Kansas, for a total of ten years. She was hired by Richard C. Owen Publishers in 2001 to serve as a Learning Network Coordinator and spent the next three years training teacher leaders and administrators in educational theory and practice in the state of Colorado, as well as around the country during the summer months. In 2004 she was hired as the Literacy Coordinator by the Adams 50 School District in Westminster, Colorado. While working in Adams 50 she mentored teachers and administrators and supported them in the writing and implementation of school development plans.
http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2011/02/are_you_there_mr_president_mad.html?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4d604596cdef1ba4%2C0
Will the slumbering masses wake in Florida too?
By TODD RICHMOND and DINESH RAMDE
MADISON, Wis. - A state Capitol thrown into political chaos swelled for a fifth day with nearly 70,000 protesters, as supporters of Republican efforts to scrap the union rights of state workers challenged pro-labor protesters face-to-face for the first time and GOP leaders insisted again Saturday there was no room for compromise.
A few dozen police officers stood between supporters of Republican Gov. Scott Walker on the muddy east lawn of the Capitol and the much larger group of pro-labor demonstrators who surrounded them. The protest was peaceful as both sides exchanged chants of "Pass the bill! Pass the bill!" and "Kill the bill! Kill the bill!"
"Go home!" union supporters yelled at Scott Lemke, a 46-year-old machine parts salesman from Cedarburg who wore a hard hat and carried a sign that read "If you don't like it, quit" on one side, and "If you don't like that, try you're fired" on the other.
The Wisconsin governor, elected in November's GOP wave that also gave control of the state Assembly and Senate to Republicans, set off the protests earlier this week by pushing ahead with a measure that would require government workers to contribute more to their health care and pension costs and largely eliminate their collective bargaining rights.
He says the concessions are needed to deal with the state's projected $3.6 billion budget shortfall and to avoid layoffs of government workers.
"We did have an election and Scott Walker won," said Deborah Arndt, 53, of Sheboygan Falls. "I think our governor will stand strong. I have faith in him."
At a rally organized by Tea Party Patriots, the movement's largest umbrella group, and Americans for Prosperity, supporters of Walker carried signs with a fresh set of messages: "Your Gravy Train Is Over . . . Welcome to the Recession" and "Sorry, we're late Scott. We work for a living."
"We pay the bills!" tea party favorite Herman Cain yelled to cheers from the pro-Walker crowd. "This is why you elected Scott Walker. and he's doing his job. . . . Wisconsin is broke. My question for the other side is, 'What part of broke don't you understand?'"
Nearby, nearly two dozen cabs blocked a major intersection near the Capitol. The driver of the lead cab leaned out of the window and played a trumpet, while others attempted to honk their car horns in sync with a chant from pro-labor protesters: "This is what democracy looks like."
"One of the reasons the company decided to support the protesters is because the members of this company started off striking their employer for better wages and that employer . . . refused to allow them to bargain collectively," said John McNamara, the marketing director of Union Cab.
Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald reaffirmed Saturday that Republicans have not been swayed by the pro-labor protesters who since Tuesday have filled the Capitol with chanting, drum-beats and anti-Walker slogans.
"The bill is not negotiable," Fitzgerald said inside a heavily guarded Senate parlor at the Capitol. "The bill will pass as is."
Fitzgerald said Republicans have the votes needed pass the so-called "budget repair" bill just as up as soon as 14 Senate Democrats who fled the state on Thursday and remain in hiding return to the Statehouse. The missing Democrats have threatened to stay away for weeks and remain more resolved than ever to stay away "as long as it takes" until Walker agrees to negotiate, Democratic Sen. Jon Erpenbach said Saturday.
"I don't think he's really thought it through, to be honest," Erpenbach said.
Democrats offered again Saturday to agree to the parts of Walker's proposal that would double workers' health insurance contributions and require them to contribute 5.8 percent of their salary to their pensions, so long as workers retained their rights to negotiate with the state as a union.
Fitzgerald said he was unimpressed given that the offer was something the GOP has rejected for months. The restrictions on collective bargaining rights are needed so local governments and the state will have the flexibility needed to balance budgets after cuts Walker plans to announce next month, he said.
Walker, who was spending time with his family Saturday and wasn't expected to make an appearance at the tea party-organized rally, also rejected the Democrats offer. His spokesman, Cullen Werwie, said the fastest way to end the stalemate was for Democrats to return and "do their jobs."
Sen. Tim Cullen, a Democrat from Janesville, refused to say where he was Saturday but said he didn't expect the Senate to meet again until Tuesday. Cullen said he was watching Saturday's rallies on television with some friends.
"I'm hoping to see no violence, that's what I'm hoping most to see," Cullen said. "This has been a very peaceful, respectful thing all week given the size of the crowds."
Madison police estimated 60,000 or more people were outside the Capitol with up to 8,000 more inside. Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney had planned to add 60 deputies to the 100 who patrolled during the week. But Madison police spokesman Joel DeSpain said there had been no arrests or problems by midafternoon.
"We've seen and shown the world that in Madison, Wis., we can bring people together who disagree strongly on a bill in a peaceful way," DeSpain said.
Steve Boss, 26, a refrigerator technician from Oostburg, carried a sign that read "The Protesters Are All 'Sick' -- Wash your Hands," a reference to the teacher sick-outs that swelled crowds at the Capitol to 40,000 people Friday and raised the noise in its rotunda to earsplitting levels. Boss said the cuts Walker has proposed were painful but needed to fix the state's financial problems.
"It's time to address the issue. They (public workers) got to take the same cuts as everyone else," he said. "It's a fairness thing."
Doctors from numerous hospitals set up a station near the Capitol to provide notes covering public employees' absences. Family physician Lou Sanner, 59, of Madison, said he had given out hundreds of notes. Many of the people he spoke with seemed to be suffering from stress, he said.
"What employers have a right to know is if the patient was assessed by a duly licensed physician about time off of work," Sanner said. "Employers don't have a right to know the nature of that conversation or the nature of that illness. So it's as valid as every other work note that I've written for the last 30 years."
John Black, 46, of Madison, said he came out to the rallies in order to help bridge the gap between the pro-labor protesters and tea party members. He carried signs that asked for a compromise on the budget bill while a friend's son handed out purple flowers.
"We liked Scott Walker as a change agent, but he moved too quickly and because of that there's always room for compromise," Black said.
---
Associated Press writers Scott Bauer and Jason Smathers contributed to this report.
http://headlines.verizon.com/headlines/portals/headlines.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=headlines_portal_page__article&_article=3334125
MADISON, Wis. - A state Capitol thrown into political chaos swelled for a fifth day with nearly 70,000 protesters, as supporters of Republican efforts to scrap the union rights of state workers challenged pro-labor protesters face-to-face for the first time and GOP leaders insisted again Saturday there was no room for compromise.
A few dozen police officers stood between supporters of Republican Gov. Scott Walker on the muddy east lawn of the Capitol and the much larger group of pro-labor demonstrators who surrounded them. The protest was peaceful as both sides exchanged chants of "Pass the bill! Pass the bill!" and "Kill the bill! Kill the bill!"
"Go home!" union supporters yelled at Scott Lemke, a 46-year-old machine parts salesman from Cedarburg who wore a hard hat and carried a sign that read "If you don't like it, quit" on one side, and "If you don't like that, try you're fired" on the other.
The Wisconsin governor, elected in November's GOP wave that also gave control of the state Assembly and Senate to Republicans, set off the protests earlier this week by pushing ahead with a measure that would require government workers to contribute more to their health care and pension costs and largely eliminate their collective bargaining rights.
He says the concessions are needed to deal with the state's projected $3.6 billion budget shortfall and to avoid layoffs of government workers.
"We did have an election and Scott Walker won," said Deborah Arndt, 53, of Sheboygan Falls. "I think our governor will stand strong. I have faith in him."
At a rally organized by Tea Party Patriots, the movement's largest umbrella group, and Americans for Prosperity, supporters of Walker carried signs with a fresh set of messages: "Your Gravy Train Is Over . . . Welcome to the Recession" and "Sorry, we're late Scott. We work for a living."
"We pay the bills!" tea party favorite Herman Cain yelled to cheers from the pro-Walker crowd. "This is why you elected Scott Walker. and he's doing his job. . . . Wisconsin is broke. My question for the other side is, 'What part of broke don't you understand?'"
Nearby, nearly two dozen cabs blocked a major intersection near the Capitol. The driver of the lead cab leaned out of the window and played a trumpet, while others attempted to honk their car horns in sync with a chant from pro-labor protesters: "This is what democracy looks like."
"One of the reasons the company decided to support the protesters is because the members of this company started off striking their employer for better wages and that employer . . . refused to allow them to bargain collectively," said John McNamara, the marketing director of Union Cab.
Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald reaffirmed Saturday that Republicans have not been swayed by the pro-labor protesters who since Tuesday have filled the Capitol with chanting, drum-beats and anti-Walker slogans.
"The bill is not negotiable," Fitzgerald said inside a heavily guarded Senate parlor at the Capitol. "The bill will pass as is."
