Unofficial Voice of the Utah Senate Majority
Welcome to The Senate Site
Twitter/
Tuesday, November 06, 2007Referendum One
By John Valentine
President of the Utah State Senate Today marks the end of a long emotional chapter for those who are concerned about the future of education in Utah. I am sincerely grateful for people who have worked to educate and enlighten voters in their role as citizen legislators. Of course I am disappointed by the actions of those on both sides who turned the policymaking arena into a negative shouting match. Had this occurred in the Senate Chamber, vitriolic partisans on both sides would have been ruled out of order and asked to modify the way in which they communicate their opinions. Contention is far easier than statesmanship but friendship suffers and the results are never as good as they could have been. That's not to say elements of nobility did not abound during this statewide debate. We have witnessed many. Specifically: the workers and volunteers on both sides who have given so much of themselves to the issue, and the citizens of Utah (you, me, all of us) with curiosity and concern for the future that runs deeper than a campaign slogan. Thank you for your research and work to make Utah better. I think we're united in that desire. Three hours until the polls close. No one likes to be served humble pie but, whatever the outcome, I believe it's healthy for government to be reminded that voters are citizens, not subjects. They are the final decision makers on this bill and bear the final responsibility for what occurs as a consequence of their vote. If vouchers are taken off the table we will need to start looking at other tools to tackle the problems that vouchers were designed to address. And by "we" I mean all of us.
posted by The Senate Site at 4:48 PM | Link
|
Government 2.0 AccessoriesRadio Free SenatePast Five Twitter UpdatesKeep in TouchYour Government 2.0 Lab
Current Discussions
Senate Site Feed
|
© 2008. All rights reserved. Designed by Jeremy Wright & His Brother-In-Law
22 Comments:
"...government of the people ... by the people ... for the people ... shall not perish from this earth."
Well said Senator Valentine. I am in your district and agree with you most of the time but not on vouchers.
One big problem with public ed in utah is that it's hard to fire bad teachers and bad administrators and it's hard to reward good teachers and good administrators. This creates an environment which coddles mediocrity as it slides toward incompetence.
I would love to see a public school system in which teachers and administrators have the tools to proactively improve and are rewarded for doing so.
I almost voted for vouchers simply because the UEA opposed them and I'd love to the UEA feel some heat. However, I don't think vouchers are the right way to fix the problems.
I hope we can take the intense interest in public ed right now and channel it toward restructuring public education.
Well put. I just hope that, if vouchers are rejected by the populace, the legislature will not retaliate against groups or people who did not agree with their viewpoint.
Of course the "legislature" will retaliate. The Republican leadership has a long history of doing so in this state. Watch for the attacks upon the state board of education, the UEA and the teachers themselves. I can just hear the Republicans now saying to the education lobby, "We tried to improve education by passing vouchers and you fought us every step of the way. Its your own fault that we can't give you the resources you need for the coming year".
You've said exactly what I was thinking saxguy. Sen. Valentine won't participate in this Partisan retribution -- of course. He'll write a thoughful piece about why they are still doing the best they can -- with limited resources -- and vote with everyone else. Then, perhaps a nice trade mission fact finding trip to Mongolia.
It is a mistake to confuse politics and policy. Nearly 75% of Utah's Hispanic public school will still be dropping out and not graduating with a diploma. Good public policy will press to address this problem...and the right thing to do is to ignore politics (yes, the vote) and help those kids...perhaps by amending the current state voucher law, Carson Smith, to include these other struggling students.
Remember, politics is not policy. The State Legislature is elected to enact policy, not conduct politics. There should never be a respite from taking care of the business of the state.
Get right back on the saddle and address these struggling students. Let the UEA file another referendum and, once again, divide the state over politics. That is their perogative as special interest group protecting their jobs.
The right thing is to get right back at it and help those who need help.
PTM
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Easy Saxguy. Your honest, respectful disagreements have always been welcome here, but personal attacks are not. Want to refine your message and repost?
You Republican/LDS/Conservative/Patriarchs always have to feel like you are in complete control don't you? You can censor my comments on your site, but you can't censor my opinion of Paul Mero or the Republican power mongers in the legislature which I am free to express on other blogs where they are not afraid of the free exchange of ideas and opinions. You will probably censor this post as well.
