Blog For Arizona

December 31: Last day to give a school tax credit!

by David Safier (TASL)

If you're a procrastinator like me, you've put off sending off your tax credit to a worthy public school.

If you're reading this on December 31, there's still time! Go to Tucson Unified School District's online tax credit form and fill it in.

Don't know what school to give to? Here's a list of TUSD schools and how much tax credit money they've gotten in the last few years. Click on one of the years, and the schools will be listed in order of donations. (Of course, you can give to any public school in Arizona, not just Tucson.)

$200 for a single person. $400 for a couple. Every penny comes back to you as a credit on your Arizona tax return.

Do it!

Weak charter school laws, lax enforcement endangered students at Morningstar Academy

by David Safier

An anecdote is not proof of anything. But this story about a California charter school operator and an Arizona charter school is a damning cautionary tale about the abuses, financial and physical, that are possible when already lax charter school laws are minimally enforced.

First I'll tell the story in encapsulated, short-blog-post fashion. Then, if you wish, you can follow the link and read the entire sordid tale. I usually wouldn't say this, but with this story, it's worth your time to click on the link and read the whole story.

Here's the short version.

C. Steven Cox created California Charter Academy in 1999. In a few years, he was running a string of schools all over  California. In 2003 he created his only charter school in Arizona, Morningstar Academy, in Apache Junction.

In 2004, Cox was accused of skimming millions of dollars from his California charters into private companies he created for that purpose. His mismanaged and underfunded schools (teachers were underpaid and had too many students, classrooms lacked the necessary materials) collapsed under their own weight, leaving thousands of students to be absorbed by public schools and who knows how many teachers out of work.

The Arizona Charter School Board appeared to be unconcerned that one of its schools was being run by someone who had bled his California schools dry. Morningstar Academy continued to run without any serious investigation of the school's financial or educational practices.

In early 2005, a male Morningstar teacher was accused of molesting female students. His mother was principal. When a 15 year old girl complained to the principal/mother about her teacher/son, the principal accused the girl of lying and told her not to repeat the allegations.

After the girl went to the police a few months later and other girls complained about similar instances of abuse, the teacher was indicted on 22 counts, and his mother the Principal was charged with failing to report child abuse. She entered a no contest plea and was given probation, a suspended sentence and a $2,500 fine. Yet she continued as the school principal for at least two more years. The Department of Education said their hands were tied because she didn't have a teaching certificate (her son had no certificate either). Cox saw no reason to fire her.

In 2007, Cox was indicted in California on 112 counts of misappropriation of funds and grand theft. Only then did the Arizona Charter School Board take an active interest in the matter. FInally, in June, 2008, Morningstar Academy closed its doors.

The behavior of Cox, the principal and the teacher are appalling. But for me the most unforgivable thing is that the Arizona Department of Education and the Charter School Board failed to do everything in their power to protect the children attending Morningside Academy. I would call it criminal neglect on their part, except in the world of charter schools, it's all perfectly legal. And that's a crime.

Read the longer version by clicking on the link below.

JibJab's "2008 Year in Review"

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Rated "L" for language. (This site continues to have problems with videos. If it does not work, try http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmEP93NVTaw).

Krugman nails it

by David Safier

Read today's Paul Krugman column, Fifty Herbert Hoovers. He takes apart the insanity of massive cuts in state budgets.

No modern American president would repeat the fiscal mistake of 1932, in which the federal government tried to balance its budget in the face of a severe recession. The Obama administration will put deficit concerns on hold while it fights the economic crisis.

But even as Washington tries to rescue the economy, the nation will be reeling from the actions of 50 Herbert Hoovers — state governors who are slashing spending in a time of recession, often at the expense both of their most vulnerable constituents and of the nation’s economic future.

These state-level cutbacks range from small acts of cruelty to giant acts of panic — from cuts in South Carolina’s juvenile justice program, which will force young offenders out of group homes and into prison, to the decision by a committee that manages California state spending to halt all construction outlays for six months.