Fitzgerald said Republicans have the votes needed pass the so-called "budget repair" bill just as up as soon as 14 Senate Democrats who fled the state on Thursday and remain in hiding return to the Statehouse. The missing Democrats have threatened to stay away for weeks and remain more resolved than ever to stay away "as long as it takes" until Walker agrees to negotiate, Democratic Sen. Jon Erpenbach said Saturday.
"I don't think he's really thought it through, to be honest," Erpenbach said.
Democrats offered again Saturday to agree to the parts of Walker's proposal that would double workers' health insurance contributions and require them to contribute 5.8 percent of their salary to their pensions, so long as workers retained their rights to negotiate with the state as a union.
Fitzgerald said he was unimpressed given that the offer was something the GOP has rejected for months. The restrictions on collective bargaining rights are needed so local governments and the state will have the flexibility needed to balance budgets after cuts Walker plans to announce next month, he said.
Walker, who was spending time with his family Saturday and wasn't expected to make an appearance at the tea party-organized rally, also rejected the Democrats offer. His spokesman, Cullen Werwie, said the fastest way to end the stalemate was for Democrats to return and "do their jobs."
Sen. Tim Cullen, a Democrat from Janesville, refused to say where he was Saturday but said he didn't expect the Senate to meet again until Tuesday. Cullen said he was watching Saturday's rallies on television with some friends.
"I'm hoping to see no violence, that's what I'm hoping most to see," Cullen said. "This has been a very peaceful, respectful thing all week given the size of the crowds."
Madison police estimated 60,000 or more people were outside the Capitol with up to 8,000 more inside. Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney had planned to add 60 deputies to the 100 who patrolled during the week. But Madison police spokesman Joel DeSpain said there had been no arrests or problems by midafternoon.
"We've seen and shown the world that in Madison, Wis., we can bring people together who disagree strongly on a bill in a peaceful way," DeSpain said.
Steve Boss, 26, a refrigerator technician from Oostburg, carried a sign that read "The Protesters Are All 'Sick' -- Wash your Hands," a reference to the teacher sick-outs that swelled crowds at the Capitol to 40,000 people Friday and raised the noise in its rotunda to earsplitting levels. Boss said the cuts Walker has proposed were painful but needed to fix the state's financial problems.
"It's time to address the issue. They (public workers) got to take the same cuts as everyone else," he said. "It's a fairness thing."
Doctors from numerous hospitals set up a station near the Capitol to provide notes covering public employees' absences. Family physician Lou Sanner, 59, of Madison, said he had given out hundreds of notes. Many of the people he spoke with seemed to be suffering from stress, he said.
"What employers have a right to know is if the patient was assessed by a duly licensed physician about time off of work," Sanner said. "Employers don't have a right to know the nature of that conversation or the nature of that illness. So it's as valid as every other work note that I've written for the last 30 years."
John Black, 46, of Madison, said he came out to the rallies in order to help bridge the gap between the pro-labor protesters and tea party members. He carried signs that asked for a compromise on the budget bill while a friend's son handed out purple flowers.
"We liked Scott Walker as a change agent, but he moved too quickly and because of that there's always room for compromise," Black said.
---
Associated Press writers Scott Bauer and Jason Smathers contributed to this report.
http://headlines.verizon.com/headlines/portals/headlines.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=headlines_portal_page__article&_article=3334125
Saturday, February 19, 2011
The assult on public employees
I think there are idiots on the left too, but below is pretty compelling.
-cpg
From the Huffington Post
by Robert Reich
The Republican strategy is to split the vast middle and working class -- pitting unionized workers against non-unionized, public-sector workers against non-public, older workers within sight of Medicare and Social Security against younger workers who don't believe these programs will be there for them, and the poor against the working middle class.
By splitting working America along these lines, Republicans want Americans to believe that we can no longer afford to do what we need to do as a nation. They hope to deflect attention from the increasing share of total income and wealth going to the richest 1 percent while the jobs and wages of everyone else languish.
Republicans would rather no one notice their campaign to shrink the pie even further with additional tax cuts for the rich -- making the Bush tax cuts permanent, further reducing the estate tax, and allowing the wealthy to shift ever more of their income into capital gains taxed at 15 percent.
The strategy has three parts.
The Battle Over the Federal Budget
The first is being played out in the budget battle in Washington. As they raise the alarm over deficit spending and simultaneously squeeze popular middle-class programs, Republicans want the majority of the American public to view it all as a giant zero-sum game among average Americans that some will have to lose.
The president has already fallen into the trap by calling for budget cuts in programs the poor and working class depend on -- assistance with home heating, community services, college loans, and the like.
In the coming showdown over Medicare and Social Security, House budget chair Paul Ryan will push a voucher system for Medicare and a partly-privatized plan for Social Security -- both designed to attract younger middle-class voters.
The Assault on Public Employees
The second part of the Republican strategy is being played out on the state level where public employees are being blamed for state budget crises. Unions didn't cause these budget crises -- state revenues dropped because of the Great Recession -- but Republicans view them as opportunities to gut public employee unions, starting with teachers.
Wisconsin's Republican governor Scott Walker and his GOP legislature are seeking to end almost all union rights for teachers. Ohio's Republican governor John Kasich is pushing a similar plan in Ohio through a Republican-dominated legislature. New Jersey's Republican governor Chris Christie is attempting the same, telling a conservative conference Wednesday, "I'm attacking the leadership of the union because they're greedy, and they're selfish and they're self-interested."
The demonizing of public employees is not only based on the lie that they've caused these budget crises, but it's also premised on a second lie: that public employees earn more than private-sector workers. They don't, when you take account of their education. In fact over the last fifteen years the pay of public-sector workers, including teachers, has dropped relative to private-sector employees with the same level of education -- even including health and retirement benefits. Moreover, most public employees don't have generous pensions. After a career with annual pay averaging less than $45,000, the typical newly-retired public employee receives a pension of $19,000 a year.
Bargaining rights for public employees haven't caused state deficits to explode. Some states that deny their employees bargaining rights, such as Nevada, North Carolina, and Arizona, are running big deficits of over 30 percent of spending. Many states that give employees bargaining rights -- Massachusetts, New Mexico, and Montana -- have small deficits of less than 10 percent.
Republicans would rather go after teachers and other public employees than have us look at the pay of Wall Street traders, private-equity managers, and heads of hedge funds -- many of whom wouldn't have their jobs today were it not for the giant taxpayer-supported bailout, and most of whose lending and investing practices were the proximate cause of the Great Depression to begin with.
Last year, America's top thirteen hedge-fund managers earned an average of $1 billion each. One of them took home $5 billion. Much of their income is taxed as capital gains -- at 15 percent -- due to a tax loophole that Republican members of Congress have steadfastly guarded.
If the earnings of those thirteen hedge-fund managers were taxed as ordinary income, the revenues generated would pay the salaries and benefits of 300,000 teachers. Who is more valuable to our society -- thirteen hedge-fund managers or 300,000 teachers? Let's make the question even simpler. Who is more valuable: One hedge fund manager or one teacher?
The Distortion of the Constitution
The third part of the Republican strategy is being played out in the Supreme Court. It has politicized the Court more than at any time in recent memory.
Last year a majority of the justices determined that corporations have a right under the First Amendment to provide unlimited amounts of money to political candidates. Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission is among the most patently political and legally grotesque decisions of our highest court -- ranking right up there with Bush vs. Gore and Dred Scott.
Among those who voted in the affirmative were Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia. Both have become active strategists in the Republican party.
A month ago, for example, Antonin Scalia met in a closed-door session with Michele Bachmann's Tea Party caucus -- something no justice concerned about maintaining the appearance of impartiality would ever have done.
Both Thomas and Scalia have participated in political retreats organized and hosted by multi-billionaire financier Charles Koch, a major contributor to the Tea Party and other conservative organizations, and a crusader for ending all limits on money in politics. (Not incidentally, Thomas's wife is the founder of Liberty Central, a Tea Party organization that has been receiving unlimited corporate contributions due to the Citizens United decision. On his obligatory financial disclosure filings, Thomas has repeatedly failed to list her sources of income over the last twenty years, nor even to include his own four-day retreats courtesy of Charles Koch.)
Some time this year or next, the Supreme Court will be asked to consider whether the nation's new health care law is constitutional. Watch your wallets.
The Strategy as a Whole
These three aspects of the Republican strategy -- a federal budget battle to shrink government, focused on programs the vast middle class depends on; state efforts to undermine public employees, whom the middle class depends on; and a Supreme Court dedicated to bending the Constitution to enlarge and entrench the political power of the wealthy -- fit perfectly together.
They pit average working Americans against one another, distract attention from the almost unprecedented concentration of wealth and power at the top, and conceal Republican plans to further enlarge and entrench that wealth and power.
What is the Democratic strategy to counter this and reclaim America for the rest of us?
Correction: An earlier version of this post erroneously stated that the revenues generated from the top 13 hedge-fund managers would pay the salaries and benefits of 5 million teachers. This typo has been corrected in the post.
Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future, now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/the-republican-strategy_b_825206.html?ref=fb&src=sp
-cpg
From the Huffington Post
by Robert Reich
The Republican strategy is to split the vast middle and working class -- pitting unionized workers against non-unionized, public-sector workers against non-public, older workers within sight of Medicare and Social Security against younger workers who don't believe these programs will be there for them, and the poor against the working middle class.