Here's a novel idea. How about restoring my original post and letting other people's responses to my comments determine if I crossed the line or not? You know, kind of like a referendum.
While I have no say over what gets posted or not, I can say that I don't mind any comment (even the nasty, undignified ones) as long as the poster is not anonymous. A terrible irony is that these advocates of free speech always seem to hide behind anonymity.
Hi Paul. My name is John B. Talcott and I live in Springville, Utah. I am not hiding behind my anonymity as you claim. I will try again to post my thoughts about your comments on this site without having my remarks cleansed by the higher authority. Your comment suggesting that the lawmakers just ignore the vote on vouchers which you label as just politics makes me angry. The will of the public was heard on this issue and not only the specifics of the voucher bill but also the concept of vouchers was resoundingly defeated. The proof I offer for this statement is that the public opinion polls on school vouchers before the bill was even drafted showed virtually the same percentage of people opposed to the idea as the number of people who voted to defeat the "specifics" of Referendum 1. This fact also lays to rest the voucher supporter's argument that vouchers lost because the public was confused or duped by the UEA.
What angers me the most Paul is the chutzpah of your suggestion that lawmakers get right back in the saddle and and try an end run around the will of the people by expanding the Carson Smith program to include other non handicapped students. The idea of deliberately ignoring the will of the public because you and your ilk know much better than they do what is best for their children's education displays an level of sanctimonious arrogance that is surprising, even coming from you. The legislature represents the people in this state, it does not rule them. What part of that don't you understand?
My suggestion to you is that if you really care so much about the education system in Utah, that you spend a semester helping to teach in one of Utah's overcrowded and underfunded classrooms. Go to a few meetings of the local association with your faculty rep and see what the Utah Education Association and the teachers who comprise its membership are really all about. Once you have had that experience your thoughts and ideas on education will be based upon reality and not just the intellectual exercise that takes place in the isolation of your right wing Sutherland think tank.
Thanks John. My point was simply that politics are not policy. Legislators (surely political creatures) should be more concerned about making good public policy, not worry so much about politics (i.e. let's not touch this issue until after the next election cycle).
It's good public policy to help these low-income minority students who are failed in the system. The voucher works well for the Carson Smith kids...it will work as well for the achievement gap kids.
A lot went into the Referendum vote, including, as you say, a deep concern about a universal voucher. Fine. Now let's limit it to just the struggling kids, like we did with the Carson Smith kids.
Why object to that?
Oh yeah...that's right...the system is sacred. Tell that to the struggling kids and their parents.
PTM
Thank you Peety Em. I find it a bit disingenuous that ultraconservative Republicans such as yourself have historically fought government assistance to the poor and disadvantaged, and now you have suddenly become the champion of the "poor failing Hispanic students" in order to continue to pawn your failed voucher concept on the people of Utah.
Your semantics of describing what you agree with as "policy" and what you disagree with as "politics" is reminiscent of the word spin used by Carl Rove to such good effect. It is also "good public policy" to adequately fund public education and "good public policy" for lawmakers to be sensitive to the will of the voting public.
Why not suggest the legislature instead provide enough money for teachers and classrooms for an intensive ESL program in areas where there are a lot of Hispaic students. Along with that they could provide the money for qualified bilingual teacher aids who could tutor those struggling children. The legislature could also adequately fund the social services in those areas those students live to help their families that are struggling economically. Surely that is a part of the problem. The struggling kids and their parents could be be helped in so many ways without channeling public funds to private (for profit) schools. Why don't you try thinking outside your "sacred" voucher box for a change. I'll bet a smart individual like yourself could come up with a lot of good ideas to improve public education.
My challenge to you to volunteer to work in the public schools to find out what Utah Educators and the UEA are really all about still stands. Call it a Sutherland Institute Research Field Trip. You could still draw your healthy salary from the 'Tute and actually do something constructive for a change to earn it. Sounds like a win win situation to me.
John B. Talcott
aka saxguy
Cynicism doesn’t become you. You don’t know me…you don’t know what I support for the poor or not. Very clever to avoid helping folks who need it by simply saying you’re the folks who care, we’re not, and if we all really wanted to help we would be just like you all.