Now, state governors aren’t stupid (not all of them, anyway). They’re cutting back because they have to — because they’re caught in a fiscal trap.

Krugman realizes the states have no alternative to cutting since, unlike the feds, they have to balance their budgets. But he also says cutting essential services when they're needed most is crazy. Likewise cutting public works projects when we have huge numbers of workers laid off in the private sector.

He doesn't give a completely satisfactory answer to the dilemma. But the first step toward fixing an absurd situation is recognizing its absurdity.

An oldie but a goodie on Charter Schools

by David Safier

This is from a 2007 Arizona Republic article, Arizona lax on charter schools. The opening paragraphs lay things out very nicely:

Every year, Arizona requires charter-school operators to get their books audited.

Every year, the results are the same: Scores of charter companies fail to track their spending and can't produce receipts for many expenses. Some schools haven't paid their taxes or don't keep accurate attendance records, with some inflating attendance to bring in more state money. 

The state usually sends out a letter asking schools to fix the problems but takes little or no action.

According to the article, charter schools get away with all kinds of financial mismanagement and outright theft due to  a combination of lax enforcement and laws that emphasize independence over accountability. (Note: you can have both independence and accountability.) Put simply, the Charter School Board was created to promote charter schools, not police them.

The Board says it's changing its ways.

Last year, the state sent $602 million to charter-school companies. State officials are just beginning to create a computer system to determine how much is going to educate kids and how much is being wasted or abused.

Until now, most of the accounting information has come in on paper, not electronically. It sits in file cabinets, pretty much untouched by human hands and unviewed by human eyes.

This is a microcosmic version of the national financial debacle we've seen on a macro scale. Let abuses run rampant through lax regulation, promise to do something when things get out of hand (what happened to all that regulatory tightening we were supposed to see after Enron collapsed?), but don't do anything to really correct the problem until some kind of disaster strikes. Then say, "We had no idea . . ."

Horn, meet Dilemma

by David Safier

The Republican vs. Republican battle lines are beginning to shape up here in Arizona now that they have all the power and can't blame what they do, or don't do, on their arch nemesis, Napolitano. No matter how hard they try to wriggle out of it, eventually, they have to own up to their successes and failures. Now more than ever, given the disastrous state of the budget, the buck stops right in their laps.

Jan Brewer said publicly that she doesn't plan to cut all day kindergarten. Yet undoing a program that was one of Napolitano's babies is a fond wish of many Republican legislators. And if they keep program, that means they'll have to cut more elsewhere.

What will happen? If Brewer goes along with the legislators and signs a bill that gets rid of all day kindergarten, it will make lots of people upset, including voters she needs if she wants to win in 2010. But if she strong-arms the legislature or vetoes their legislation, she's got angry legislators and the Republican base to contend with.

We'll soon find out if the Republicans can figure out a way to govern themselves as they try to govern Arizona. They may find themselves in a no-win situation, courtesy, ironically, of their recent victories.

Unintended Pun Note: When I wrote the headline, Horn, Meet Dilemma, I wasn't purposely playing off Tom Horne's name. But given that Horne will feel the repercussions of this dilemma as well, maybe I should retitle this, Brewer and Horne, meet Dilemma. Or maybe not.

Republican base shrinking further?

by David Safier

If the Arizona Republican Party can't count on business leaders to support them, who can they count on?

The Tucson economic development group recently asked businesses what they most want the state Legislature to fund. The answer was resounding: education.

About 77 percent of 600 respondents checked the box on the survey that said "AZ needs to make significant new investments in educational achievement to meet real needs and avoid a crisis."

Note the phrase "significant new investments." Quite a ways from "We're going to have to make some painful cuts in education."

The business priorities listed in order were, "maintaining elementary education funding, increasing economic development, maintaining higher education funding, investing in transportation and updating technology and communication infrastructure."