By splitting working America along these lines, Republicans want Americans to believe that we can no longer afford to do what we need to do as a nation. They hope to deflect attention from the increasing share of total income and wealth going to the richest 1 percent while the jobs and wages of everyone else languish.
Republicans would rather no one notice their campaign to shrink the pie even further with additional tax cuts for the rich -- making the Bush tax cuts permanent, further reducing the estate tax, and allowing the wealthy to shift ever more of their income into capital gains taxed at 15 percent.
The strategy has three parts.
The Battle Over the Federal Budget
The first is being played out in the budget battle in Washington. As they raise the alarm over deficit spending and simultaneously squeeze popular middle-class programs, Republicans want the majority of the American public to view it all as a giant zero-sum game among average Americans that some will have to lose.
The president has already fallen into the trap by calling for budget cuts in programs the poor and working class depend on -- assistance with home heating, community services, college loans, and the like.
In the coming showdown over Medicare and Social Security, House budget chair Paul Ryan will push a voucher system for Medicare and a partly-privatized plan for Social Security -- both designed to attract younger middle-class voters.
The Assault on Public Employees
The second part of the Republican strategy is being played out on the state level where public employees are being blamed for state budget crises. Unions didn't cause these budget crises -- state revenues dropped because of the Great Recession -- but Republicans view them as opportunities to gut public employee unions, starting with teachers.
Wisconsin's Republican governor Scott Walker and his GOP legislature are seeking to end almost all union rights for teachers. Ohio's Republican governor John Kasich is pushing a similar plan in Ohio through a Republican-dominated legislature. New Jersey's Republican governor Chris Christie is attempting the same, telling a conservative conference Wednesday, "I'm attacking the leadership of the union because they're greedy, and they're selfish and they're self-interested."
The demonizing of public employees is not only based on the lie that they've caused these budget crises, but it's also premised on a second lie: that public employees earn more than private-sector workers. They don't, when you take account of their education. In fact over the last fifteen years the pay of public-sector workers, including teachers, has dropped relative to private-sector employees with the same level of education -- even including health and retirement benefits. Moreover, most public employees don't have generous pensions. After a career with annual pay averaging less than $45,000, the typical newly-retired public employee receives a pension of $19,000 a year.
Bargaining rights for public employees haven't caused state deficits to explode. Some states that deny their employees bargaining rights, such as Nevada, North Carolina, and Arizona, are running big deficits of over 30 percent of spending. Many states that give employees bargaining rights -- Massachusetts, New Mexico, and Montana -- have small deficits of less than 10 percent.
Republicans would rather go after teachers and other public employees than have us look at the pay of Wall Street traders, private-equity managers, and heads of hedge funds -- many of whom wouldn't have their jobs today were it not for the giant taxpayer-supported bailout, and most of whose lending and investing practices were the proximate cause of the Great Depression to begin with.
Last year, America's top thirteen hedge-fund managers earned an average of $1 billion each. One of them took home $5 billion. Much of their income is taxed as capital gains -- at 15 percent -- due to a tax loophole that Republican members of Congress have steadfastly guarded.
If the earnings of those thirteen hedge-fund managers were taxed as ordinary income, the revenues generated would pay the salaries and benefits of 300,000 teachers. Who is more valuable to our society -- thirteen hedge-fund managers or 300,000 teachers? Let's make the question even simpler. Who is more valuable: One hedge fund manager or one teacher?
The Distortion of the Constitution
The third part of the Republican strategy is being played out in the Supreme Court. It has politicized the Court more than at any time in recent memory.
Last year a majority of the justices determined that corporations have a right under the First Amendment to provide unlimited amounts of money to political candidates. Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission is among the most patently political and legally grotesque decisions of our highest court -- ranking right up there with Bush vs. Gore and Dred Scott.
Among those who voted in the affirmative were Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia. Both have become active strategists in the Republican party.
A month ago, for example, Antonin Scalia met in a closed-door session with Michele Bachmann's Tea Party caucus -- something no justice concerned about maintaining the appearance of impartiality would ever have done.
Both Thomas and Scalia have participated in political retreats organized and hosted by multi-billionaire financier Charles Koch, a major contributor to the Tea Party and other conservative organizations, and a crusader for ending all limits on money in politics. (Not incidentally, Thomas's wife is the founder of Liberty Central, a Tea Party organization that has been receiving unlimited corporate contributions due to the Citizens United decision. On his obligatory financial disclosure filings, Thomas has repeatedly failed to list her sources of income over the last twenty years, nor even to include his own four-day retreats courtesy of Charles Koch.)
Some time this year or next, the Supreme Court will be asked to consider whether the nation's new health care law is constitutional. Watch your wallets.
The Strategy as a Whole
These three aspects of the Republican strategy -- a federal budget battle to shrink government, focused on programs the vast middle class depends on; state efforts to undermine public employees, whom the middle class depends on; and a Supreme Court dedicated to bending the Constitution to enlarge and entrench the political power of the wealthy -- fit perfectly together.
They pit average working Americans against one another, distract attention from the almost unprecedented concentration of wealth and power at the top, and conceal Republican plans to further enlarge and entrench that wealth and power.
What is the Democratic strategy to counter this and reclaim America for the rest of us?
Correction: An earlier version of this post erroneously stated that the revenues generated from the top 13 hedge-fund managers would pay the salaries and benefits of 5 million teachers. This typo has been corrected in the post.
Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future, now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/the-republican-strategy_b_825206.html?ref=fb&src=sp
Saturday, February 12, 2011
7 reasons Rick Scott will destroy Florida
from the Reid Report
When Rick Scott was running for Florida governor, he tagged his “let’s get to work” jobs plan “777.” Now that he’s in office and has issued his first budget, the numbers that come to mind are more like “666.” How bad is Scott for Florida? Let me count the ways …
1. He doesn’t understand the difference between campaigning and governing. Scott unveiled his budget plan at a tea party gathering. And while that might make Florida’s tea party activists feel important, the election is over. Scott is going to have to come to terms with the fact that while he didn’t win a majority of Floridians’ support, he is stuck governing everybody, including people who are not part of the tea party movement. By unveiling his plans at a highly partisan gathering that represents perhaps a third of Floridians at best, Scott revealed that he’s more interested in positioning himself ideologically than in behaving as a statesman. From the Miami Herald:
Scott’s initial budget roll-out in Eustis had the look and feel of a highly partisan, heavily scripted campaign event. The venue underscored Scott’s eagerness to make what is normally a staid, policy-laden event into one that turned the budget into a political declaration. Inside the cavernous First Baptist Church of Eustis, Scott stood in front of a made-for-TV backdrop that said “Reducing Spending & Holding Government Accountable.”
The church, which seats 800, was filled to overflowing, and people waved miniature American flags and sang God Bless the USA and God Bless America. Warm-up speakers criticized President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, and praised Roger Vinson, the federal judge in Pensacola who last week struck down the Obama health plan as unconstitutional.
Before the public event, Scott hosted a private lunch for tea party activists at a nearby civic center. Activists said they would push for Scott’s budget in the same way they fought health care reform.
“This budget will reshape the state, and we want all of our legislators to know we’re behind this,” said Apryl Marie Fogel, state director of Americans for Prosperity Florida.
And if you’re not in the tea party? Well, there’s always 2014.
2. He thinks he’s above the law. That’s no surprise given his history of presiding over record Medicare fraud, then skating with a giant bag full of cash while his underlings took the fall with the feds. But Scott’s flagrant defiance of even the simplest strictures — like the Sunshine Laws — places him at the far authoritarian end of the spectrum, even further on that scale than Jeb Bush. Scott’s officiousness extends to the press, whom he thinks should treat him like a regent, and even to the cabinet, whom he treats like the court of petty dictator, “suggesting” that they run their regulations by him as if they were not themselves elected statewide (they rather curtly declined.) That kind of thing might fly for a petty dictator, but Scott, thankfully, is no dictator. Petty is another matter.
3. Scott is bad for eduction. Florida in order to attract good jobs needs to have a world class education system. The state already struggles with low graduation rates, especially for minority students, and Scott in his new budget breaks a campaign pledge to hold education harmless in his quest to cut spending. Scott’s proposed budget slashes education spending in Florida by 10 percent – which he said just a week ago he wouldn’t do. (He’s now trying to claim that he never said he wouldn’t cut eduction funding, to which Politifact Florida replies: FALSE.) Even Republicans, who have total control over Florida’s government and thus could pass Scott’s plan quite easily seemed taken aback by the plan. Even the most ideological among them apparently understands that cutting education at a time when Florida is trying to attract high tech and other businesses to the state to diversify the tourism-agriculture based economy, and just months after the state was awarded federal Race to the Top dollars as a reward for efforts during the Charlie Crist era to reform the state’s public schools is short sighted at best. Scott is even proposing to slash funding for the state’s colleges and for research, which would damage Florida immensely and make the state less competitive for top high school seniors as well as businesses.
It ‘s a lack of foresight that’s equal to Scott’s already established lack of basic human compassion. And coupled with the coming plans that will chase good teachers out of the state by reviving the teacher mercenary bill SB6 (a joint project of Scott and the right wing Republican legislature) Florida is likely headed back to the bottom of the heap in national education rankings.