Evidently, it is not good public policy to throw money at public education given that there is no positive correlation between more money and academic success. And it is not good public policy for legislators to always stick their finger in the wind checking the breeze of the public…might make good political sense, but that was my point.
These Hispanic kids are already the most expensive kids to educate (or, evidently not educate). They need a new opportunity in a new program. School districts and principals already have discretion to allocate resources how they desire…if they need more ESL then perhaps they could choose between that priority and the sports program or some other extracurricular activity.
Your suggestion to work in a public school is like me telling you to go to work in a prison so you can know what a miserable place it is. And anyway, with so many folks like you telling me how things really are (and not listening to ANY attempts at real school reform) why should I bother?
I can promise you this: we will indeed keep coming up with all sorts of constructive alternatives to help kids that your beloved system is failing.
And the whole "those kids fail because of their socio-economic standing" is not only elitist and completely ignorant of history, it is border-line racist (in that nice with-all-due-respect liberal sort of way).
So, once again, the Legislature should extend vouchers to these acheivement gap kids. That is the moral thing to do.
PTM
Sarcasm doesn't become you either Paul. Stop putting words in my mouth I have plenty there already. I did not say "we are the folks who care, and you're not, and if you all really wanted to help you would be just like we all". What I said was that historically ultraconservative Republicans have fought against government assistance for the poor and disadvantaged. Respond to that if you like, but please don't change what I actually said.
You said that it is not good public policy to throw money at public education. I hear that a lot from you Republicans. The fact is that it is just a theory, since you have never really tried it in the state of Utah to see whether it works or not.
You said there is no correlation between more money and academic success. That is simply not true. Studies have shown that lower class sizes increase student achievement. That requires more money. Studies have shown that the quality of the teacher makes a significant difference in student success. To attract the brightest and best young college students to go into teaching requires competitive salaries. That takes more money. To keep Utah's best teachers from moving to neighboring states that pay a salary they can live on, that takes more money.
"Telling you to go work in a prison" P L E A S E. If you were advocating that the prisons are not doing a good enough job and that prisoners be given a voucher to go to a private penal institution, I would advise you to go work in a prison to see how they are run so you can be better informed. What I am saying to you is that if you profess to be such an expert on public education that you go around lecturing and debating about why private schools are so much better, that you would do well to get some "hands on" experience in a public school to gain a better understanding of the subject. Where better to learn about public schools that at a public school.
I understand your five wonderful children were all home schooled. That in itself tells me that you have not had much first hand experience with the system that you claim to be so deficient. "Why should I bother?" How about to get some facts about public schools and the people who work in them, rather than just opinions. That's why you should bother.
Paul Mero said "And the whole 'those kids fail because of their socio-economic standing" is not olnly elitist and completely ignorant of history, it is border-line racist (in that nice with-all-due-respect liberal sort of way'., I suspect the real Paul Mero is coming out in this snide and disparaging remark. I hope other intelligent people are reading this dialog to form a more accurate opinion of him just as I am.
First of all he is clouding the issue by changing the words I actually said into something else and then insinuating that I am a "racist" because of what he claims I said. Here is what I actually said Paul:
The legislature could also adequately fund the social services in those areas those students live to help their families that are struggling economically.
There are children who come to school hungry. There are children who come to school without adequate clothing. There are students who come to school sleep deprived because they have to work late in fast food places to help support their families. There are children who come to school from homes where there is alcoholism and or drug abuse. There are students who come to school who are the caretakers of the younger children because their father is absent and their mother is ill. All of these situations have a profound effect on how a student does in school. And yes Paul, some of these children are Hispanic, some of them are Black, many of them are Caucasian. Their race or ethnicity doesn't matter if they are cold and hungry and tired when they get to school. I resent your "border-line racist" remark. It was uncalled for and unbecoming a person of your stature.
Let's say your $3000 voucher program passes someday. How many children with learning disabilities are the private schools going to take for that amount? How many students with mental and emotional problems are the private schools going open their arms to. What about the kids who qualify for free school lunch (and breakfast), are the private schools going to feed them every day as part of their $3000. What about the students who don't have transportation to the school? Is the private academy going to bus them each way every day of the school year. How are your private schools going to do all of that for the "achievement gap" kids for $3000 when public (NOT FOR PROFIT) schools are struggling to meet these kid's needs with a much greater amount of money?