4. He’s not so good at math. Maybe Scott is so quick to cut education because it’s not his personal strong suit. The budget that the governor unveiled to his tea party friends purports to close the state’s massive, $3.6 billion budget gap by cutting taxes (read “revenues”) and to grow jobs by cutting them. The lowlights:
… Eliminating 1,690 jobs from the Department of Corrections
Despite earlier pledges to cut $1 billion from prison spending, Scott has only targeted $82 million in corrections cuts. But that will mean the loss of nearly 1,700 jobs, the most of any state agency.
… An 8,700 overall reduction in the state government workforce
In addition to the almost 1,700 jobs Scott wants to eliminate from the Department of Corrections, he plans to cut approximately 7,000 more positions throughout the state government. The Miami Herald notes that despite these drastic reductions, Scott has budgeted for increased personnel in his own executive office. Florida Democratic Party Chairman Rod Smith has already issued a press release calling Scott’s plan a “jobs-killing budget.”
… Tax cuts worth $4 billion
Perhaps the most striking feature of Gov. Scott’s budget plan is a call for tax cuts totaling nearly $4 billion over the next two years. These include a $1.4 billion reduction in property taxes and a 1.5 percent drop in the corporate income tax.
Per the Miami Herald:
Prisons
* Proposes eliminating 1,690 employees from Department of Corrections by closing two prisons.
Corrections houses more than 100,000 inmates in 146 facilities, employing 18,200 employees.
Property Taxes
* State-set school property taxes would be cut by $1 billion over two years. Scott had pledged a $1.4 billion cut in the first year, but is phasing in a lesser tax cut over two years.
* Water management districts would be asked to take a 25 percent reducting in their annual property tax levy for two years, contributing $178 million and school districts would be expected to rollback taxes $507 million in first year.
Corporate Income Tax
* Corporate income tax would drop from 5.5 percent to 3 percent in 2011-12 and be phased out by 2018.* * The first year savings would be $458 million statewide.
Fees
* Motor vehicle fees would be scaled back, saving $235 million.
Environment
* The Department of Community Affairs would be merged with the Department of Environmental Protection, eliminating 530 jobs over two years. DCA staff will decrease to 40 employees within two years; budget drops to $70 million.
So Scott’s plan to grow jobs starts by cutting nearly 10,000 jobs, and his plan to close the budget gap starts with slashing state revenues. And how would Scott make up the revenues? Scott doesn’t say, and that’s even got Republicans scratching their heads and demanding actual details. Perhaps he’ll give the 411 to his tea party friends at some point, so they can tell the rest of us.
5. Scott’s proposals would harm Florida’s most vulnerable. Cutting Medicaid, and gutting the corrections department and the Department of Children and families… those are just three of the awful proposals Scott is putting on the table. And as even Republicans are pointing out, his cuts net out to relatively small cost savings to go with the loss of jobs and services. The Herald once again:
The criticisms and tough questions weren’t limited to Democrats; Scott’s fellow Republicans were skeptical of what many thought were skimpy details in his $65.9 billion budget.
The bipartisan concerns underscored a growing sense in the Legislature that Scott’s proposal is rooted in unrealistic political calculations, not the subtle calculus it takes to run the nation’s fourth-most populous state. In the House K-12 budget committee on Tuesday morning, eyebrows arched and heads shook as lawmakers tried digesting Scott’s plan to slash state-paid per-student spending by 10 percent.
“A 10 percent reduction is a significant cut,” said committee Chairwoman Marti Coley, R-Marianna.
Coley and Rep. Janet Adkins scolded Scott’s office for trying to “have it both ways” with the education budget. Scott said he’s against the use of federal stimulus money, but his office tacitly encourages school districts to use the money to boost per-pupil spending.
“It’s imperative that you go back and you redo the numbers,” said Adkins, R-Fernandina Beach.
In the House health appropriations committee, Republicans and Democrats flummoxed another Scott aide who had difficulties explaining his plans to cut $3 billion from Medicaid over two years.
Rep. Jose Diaz, R-Miami, said he struggling with the idea of deeply cutting the Department of Children and Families and privatizing mental-health facilities.
“My math tells me that the 2,500 jobs that you’re getting rid of only leads to a 4 percent reduction in the budget,” Diaz said. “It’s only an $8 million savings in an almost $3 billion budget. That seems like a significant loss of jobs for a very small gain.”
More on those Medicaid Cuts: Scott is proposing to slash $3 billion from the state-administered federal program over two years, “including $1 billion in cuts to provider reimbursement rates,” according to the Herald.
Savings are expected by receiving federal approval to transfer all 3 million Medicaid patients into a managed care program which would control costs and crack down on fraud.
But wait, there’s more! Scott also wants to privatize Florida’s Veterans’ homes (another chapter in his “let us make a profit, so what?” philosophy on Medicare, perhaps.) From the Orlando Sentinel:
TALLAHASSEE — Gov. Rick Scott’s $65.8 billion spending pitch to lawmakers includes privatizing veterans homes, mental health facilities and developmental disability centers, which the governor’s budget staff has concluded will save $103.9 million.
Scott health-care policy coordinator Jane Johnson said the governor’s office was still working with Veterans Affairs director Bob Milligan on the specifics of how to hand veterans homes over to private enterprise, a concept she called “public instrumentality.”
“The homes would be operated as a private entity and the employees would not be public employees,” Johnson told the House Health Care Appropriations Committee on Tuesday.
The Veteran Affairs budget would get cut $38 million as part of the plan to hand over those nursing homes for vets to a quasi-public organization like the state’s housing finance corporation. Johnson said 80 percent of the department’s budget goes to 700 veterans in nursing homes, and that the department felt its funding would be better-spent on the other 1.8 million Florida veterans.
But lawmakers’ first-blush reaction to the idea of privatizing veterans’ nursing homes was muted.
“While creative and out of the box, [it] certainly creates a lot of questions in our minds about how it gets pulled together,” said Health Care Appropriations Chairman Matt Hudson, R-Naples.
Of course, we all remember how well privatization worked out for Walter Reed …
So far, Scott’s plan to raid $600 million from local taxes dedicated to healthcare, particularly in South Florida, and leech the money into general revenues is probably dead on arrival, but the fact that the former hospital executive thought it was a good idea is telling. Scott also wants to shift thousands of inmates to private prisons, along with a few less than awful prison reforms. And that’s not even to get into Scott and his fellow Republicans’ ideas on drug testing the jobless and forcing them to take low wage work, while cutting the taxes businesses pay to cover the unemployed.
6. He thinks corporations have more rights than actual people. Scott’s plan to lower electricity rates for business (while also eliminating corporate taxes) would mean higher utility rates for the rest of us. From the Herald Tribune in December:
TALLAHASSEE – With Gov.-elect Rick Scott promising to save businesses a stunning $3.2 billion on their electric bills, consumer groups are bracing for a fight, fearing his plan will push higher costs onto residential customers.
Scott’s advisers are floating the idea of an “economic development rate” for corporations that agree to relocate to Florida or expand businesses within the state. The level of utility cost savings would be tied to job creation, under the plan.
But Florida’s four big investor-owned utilities would not have to absorb the rate reduction — or ask investors to pick up the tab, said those familiar with the proposal. Instead, rate reductions given these companies would be offset by higher charges imposed on a utility’s overall rate base — with residential customers shouldering most of the costs.
“What’s good for businesses is going to be too bad for consumers,” said Bill Newton, executive director of the Florida Consumer Action Network. “The only thing we can hope for is that a rate increase can backfire on legislators, and they may not want to get involved in it.”
Scott communications director Brian Burgess would not comment on the rate plan. But utility industry officials briefed on the plan by members of Scott’s economic development transition team say the proposal is designed to help him reach a central goal of his campaign: creating 700,000 jobs over the next seven years.
It also would help Scott meet a campaign pledge to “address Florida’s relatively expensive electricity costs so businesses could save approximately $3.25 billion,” part of the Republican candidate’s regulatory reform platform.
Tampa Electric Co. and Florida Power & Light, two of the state’s largest publicly-held utilities, were among the top contributors to Florida political campaigns this fall, with each giving more than $1.2 million, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.
And as one columnist pointed out:
It’s a curious plan. If Scott had said this during the election… “We’re going to subsidize electricity rates for businesses by jacking up already high electricity rates for residential customers”… I’m not sure he would even be stepping into the governor’s role next week. The early winter cold spell alone will put plenty of Floridians in shock when they get their next electric bill — without a hike in rates.
Business backers, not surprisingly, like the Florida Chamber of Commerce (surely eager to stay in Scott’s good graces after opposing him in the Republican primary) think Scott’s idea is just peachy. Funny how nobody mentioned this concept as a brilliant way to generate jobs in Florida until the new Guv-To-Be brought it up.
Like his “let us make a profit, so what?” attitude toward privatizing Medicare, it’s a sign that this is a person (or robot) who thinks corporate profits matter more than consumers, or voters. That kind of lack of basic respect for humanity is great for sociopaths, bad for governors.
7. His immigration plans threaten tourism, Florida’s Latin American commerce, and Major League Baseball. Scott, who used to own part of the Texas Rangers with George W. Bush, has said he wants to attract more MLB teams to do spring training in Florida. Ironically, he also wants to mirror the other big spring training state: Arizona, in pushing through anti-immigrant laws that invariably target Hispanics, who happen to make up 30 percent of the MLB’s rosters. And how would Scott’s anti-imimgrant stance play with the Latin American businesspeople who frequent South Florida? Short answer: it won’t help. Now, it seems that immigration could create yet another divide between the no-experience governor and the veto-proof majority in his party:
ORLANDO, Fla. —A month before the legislative session begins in Tallahassee, Republican leaders in Florida are divided over whether to enact an anti-immigration law similar to SB 1070 in Arizona, La Prensa reports.
Last week, the president of the state senate, Mike Haridopolos, R-Merrit Island, said that a law like the one enacted in Arizona would not be good for Florida. Agriculture commissioner Adam Putnam, also a Republican, agreed, saying it would not be financially viable.
Gov. Rick Scott, meanwhile, affirmed his support of an Arizona-style immigration law in Florida, and insisted that police should have the ability to ask people for immigration papers while they go about their jobs, even during routine stops.
Scott, who ran his election campaign on an anti-immigration platform, signed an executive order requiring Florida state agents to use the E-Verify document verification system for all employees, including subcontractors.
William Snyder, R-Stuart, who drafted a bill similar to SB 1070 last August, said he is considering making some changes to the bill and that the final version would not be as harsh as what Gov. Scott is supporting.
Scott is also pushing requirements that all government agencies and contractors utilize the E-Verify system. So what’s the problem? Costs:
An Migration Policy Institute report released Tuesday concludes that extending the use of the E-Verify employment program at the federal level may cause more harm to U.S. workers and the economy than it would deter illegal immigration.
Operated by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, ”E-Verify is an Internet-based system that allows businesses to determine the eligibility of their employees to work in the United States. E-Verify is fast, free and easy to use – and it’s the best way employers can ensure a legal workforce.”
The Migration Policy report states that “after five years of dramatic growth is is unclear how E-Verify affects hiring practices, especially in industries that rely more heavily on foreign workers.” (See the full report below.)
The report indicates that as of January 2011, a little more than 11,000 Florida employers are enrolled in the program. Over 240,000 are enrolled across the U.S.
On his first day in office, Gov. Rick Scott signed an executive order requiring all state agencies and companies that contract with state agencies to screen employees using the E-Verify system.
State Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla, who at one point called E-Verify a “bogus deal,” filedSenate Bill 518 to require every employer to use the “Employment Authorization Program,” prohibit an employer from hiring an unauthorized alien and require every public employer to register with and participate in the E-Verify system.
And then there’s this:
TALLAHASSEE — Florida legislators should think twice before considering an Arizona-style immigration law, a South Florida law professor warned Monday.
Not only would a Florida law likely be struck down by federal courts, it could backfire on the state’s tourism-based economy, Ediberto Roman, an immigration-law expert at Florida International University, told a Senate panel.
“Florida’s population is much different than Arizona’s,” Roman said. “The economy thrives on foreign tourists.”
And this:
State Rep. William Snyder has portrayed his Arizona-style immigration bill as a foregone conclusion for Florida.
If he doesn’t push for the law cracking down on illegal immigrants, there are a slew of other lawmakers who will, the Republican from Stuart said earlier this month during a town hall meeting in Palm City.
We had little reason to doubt that — until last week.
That’s when some of the state’s most powerful business lobbies voiced their concerns about the damage such a law could do to Florida’s image and business climate.
During a special Senate committee meeting in Tallahassee on Monday, representatives from the Florida Chamber of Commerce shared a report examining the impact of immigration on the state’s economy.
Among the key points:
Immigration boosts productivity, improves the economy and has a small positive impact on the wages of native-born workers.
Despite the perception that the United States is being overwhelmed by immigrants, the inflow of legal and illegal immigrants “is well within historical norms,” data shows.
Though unauthorized immigrants cost the state money in terms of education and criminal justice, many studies demonstrate a net positive impact on the economy and tax revenues.
“The immigrants that come to the United States come to work,” said Dale Brill, president of the Florida Chamber Foundation and co-author of the report.
The numbers tend to ebb and flow with the economy. He pointed to research that shows the 10 states with the highest concentration of immigrants between 1960 and 1990 had a median unemployment rate that was lower than the 10 states with the fewest immigrants.
Brill was careful not give his opinion on Snyder’s bill or a similar bill already filed by state Sen. Mike Bennett, R-Sarasota.
But the Florida Chamber made no secret of its general preferences. It wants federal-level immigration reform that eases the cost burden for states and provides opportunities to create more legal immigration.
“A state-by-state approach, from our board’s perspective, creates confusion and uncertainty,” said Adam Babington, vice president of governmental affairs for the Florida Chamber of Commerce.
The position was echoed by Associated Industries of Florida, a lobbying organization for businesses that also addressed the Senate committee.
It went a step further by criticizing a federal E-Verify system that would require businesses to determine the legal status of workers before hiring them.
Gov. Rick Scott recently signed an executive order requiring state agencies to use the system. Snyder’s draft bill calls for employing it across the state.
“The fact of the matter is E-Verify will always have an error rate due to the fact that it does not prevent identity fraud,” warned Brewster Bevis, vice president of government affairs for Associated Industries of Florida.
The group pointed out that demand for temporary agricultural workers has outpaced supply through the H-2A visa program.
Considering the essential role immigrant workers play in agriculture, tourism and construction — three of Florida’s biggest industries — the input is likely to carry weight with elected officials. It already has.
One of the state’s top Republicans, newly elected agriculture commissioner Adam Putnam, has shunned the idea of an Arizona-style bill in Florida. Putnam’s office says duplicating Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070, which is being challenged in federal court, “is the wrong approach.”
Even state Sen. Bennett is not sure if he would vote for his own bill. …
Ironically, what might ultimately save Floridians from the disaster that Scott’s policies would inflict on the state could be his own political party, which after all, is the only thing standing in his way.
http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/02/menace-to-society-7-reasons-rick-scott-is-bad-for-florida/
When Rick Scott was running for Florida governor, he tagged his “let’s get to work” jobs plan “777.” Now that he’s in office and has issued his first budget, the numbers that come to mind are more like “666.” How bad is Scott for Florida? Let me count the ways …
1. He doesn’t understand the difference between campaigning and governing. Scott unveiled his budget plan at a tea party gathering. And while that might make Florida’s tea party activists feel important, the election is over. Scott is going to have to come to terms with the fact that while he didn’t win a majority of Floridians’ support, he is stuck governing everybody, including people who are not part of the tea party movement. By unveiling his plans at a highly partisan gathering that represents perhaps a third of Floridians at best, Scott revealed that he’s more interested in positioning himself ideologically than in behaving as a statesman. From the Miami Herald:
Scott’s initial budget roll-out in Eustis had the look and feel of a highly partisan, heavily scripted campaign event. The venue underscored Scott’s eagerness to make what is normally a staid, policy-laden event into one that turned the budget into a political declaration. Inside the cavernous First Baptist Church of Eustis, Scott stood in front of a made-for-TV backdrop that said “Reducing Spending & Holding Government Accountable.”
The church, which seats 800, was filled to overflowing, and people waved miniature American flags and sang God Bless the USA and God Bless America. Warm-up speakers criticized President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, and praised Roger Vinson, the federal judge in Pensacola who last week struck down the Obama health plan as unconstitutional.
Before the public event, Scott hosted a private lunch for tea party activists at a nearby civic center. Activists said they would push for Scott’s budget in the same way they fought health care reform.
“This budget will reshape the state, and we want all of our legislators to know we’re behind this,” said Apryl Marie Fogel, state director of Americans for Prosperity Florida.
And if you’re not in the tea party? Well, there’s always 2014.
2. He thinks he’s above the law. That’s no surprise given his history of presiding over record Medicare fraud, then skating with a giant bag full of cash while his underlings took the fall with the feds. But Scott’s flagrant defiance of even the simplest strictures — like the Sunshine Laws — places him at the far authoritarian end of the spectrum, even further on that scale than Jeb Bush. Scott’s officiousness extends to the press, whom he thinks should treat him like a regent, and even to the cabinet, whom he treats like the court of petty dictator, “suggesting” that they run their regulations by him as if they were not themselves elected statewide (they rather curtly declined.) That kind of thing might fly for a petty dictator, but Scott, thankfully, is no dictator. Petty is another matter.
3. Scott is bad for eduction. Florida in order to attract good jobs needs to have a world class education system. The state already struggles with low graduation rates, especially for minority students, and Scott in his new budget breaks a campaign pledge to hold education harmless in his quest to cut spending. Scott’s proposed budget slashes education spending in Florida by 10 percent – which he said just a week ago he wouldn’t do. (He’s now trying to claim that he never said he wouldn’t cut eduction funding, to which Politifact Florida replies: FALSE.) Even Republicans, who have total control over Florida’s government and thus could pass Scott’s plan quite easily seemed taken aback by the plan. Even the most ideological among them apparently understands that cutting education at a time when Florida is trying to attract high tech and other businesses to the state to diversify the tourism-agriculture based economy, and just months after the state was awarded federal Race to the Top dollars as a reward for efforts during the Charlie Crist era to reform the state’s public schools is short sighted at best. Scott is even proposing to slash funding for the state’s colleges and for research, which would damage Florida immensely and make the state less competitive for top high school seniors as well as businesses.