I think the bottom line here is the motives of the pro-voucher movement. It is not about helping the "achievement gap" kids. That is just the excuse du jour. The fact of the matter is that private schools indoctrinate, children and public schools educate them. I'm sure you will disagree Paul, but I think this is what this whole debate has been about from the very beginning. Tweaking the Carson Smith law to include students who are not handicapped is nothing more than an end run around the will of the public on the issue of vouchers, and in my opinion is a dishonest attempt to "get the camel's nose further in the tent". That's how I see it, the view from your tunnel may be different.
John Talcott
Let’s go one by one…sorry to put words in your mouth. Next, what is an “ultraconservative”? I don’t think you can even define a Republican today, but I would enjoy your thoughts on what an ultraconservative is and how that is relevant or applies to me.
The more-money-thrown-at-public schools idea has been tried in Utah for decades…doesn’t the school budget grow every year? Furthermore, it has been tried all over the rest of the country. So, one more time, there is no correlation between more money and better results.
Better teachers certainly takes more money, but good teaching is not a function of money (home school kids and their teachers prove that every day). Good teaching is a function of two things: 1) knowledge of the subject and 2) ability to relate to students.
And I don’t need to run a restaurant to tell you that the food tastes like crap or is great. This is one of those comments you make (sorry to put words in your mouth) that precludes any other comment except ones made by teachers or the “professionals.” And that is simply an elitist, arrogant, and/or unintelligent proposition.
We have six children…and I was taught in the public education system. That counts doesn’t it?
The subtle racist implication is that nearly all of the struggling public school students (I mean really struggling to the point of failure) come from low-income minority households. So for you or any other defender of keeping these kids trapped in their failing situations is at least elitist, probably distant in your ability to relate to them, and perhaps passively racist as you conclude that these folks need the paternalistic hand of government to make everything in their lives better.
These families do receive other social program benefits. So that isn’t the missing factor. I am sure family structure is a huge factor, but Hispanic families tend to come together to help one another, so it probably isn’t as big a factor as say fatherlessness in Washington DC communities.
So, resent my comment all you want.
Your hypothetical, about the voucher passing, says it all. You place yourself in a position to know what is best for everyone else. What if…what if…what if…then how…then how…then how, etc.
This is where a good conservative (ultra or not) is supposed to say, why don’t you mind your own business? Beyond giving these struggling families the tools and opportunities, mind your own business. The voucher model would have sprung loose as many private schools to help achievement gap kids as would be needed (probably too many before the market adjusted).
Lastly, your “indoctrinate vs. educate” comment is plain ignorant. Not only is it an insult to every parent who has sent their children to private schools throughout world and America, it is delusional in respect to what is taught (or not) in the public school system. It is like saying that Sutherland indoctrinates and the ACLU educates. It is like saying that your opinion is categorically objective and mine is not.
John, I would invite you to peruse our Sutherland web site and read everything we have written on education. Then you will know where we stand and then you can critique us/me on a more informed basis.
PTM
There is no need to get testy Paul. Your petty name calling is unbecoming to you. I would hope that we can agree to disagree as gentlemen.
1. What is an "ultraconservative" - That's easy, look in the mirror.
2. You say the more-money-thrown-at-public schools every year has been tried. The facts are that the school budget indeed does grow every year but not as fast as enrollment or inflation. In 1995 Utah was 7th in the nation in revenue for public education per $1000 personal income. In 2005 Utah slipped to 22nd in this category. Per pupil funding in Utah in 2005 was $5,257 last in the nation (as usual) which was $1004 per pupil lower than the next lowest state, $3,444 per pupil below the national average. Is this what you call throwing money at public schools?
3. You called my suggestion that you spend some time in our public schools to get some hands on experience so you will know what you are talking about is an elitist, arrogant, and/or unintelligent proposition.
I think is is common sense. I note that you did not attend public school in Utah, nor did any of 6 wonderful children. So what makes you such an expert on Utah's schools? Your boys however did take advantage of the Jordan High School basketball program even though they were home schooled. How did that work out for you? Is the basketball program one of the things the high school principals should cut to provide more money for the achievement gap kids? You said principals can allocate resources as they desire. You would have screamed bloody murder had a principal done that when your boys were on the team. Let's get real.