It ‘s a lack of foresight that’s equal to Scott’s already established lack of basic human compassion. And coupled with the coming plans that will chase good teachers out of the state by reviving the teacher mercenary bill SB6 (a joint project of Scott and the right wing Republican legislature) Florida is likely headed back to the bottom of the heap in national education rankings.
4. He’s not so good at math. Maybe Scott is so quick to cut education because it’s not his personal strong suit. The budget that the governor unveiled to his tea party friends purports to close the state’s massive, $3.6 billion budget gap by cutting taxes (read “revenues”) and to grow jobs by cutting them. The lowlights:
… Eliminating 1,690 jobs from the Department of Corrections
Despite earlier pledges to cut $1 billion from prison spending, Scott has only targeted $82 million in corrections cuts. But that will mean the loss of nearly 1,700 jobs, the most of any state agency.
… An 8,700 overall reduction in the state government workforce
In addition to the almost 1,700 jobs Scott wants to eliminate from the Department of Corrections, he plans to cut approximately 7,000 more positions throughout the state government. The Miami Herald notes that despite these drastic reductions, Scott has budgeted for increased personnel in his own executive office. Florida Democratic Party Chairman Rod Smith has already issued a press release calling Scott’s plan a “jobs-killing budget.”
… Tax cuts worth $4 billion
Perhaps the most striking feature of Gov. Scott’s budget plan is a call for tax cuts totaling nearly $4 billion over the next two years. These include a $1.4 billion reduction in property taxes and a 1.5 percent drop in the corporate income tax.
Per the Miami Herald:
Prisons
* Proposes eliminating 1,690 employees from Department of Corrections by closing two prisons.
Corrections houses more than 100,000 inmates in 146 facilities, employing 18,200 employees.
Property Taxes
* State-set school property taxes would be cut by $1 billion over two years. Scott had pledged a $1.4 billion cut in the first year, but is phasing in a lesser tax cut over two years.
* Water management districts would be asked to take a 25 percent reducting in their annual property tax levy for two years, contributing $178 million and school districts would be expected to rollback taxes $507 million in first year.
Corporate Income Tax
* Corporate income tax would drop from 5.5 percent to 3 percent in 2011-12 and be phased out by 2018.* * The first year savings would be $458 million statewide.
Fees
* Motor vehicle fees would be scaled back, saving $235 million.
Environment
* The Department of Community Affairs would be merged with the Department of Environmental Protection, eliminating 530 jobs over two years. DCA staff will decrease to 40 employees within two years; budget drops to $70 million.
So Scott’s plan to grow jobs starts by cutting nearly 10,000 jobs, and his plan to close the budget gap starts with slashing state revenues. And how would Scott make up the revenues? Scott doesn’t say, and that’s even got Republicans scratching their heads and demanding actual details. Perhaps he’ll give the 411 to his tea party friends at some point, so they can tell the rest of us.
5. Scott’s proposals would harm Florida’s most vulnerable. Cutting Medicaid, and gutting the corrections department and the Department of Children and families… those are just three of the awful proposals Scott is putting on the table. And as even Republicans are pointing out, his cuts net out to relatively small cost savings to go with the loss of jobs and services. The Herald once again:
The criticisms and tough questions weren’t limited to Democrats; Scott’s fellow Republicans were skeptical of what many thought were skimpy details in his $65.9 billion budget.
The bipartisan concerns underscored a growing sense in the Legislature that Scott’s proposal is rooted in unrealistic political calculations, not the subtle calculus it takes to run the nation’s fourth-most populous state. In the House K-12 budget committee on Tuesday morning, eyebrows arched and heads shook as lawmakers tried digesting Scott’s plan to slash state-paid per-student spending by 10 percent.
“A 10 percent reduction is a significant cut,” said committee Chairwoman Marti Coley, R-Marianna.
Coley and Rep. Janet Adkins scolded Scott’s office for trying to “have it both ways” with the education budget. Scott said he’s against the use of federal stimulus money, but his office tacitly encourages school districts to use the money to boost per-pupil spending.
“It’s imperative that you go back and you redo the numbers,” said Adkins, R-Fernandina Beach.
In the House health appropriations committee, Republicans and Democrats flummoxed another Scott aide who had difficulties explaining his plans to cut $3 billion from Medicaid over two years.
Rep. Jose Diaz, R-Miami, said he struggling with the idea of deeply cutting the Department of Children and Families and privatizing mental-health facilities.
“My math tells me that the 2,500 jobs that you’re getting rid of only leads to a 4 percent reduction in the budget,” Diaz said. “It’s only an $8 million savings in an almost $3 billion budget. That seems like a significant loss of jobs for a very small gain.”
More on those Medicaid Cuts: Scott is proposing to slash $3 billion from the state-administered federal program over two years, “including $1 billion in cuts to provider reimbursement rates,” according to the Herald.
Savings are expected by receiving federal approval to transfer all 3 million Medicaid patients into a managed care program which would control costs and crack down on fraud.
But wait, there’s more! Scott also wants to privatize Florida’s Veterans’ homes (another chapter in his “let us make a profit, so what?” philosophy on Medicare, perhaps.) From the Orlando Sentinel:
TALLAHASSEE — Gov. Rick Scott’s $65.8 billion spending pitch to lawmakers includes privatizing veterans homes, mental health facilities and developmental disability centers, which the governor’s budget staff has concluded will save $103.9 million.
Scott health-care policy coordinator Jane Johnson said the governor’s office was still working with Veterans Affairs director Bob Milligan on the specifics of how to hand veterans homes over to private enterprise, a concept she called “public instrumentality.”
“The homes would be operated as a private entity and the employees would not be public employees,” Johnson told the House Health Care Appropriations Committee on Tuesday.
The Veteran Affairs budget would get cut $38 million as part of the plan to hand over those nursing homes for vets to a quasi-public organization like the state’s housing finance corporation. Johnson said 80 percent of the department’s budget goes to 700 veterans in nursing homes, and that the department felt its funding would be better-spent on the other 1.8 million Florida veterans.
But lawmakers’ first-blush reaction to the idea of privatizing veterans’ nursing homes was muted.
“While creative and out of the box, [it] certainly creates a lot of questions in our minds about how it gets pulled together,” said Health Care Appropriations Chairman Matt Hudson, R-Naples.
Of course, we all remember how well privatization worked out for Walter Reed …
So far, Scott’s plan to raid $600 million from local taxes dedicated to healthcare, particularly in South Florida, and leech the money into general revenues is probably dead on arrival, but the fact that the former hospital executive thought it was a good idea is telling. Scott also wants to shift thousands of inmates to private prisons, along with a few less than awful prison reforms. And that’s not even to get into Scott and his fellow Republicans’ ideas on drug testing the jobless and forcing them to take low wage work, while cutting the taxes businesses pay to cover the unemployed.
6. He thinks corporations have more rights than actual people. Scott’s plan to lower electricity rates for business (while also eliminating corporate taxes) would mean higher utility rates for the rest of us. From the Herald Tribune in December:
TALLAHASSEE – With Gov.-elect Rick Scott promising to save businesses a stunning $3.2 billion on their electric bills, consumer groups are bracing for a fight, fearing his plan will push higher costs onto residential customers.
Scott’s advisers are floating the idea of an “economic development rate” for corporations that agree to relocate to Florida or expand businesses within the state. The level of utility cost savings would be tied to job creation, under the plan.
But Florida’s four big investor-owned utilities would not have to absorb the rate reduction — or ask investors to pick up the tab, said those familiar with the proposal. Instead, rate reductions given these companies would be offset by higher charges imposed on a utility’s overall rate base — with residential customers shouldering most of the costs.
“What’s good for businesses is going to be too bad for consumers,” said Bill Newton, executive director of the Florida Consumer Action Network. “The only thing we can hope for is that a rate increase can backfire on legislators, and they may not want to get involved in it.”
Scott communications director Brian Burgess would not comment on the rate plan. But utility industry officials briefed on the plan by members of Scott’s economic development transition team say the proposal is designed to help him reach a central goal of his campaign: creating 700,000 jobs over the next seven years.
It also would help Scott meet a campaign pledge to “address Florida’s relatively expensive electricity costs so businesses could save approximately $3.25 billion,” part of the Republican candidate’s regulatory reform platform.
Tampa Electric Co. and Florida Power & Light, two of the state’s largest publicly-held utilities, were among the top contributors to Florida political campaigns this fall, with each giving more than $1.2 million, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.
And as one columnist pointed out:
It’s a curious plan. If Scott had said this during the election… “We’re going to subsidize electricity rates for businesses by jacking up already high electricity rates for residential customers”… I’m not sure he would even be stepping into the governor’s role next week. The early winter cold spell alone will put plenty of Floridians in shock when they get their next electric bill — without a hike in rates.
Business backers, not surprisingly, like the Florida Chamber of Commerce (surely eager to stay in Scott’s good graces after opposing him in the Republican primary) think Scott’s idea is just peachy. Funny how nobody mentioned this concept as a brilliant way to generate jobs in Florida until the new Guv-To-Be brought it up.