4. You conveniently sidestepped my comment about private schools taking the more difficult children to work with and those children whose parents don't have the resources to provide transportation. That just doesn't fit into your neat package does it? What about the fact that private schools are not eligible for the Federal Government assistance directed at ESL, low income, and learning disabled students. How are your vouchers going to help these "achievement gap" kids or their families? What makes private schools better equipped to teach these kinds of students?
5. My comment that private schools indoctrinate is right on the money your ignorant comment notwithstanding. Just look at the list of private schools on your Sutherland Institute Website. How many of those schools are religion based? How many of them are based on conservative values? To indoctrinate means to imbue with a partisan or sectarian opinion or point of view. Can you tell me with a straight face that to indoctrinate the students in the ideals of that particular religion or political philosophy is not one of the primary purposes of those schools? Again, your name calling is petty. I really expected a more mature and intelligent argument from someone of your stature and experience.
5. Your comments imply that public schools "indoctrinate" students in their own way. I suppose from an ultra conservative viewpoint they do. I have heard conservatives complain about public schools teaching such dangerous liberal ideas as: protecting the environment, respecting diversity, learning about different political systems, sex education, and the horrible practice of teaching math through concepts instead of rote memorization and drill. If this is what you mean by indoctrination then public schools are guilty as charged. I was taught that the true purpose of education is to open student's minds, not to close them. Home schools, parochial schools, and most private schools exist to close students minds around a narrow set of ideas and values. This in my opinion is what is driving the voucher movement nationwide.
It is not nor has it ever been about the "poor Hispanic learning gap kids" (enter violins). It is about religious conservatives like yourself taking their children from public schools to indoctrinate them somewhere else and expecting the public to pick up the tab.
The public voice in Utah voted a resounding NO to the idea of vouchers last Tuesday. What part of NO don't you understand?
FIRE AWAY, Peety Em! These are my last words on the subject. I have enjoyed our discussion. (I hope the Senate folks are listening in.)
Have a nice day.
John Talcott
Your first point is, well, immature.
Your second point is now a new point about per pupil spending…obviously low because we have so many children (a good thing) and don’t want to bankrupt taxpayers (a good thing) so we do the best we can and continue to pump lots of cash into the public school system (a half billion dollars more this last legislative session). Unfortunately, your new second point alludes your previous one…that there is somehow a positive correlation between more money and better academic performance. Still not true.
Your third point about my visiting a school remains irrelevant. You did manage to morph your point into one about my boys playing basketball for Jordan HS. Thanks for noticing (you aren’t stalking our family are you? ) Actually, I just testified on Captiol Hill before the Interim Education Committee to allow high schools to dump their sports programs, or at least turn them over to private ventures that would allow both real competition and the schools to make money instead of cost money.
My boys would do fine under any other formal sports scheme approved by colleges. Thanks again for the opportunity to let me brag on the guys.
Your fourth point wasn’t missed. I just thought the answer was obvious and didn’t need addressing. The Carson Smith voucher already covers special needs students and many (but unfortunately not enough) achievement gap kids are provided for under the private Children First Utah scholarship (voucher). All are doing quite well, thank you very much for asking.
Your points 5 and 5 (I guess you meant 5 and 6, or 5a and 5b) show your colors my friend. Mero-schools are all bigoted and your schools are all gloriously American and democratic and tolerant and diverse, ad nauseum. Here’s a test for you…abolish LDS seminaries from the public school day and see 1) how happy parents are and 2) how wonderfully tolerant your government schools will become. Or look to California’s public school system, that might be quicker…tolerance and diversity and democracy in action!
One last thought, perhaps you should just simply visit both Utah’s public schools and its private ones. My guess is that you will find that, while good ones exist on both realms, you have your love/hate relationship backwards.
Best, PTM
"There is somehow a positive correlation between more money and better academic performance. Still not true." I remember debating this as the topic of the year in 1973. I went to State and won.
You are correct that there is no correlation between money spent on education and the results. However, as with most things, this is never a pure absolute. You know that, even though you deny it. It's easy to say, well, we should just spend $0 if there's no correlation. At that point, there is no school, or teachers. Obviously, money does make a difference at a certain level. Sure, you can show inner city schools spending similar to white bread schools in the burbs doing very differently at the same price.
Saxguy has a point. We are at a point, where Utah does not pay enough money to attract the best teachers. We have trouble attracting enough teachers willing to show up and teach. Like Maslow's hierarchy, it's not until you can actually have the school, fill it with teachers and have textbooks that you can say money doesn't matter. Please show me the study showing that we are at that point. That would be a good topic.
I also looked at the list of schools a few people could likely get into. There certainly wasn't enough to take all these thousands of new private school students. I have looked into some. They are indeed proud that they don't have to follow those pesky secular rules when it comes to religion, sex education and critical thinking.
This whole seminary argument is at least at bogus as anything Saxguy brought up. Somehow, people learning about their religion in the evening, weekend, early morning, or a break in their school day is the same as attending a religious school where kids having math class problems asking questions like calculating how much tithing money a person has to pay each week if they make .20 an apple and they sell 25 apples a day is the same thing as seminary. I would say that we have the same thing when they say that teaching "intelligent design" along with evolution is a reasonable idea, but I suspect this is something you agree with. I loved the day when the LDS church had an Ezra Taft Benson teaching that God put fake fossil records in the Earth to fool scientists so you had to have faith to appreciate the World is only 7,000 years old -- and otherwise smart people bought it. I know I was taught this in Seminary (early morning seminary, since I didn't grow up in Utah). Although that only made me less of a local when I lived in Springville. I was born here, have lots of pioneer heritage, and go back to the original 300 families of Mormonism and have been back 25 years. At least I didn't have to be taught it as accurate science in private school.
The only thing that keeps me sane is working with business leaders in major metropolitan areas 30 weeks a year. It shows me that not everywhere in the country is like Arkansas and Utah (two States I do know about). I'm not even going to touch the differences I see between the diverse, also moral, thinking people there and the pod people here in Utah County.
Paul Mero's original comment on this forum read:
Paul Mero said...
"It is a mistake to confuse politics and policy. Nearly 75% of Utah's Hispanic public school will still be dropping out and not graduating with a diploma. Good public policy will press to address this problem...and the right thing to do is to ignore politics (yes, the vote) and help those kids...perhaps by amending the current state voucher law, Carson Smith, to include these other struggling students.
My challenge to Mr. Mero is to: (first, proofread his work before he turns it in---then)
1. Visit the public schools, elementary through secondary where this "statistic" is true.
2. Find out first hand by talking to the teachers, counselors, administrators, and students themselves what the actual causes and conditions are for this high attrition rate among Hispanic students.
3. Address specifically on this forum the shortcomings of the public schools involved as these students are concerned and identify exactly how a private school would be superior in meeting the needs of these students in such a way as to reduce their dropout rate.
This is about putting real world, hands on experience behind all of the "conceptualizing" that is done in the ivory tower of your think tank.
Have you ever noticed how having attended a public school as a child makes one an expert on public education. Just ask most legislators. In fact most of them are more knowledgeable than people with Doctorate Degrees who have 30 or more years working in the field of education. My proof for this statement is the countless number of times over the years that education professionals have presented their views at legislative education subcommittee meetings and the Republican lawmakers simply brush them off and pass legislation that fits their agenda because they know better than the people who are trained professionals with years of experience. No wonder educators in Utah are are tired and frustrated.
Now we have "education experts" from think tanks who have not set foot in a Utah public school who know much more about educating children than those who do it on a daily basis. Sheesh.
Lame excuses for why you refuse to act on my suggestions to get some first hand experience in public schools to back up your arguments (and your name calling reveals) that you have no real interest in the facts underlying the challenges faced in improving public education. Your only interest is pushing your agenda which is to use public money to pay for private school tuition.
The right thing to do Paul is not to ignore the vote but to put all of Utah's available resources into improving public education, not subsidizing private (for profit) schools.
This is how I see it---your mileage may vary.
John Talcott
Hey Paul and John - It's best to remember an old adage: "never to get into a pissing contest with a skunk, 'cause you won't come out smelling pretty".
I'd have to say that the guys responding to Paul have done an excellent job refuting his arguments.
I just linked to this forum through the new one asking us to comment about public education.
same old arguments.
The simple matter is the state has money to try all these so called new programs. That means they have money to spend right now.
Where is it?
Post a Comment
<< Home