Like his “let us make a profit, so what?” attitude toward privatizing Medicare, it’s a sign that this is a person (or robot) who thinks corporate profits matter more than consumers, or voters. That kind of lack of basic respect for humanity is great for sociopaths, bad for governors.
7. His immigration plans threaten tourism, Florida’s Latin American commerce, and Major League Baseball. Scott, who used to own part of the Texas Rangers with George W. Bush, has said he wants to attract more MLB teams to do spring training in Florida. Ironically, he also wants to mirror the other big spring training state: Arizona, in pushing through anti-immigrant laws that invariably target Hispanics, who happen to make up 30 percent of the MLB’s rosters. And how would Scott’s anti-imimgrant stance play with the Latin American businesspeople who frequent South Florida? Short answer: it won’t help. Now, it seems that immigration could create yet another divide between the no-experience governor and the veto-proof majority in his party:
ORLANDO, Fla. —A month before the legislative session begins in Tallahassee, Republican leaders in Florida are divided over whether to enact an anti-immigration law similar to SB 1070 in Arizona, La Prensa reports.
Last week, the president of the state senate, Mike Haridopolos, R-Merrit Island, said that a law like the one enacted in Arizona would not be good for Florida. Agriculture commissioner Adam Putnam, also a Republican, agreed, saying it would not be financially viable.
Gov. Rick Scott, meanwhile, affirmed his support of an Arizona-style immigration law in Florida, and insisted that police should have the ability to ask people for immigration papers while they go about their jobs, even during routine stops.
Scott, who ran his election campaign on an anti-immigration platform, signed an executive order requiring Florida state agents to use the E-Verify document verification system for all employees, including subcontractors.
William Snyder, R-Stuart, who drafted a bill similar to SB 1070 last August, said he is considering making some changes to the bill and that the final version would not be as harsh as what Gov. Scott is supporting.
Scott is also pushing requirements that all government agencies and contractors utilize the E-Verify system. So what’s the problem? Costs:
An Migration Policy Institute report released Tuesday concludes that extending the use of the E-Verify employment program at the federal level may cause more harm to U.S. workers and the economy than it would deter illegal immigration.
Operated by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, ”E-Verify is an Internet-based system that allows businesses to determine the eligibility of their employees to work in the United States. E-Verify is fast, free and easy to use – and it’s the best way employers can ensure a legal workforce.”
The Migration Policy report states that “after five years of dramatic growth is is unclear how E-Verify affects hiring practices, especially in industries that rely more heavily on foreign workers.” (See the full report below.)
The report indicates that as of January 2011, a little more than 11,000 Florida employers are enrolled in the program. Over 240,000 are enrolled across the U.S.
On his first day in office, Gov. Rick Scott signed an executive order requiring all state agencies and companies that contract with state agencies to screen employees using the E-Verify system.
State Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla, who at one point called E-Verify a “bogus deal,” filedSenate Bill 518 to require every employer to use the “Employment Authorization Program,” prohibit an employer from hiring an unauthorized alien and require every public employer to register with and participate in the E-Verify system.
And then there’s this:
TALLAHASSEE — Florida legislators should think twice before considering an Arizona-style immigration law, a South Florida law professor warned Monday.
Not only would a Florida law likely be struck down by federal courts, it could backfire on the state’s tourism-based economy, Ediberto Roman, an immigration-law expert at Florida International University, told a Senate panel.
“Florida’s population is much different than Arizona’s,” Roman said. “The economy thrives on foreign tourists.”
And this:
State Rep. William Snyder has portrayed his Arizona-style immigration bill as a foregone conclusion for Florida.
If he doesn’t push for the law cracking down on illegal immigrants, there are a slew of other lawmakers who will, the Republican from Stuart said earlier this month during a town hall meeting in Palm City.
We had little reason to doubt that — until last week.
That’s when some of the state’s most powerful business lobbies voiced their concerns about the damage such a law could do to Florida’s image and business climate.
During a special Senate committee meeting in Tallahassee on Monday, representatives from the Florida Chamber of Commerce shared a report examining the impact of immigration on the state’s economy.
Among the key points:
Immigration boosts productivity, improves the economy and has a small positive impact on the wages of native-born workers.
Despite the perception that the United States is being overwhelmed by immigrants, the inflow of legal and illegal immigrants “is well within historical norms,” data shows.
Though unauthorized immigrants cost the state money in terms of education and criminal justice, many studies demonstrate a net positive impact on the economy and tax revenues.
“The immigrants that come to the United States come to work,” said Dale Brill, president of the Florida Chamber Foundation and co-author of the report.
The numbers tend to ebb and flow with the economy. He pointed to research that shows the 10 states with the highest concentration of immigrants between 1960 and 1990 had a median unemployment rate that was lower than the 10 states with the fewest immigrants.
Brill was careful not give his opinion on Snyder’s bill or a similar bill already filed by state Sen. Mike Bennett, R-Sarasota.
But the Florida Chamber made no secret of its general preferences. It wants federal-level immigration reform that eases the cost burden for states and provides opportunities to create more legal immigration.
“A state-by-state approach, from our board’s perspective, creates confusion and uncertainty,” said Adam Babington, vice president of governmental affairs for the Florida Chamber of Commerce.
The position was echoed by Associated Industries of Florida, a lobbying organization for businesses that also addressed the Senate committee.
It went a step further by criticizing a federal E-Verify system that would require businesses to determine the legal status of workers before hiring them.
Gov. Rick Scott recently signed an executive order requiring state agencies to use the system. Snyder’s draft bill calls for employing it across the state.
“The fact of the matter is E-Verify will always have an error rate due to the fact that it does not prevent identity fraud,” warned Brewster Bevis, vice president of government affairs for Associated Industries of Florida.
The group pointed out that demand for temporary agricultural workers has outpaced supply through the H-2A visa program.
Considering the essential role immigrant workers play in agriculture, tourism and construction — three of Florida’s biggest industries — the input is likely to carry weight with elected officials. It already has.
One of the state’s top Republicans, newly elected agriculture commissioner Adam Putnam, has shunned the idea of an Arizona-style bill in Florida. Putnam’s office says duplicating Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070, which is being challenged in federal court, “is the wrong approach.”
Even state Sen. Bennett is not sure if he would vote for his own bill. …
Ironically, what might ultimately save Floridians from the disaster that Scott’s policies would inflict on the state could be his own political party, which after all, is the only thing standing in his way.
http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/02/menace-to-society-7-reasons-rick-scott-is-bad-for-florida/
Vouchers, the irresponsible reform
From the Keystone State education Coalition
bny Laurence Feinberg
Most Americans believe that improving our system of education should be a top priority for government at the local, state and Federal levels. Legislators, school boards, education professionals, parent groups and community organizations are attempting to implement innovative ideas to rescue children from failing school systems, particularly in inner-city neighborhoods. Many such groups champion voucher programs. The standard program proposed in dozens of states across the country would distribute monetary vouchers (typically valued between $2,500-$5,000) to parents of school-age children, usually in troubled inner-city school districts. Parents could then use the vouchers towards the cost of tuition at private schools -- including those dedicated to religious indoctrination.
Superficially, school vouchers might seem a relatively benign way to increase the options poor parents have for educating their children. In fact, vouchers pose a serious threat to values that are vital to the health of American democracy. These programs subvert the constitutional principle of separation of church and state and threaten to undermine our system of public education.
Vouchers Are Constitutionally Suspect
Proponents of vouchers are asking Americans to do something contrary to the very ideals upon which this country was founded. Thomas Jefferson, one of the architects of religious freedom in America, said, "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves... is sinful and tyrannical." Yet voucher programs would do just that; they would force citizens -- Christians, Jews, Muslims and atheists -- to pay for the religious indoctrination of school children at schools with narrow parochial agendas. In many areas, 80 percent of vouchers would be used in schools whose central mission is religious training. In most such schools, religion permeates the classroom, the lunchroom, even the football practice field. Channeling public money to these institutions flies in the face of the constitutional mandate of separation of church and state.
While the Supreme Court has upheld school vouchers in the Zelman v. Simmons-Harris case, vouchers have not been given a green light by the Court beyond the narrow facts of this case. Indeed, Cleveland's voucher program was upheld in a close (5-4) ruling that required a voucher program to (among other things):
be a part of a much wider program of multiple educational options, such as magnet schools and after-school tutorial assistance,
offer parents a real choice between religious and non-religious education perhaps even providing incentives for non-religious education),
not only address private schools, but to ensure that benefits go to schools regardless of whether they are public or private, religious or not.
This decision also does not disturb the bedrock constitutional idea that no government program may be designed to advance religious institutions over non-religious institutions.
Finally, and of critical importance, many state constitutions provide for a higher wall of separation between church and state -- and thus voucher programs will likely have a hard time surviving litigation in state courts.
Thus, other states will likely have a very hard time reproducing the very narrow set of circumstances found in the Cleveland program.
Vouchers Undermine Public Schools
Implementation of voucher programs sends a clear message that we are giving up on public education. Undoubtedly, vouchers would help some students. But the glory of the American system of public education is that it is for all children, regardless of their religion, their academic talents or their ability to pay a fee. This policy of inclusiveness has made public schools the backbone of American democracy.
Private schools are allowed to discriminate on a variety of grounds. These institutions regularly reject applicants because of low achievement, discipline problems, and sometimes for no reason at all. Further, some private schools promote agendas antithetical to the American ideal. Under a system of vouchers, it may be difficult to prevent schools run by extremist groups like the Nation of Islam or the Ku Klux Klan from receiving public funds to subsidize their racist and anti-Semitic agendas. Indeed, the proud legacy of Brown v. Board of Education may be tossed away as tax dollars are siphoned off to deliberately segregated schools.
Proponents of vouchers argue that these programs would allow poor students to attend good schools previously only available to the middle class. The facts tell a different story. A $2,500 voucher supplement may make the difference for some families, giving them just enough to cover the tuition at a private school (with some schools charging over $10,000 per year, they would still have to pay several thousand dollars). But voucher programs offer nothing of value to families who cannot come up with the rest of the money to cover tuition costs.
In many cases, voucher programs will offer students the choice between attending their current public school or attending a school run by the local church. Not all students benefit from a religious school atmosphere -- even when the religion being taught is their own. For these students, voucher programs offer only one option: to remain in a public school that is likely to deteriorate even further.
As our country becomes increasingly diverse, the public school system stands out as an institution that unifies Americans. Under voucher programs, our educational system -- and our country -- would become even more Balkanized than it already is. With the help of taxpayers' dollars, private schools would be filled with well-to-do and middle-class students and a handful of the best, most motivated students from inner cities. Some public schools would be left with fewer dollars to teach the poorest of the poor and other students who, for one reason or another, were not private school material. Such a scenario can hardly benefit public education.
Finally, as an empirical matter, reports on the effectiveness of voucher programs have been mixed. Initial reports on Cleveland's voucher program, published by the American Federation of Teachers, suggest that it has been less effective than proponents argue. Milwaukee's program has resulted in a huge budget shortfall, leaving the public schools scrambling for funds. While some studies suggest that vouchers are good for public schools, there is, as yet, little evidence that they ultimately improve the quality of public education for those who need it most.
Vouchers Are Not Universally Popular
When offered the opportunity to vote on voucher-like programs, the public has consistently rejected them; voters in 19 states have rejected such proposals in referendum ballots. In the November 1998 election, for example, Colorado voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would have allowed parochial schools to receive public funds through a complicated tuition tax-credit scheme. Indeed, voters have rejected all but one of the tuition voucher proposals put to the ballot since the first such vote over 30 years ago.
Voucher proposals have also made little progress in legislatures across the country. While 20 states have introduced voucher bills, only two have been put into law. Congress has considered several voucher plans for the District of Columbia, but none has been enacted.
A recent poll conducted by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies demonstrates that support for vouchers has declined over the last year. Published in October 1998, the Poll revealed that support for school vouchers declined from 57.3 percent to 48.1 percent among Blacks, and from 47 to 41.3 percent among whites. Overall, 50.2 percent of Americans now oppose voucher programs; only 42 percent support them.
Conclusion
School voucher programs undermine two great American traditions: universal public education and the separation of church and state. Instead of embracing vouchers, communities across the country should dedicate themselves to finding solutions that will be available to every American schoolchild and that take into account the important legacy of the First Amendment.
http://keystonestateeducationcoalition.blogspot.com/2011/02/anti-defamation-league-school-vouchers.html
bny Laurence Feinberg
Most Americans believe that improving our system of education should be a top priority for government at the local, state and Federal levels. Legislators, school boards, education professionals, parent groups and community organizations are attempting to implement innovative ideas to rescue children from failing school systems, particularly in inner-city neighborhoods. Many such groups champion voucher programs. The standard program proposed in dozens of states across the country would distribute monetary vouchers (typically valued between $2,500-$5,000) to parents of school-age children, usually in troubled inner-city school districts. Parents could then use the vouchers towards the cost of tuition at private schools -- including those dedicated to religious indoctrination.
Superficially, school vouchers might seem a relatively benign way to increase the options poor parents have for educating their children. In fact, vouchers pose a serious threat to values that are vital to the health of American democracy. These programs subvert the constitutional principle of separation of church and state and threaten to undermine our system of public education.
Vouchers Are Constitutionally Suspect
Proponents of vouchers are asking Americans to do something contrary to the very ideals upon which this country was founded. Thomas Jefferson, one of the architects of religious freedom in America, said, "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves... is sinful and tyrannical." Yet voucher programs would do just that; they would force citizens -- Christians, Jews, Muslims and atheists -- to pay for the religious indoctrination of school children at schools with narrow parochial agendas. In many areas, 80 percent of vouchers would be used in schools whose central mission is religious training. In most such schools, religion permeates the classroom, the lunchroom, even the football practice field. Channeling public money to these institutions flies in the face of the constitutional mandate of separation of church and state.
While the Supreme Court has upheld school vouchers in the Zelman v. Simmons-Harris case, vouchers have not been given a green light by the Court beyond the narrow facts of this case. Indeed, Cleveland's voucher program was upheld in a close (5-4) ruling that required a voucher program to (among other things):
be a part of a much wider program of multiple educational options, such as magnet schools and after-school tutorial assistance,
offer parents a real choice between religious and non-religious education perhaps even providing incentives for non-religious education),
not only address private schools, but to ensure that benefits go to schools regardless of whether they are public or private, religious or not.
This decision also does not disturb the bedrock constitutional idea that no government program may be designed to advance religious institutions over non-religious institutions.
Finally, and of critical importance, many state constitutions provide for a higher wall of separation between church and state -- and thus voucher programs will likely have a hard time surviving litigation in state courts.
Thus, other states will likely have a very hard time reproducing the very narrow set of circumstances found in the Cleveland program.
Vouchers Undermine Public Schools
Implementation of voucher programs sends a clear message that we are giving up on public education. Undoubtedly, vouchers would help some students. But the glory of the American system of public education is that it is for all children, regardless of their religion, their academic talents or their ability to pay a fee. This policy of inclusiveness has made public schools the backbone of American democracy.
Private schools are allowed to discriminate on a variety of grounds. These institutions regularly reject applicants because of low achievement, discipline problems, and sometimes for no reason at all. Further, some private schools promote agendas antithetical to the American ideal. Under a system of vouchers, it may be difficult to prevent schools run by extremist groups like the Nation of Islam or the Ku Klux Klan from receiving public funds to subsidize their racist and anti-Semitic agendas. Indeed, the proud legacy of Brown v. Board of Education may be tossed away as tax dollars are siphoned off to deliberately segregated schools.
Proponents of vouchers argue that these programs would allow poor students to attend good schools previously only available to the middle class. The facts tell a different story. A $2,500 voucher supplement may make the difference for some families, giving them just enough to cover the tuition at a private school (with some schools charging over $10,000 per year, they would still have to pay several thousand dollars). But voucher programs offer nothing of value to families who cannot come up with the rest of the money to cover tuition costs.
In many cases, voucher programs will offer students the choice between attending their current public school or attending a school run by the local church. Not all students benefit from a religious school atmosphere -- even when the religion being taught is their own. For these students, voucher programs offer only one option: to remain in a public school that is likely to deteriorate even further.
As our country becomes increasingly diverse, the public school system stands out as an institution that unifies Americans. Under voucher programs, our educational system -- and our country -- would become even more Balkanized than it already is. With the help of taxpayers' dollars, private schools would be filled with well-to-do and middle-class students and a handful of the best, most motivated students from inner cities. Some public schools would be left with fewer dollars to teach the poorest of the poor and other students who, for one reason or another, were not private school material. Such a scenario can hardly benefit public education.
Finally, as an empirical matter, reports on the effectiveness of voucher programs have been mixed. Initial reports on Cleveland's voucher program, published by the American Federation of Teachers, suggest that it has been less effective than proponents argue. Milwaukee's program has resulted in a huge budget shortfall, leaving the public schools scrambling for funds. While some studies suggest that vouchers are good for public schools, there is, as yet, little evidence that they ultimately improve the quality of public education for those who need it most.
Vouchers Are Not Universally Popular
When offered the opportunity to vote on voucher-like programs, the public has consistently rejected them; voters in 19 states have rejected such proposals in referendum ballots. In the November 1998 election, for example, Colorado voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would have allowed parochial schools to receive public funds through a complicated tuition tax-credit scheme. Indeed, voters have rejected all but one of the tuition voucher proposals put to the ballot since the first such vote over 30 years ago.
Voucher proposals have also made little progress in legislatures across the country. While 20 states have introduced voucher bills, only two have been put into law. Congress has considered several voucher plans for the District of Columbia, but none has been enacted.
A recent poll conducted by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies demonstrates that support for vouchers has declined over the last year. Published in October 1998, the Poll revealed that support for school vouchers declined from 57.3 percent to 48.1 percent among Blacks, and from 47 to 41.3 percent among whites. Overall, 50.2 percent of Americans now oppose voucher programs; only 42 percent support them.
Conclusion
School voucher programs undermine two great American traditions: universal public education and the separation of church and state. Instead of embracing vouchers, communities across the country should dedicate themselves to finding solutions that will be available to every American schoolchild and that take into account the important legacy of the First Amendment.
http://keystonestateeducationcoalition.blogspot.com/2011/02/anti-defamation-league-school-vouchers.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)