Deregulated charter schools

by David Safier

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I like the idea of charter schools, and I'm a big fan of the best charter schools. But I'm not a fan of Arizona's charter school system.

Our economy is in a tailspin, the disastrous results of runaway free market capitalism. The invisible hand of the marketplace that is supposed to correct its own excesses has failed. Alan Greenspan has said, "I was wrong." Phil Gramm has crept away and hidden in a dark corner somewhere to count his money. And those who talk about the need for stringent, intelligent regulation of the marketplace are making a long-needed comeback.

But we're not making the connection between conservative-based runaway free market capitalism and the attempts by the same conservatives to bring the unregulated free market model to education. The extreme form of free market education is vouchers, where families are given tax dollars to spend at the schools of their choice, many of them private schools which operate outside the regulatory system of public education. The less extreme but still dangerous form is the under-regulated charter school system which we have here in Arizona.

Charter schools are public schools, but they are free from most of the regulation and accountability imposed on traditional public schools. Really, just about the only thing charters have to do is make their students take state tests. Otherwise, they spend their money with only the most minimal accounting, they hire teachers who may or may not have credentials, and they have few if any visitors from the Department of Education checking in to see if they are making reasonable attempts at educating their students.

Many charter schools don't need more regulation and oversight. They have hard working owners and dedicated staff. They're doing a great job without anyone's help. In those cases, additional regulatory precautions are unnecessary but probably not harmful. But Arizona's charter school history is littered with mismanaged schools, sometimes run by people who kept tax dollars for themselves that were intended for their students' educations. For all we know, there are dozens of schools like that in operation right now. But we don't know for sure, because nobody's checking. We're letting that "invisible hand of the marketplace" work its magic. But those of us older than ten years old know that magic is done with smoke, mirrors and sleight of hand. When it's performed for a willing audience, it's fun. When it's inflicted on us by scoundrels, it's dangerous.

Soon I'll be telling the story of a charter school in Maricopa County that is a textbook case of the things that can go wrong when the agencies that should regulate charter schools don't regulate, hoping things will somehow magically work themselves out without government interference. The school had been in operation for about eight years until it closed this June. It was run by a man whose schools in California were closed in 2005 after it was found he was skimming millions of taxpayer dollars off the top. Its principal retained her job for years after it was found she didn't report child molestation charges against a teacher who happened to be her son. Neither she nor her son have teaching credentials.

It's probably the most sensationalistic story I'll ever tell on this blog, but it's all documented in newspapers -- "Ripped From Today's Headlines!" as the announcer says ominously in those types of TV shows. I'll be telling it at length and in detail as a cautionary tale about the kinds of abuses that happen when you give unscrupulous people carte blanche to run schools on taxpayer money.

Words to the wise

by David Safier

From today's Bob Herbert column, Stop Being Stupid:

We have behaved in ways that were incredibly, astonishingly and embarrassingly stupid for much too long. We’ve wrecked the economy and mortgaged the future of generations yet unborn. We don’t even know if we’ll have an automobile industry in the coming years. It’s time to stop the self-destruction.

The slogan? “Invest in the U.S.” By that I mean we should stop squandering the nation’s wealth on unnecessary warfare overseas and mindless consumption here at home and start making sensible investments in the well-being of the American people and the long-term health of the economy.

And let's be clear. The "stupid" here are from the most educated classes, so it's not about bad education. They fell prey to a combination of self-delusion and greed. Better schools won't correct that. And among the "stupid" were religious, church/synagogue/mosque going folks, so let's not talk moral decay either. This is about some of the worst traits in human nature being allowed to run rampant and overwhelm our economy.

The New Testament has Jesus saying, "The poor will always be with us."

I'll say, the stupidly, self-delusionally greedy will always be with us. That's one of the reasons we have governments with regulatory agencies, police and jails. So our own greed and the greed of others doesn't trample us to death.

The UAW built America's middle class, the GOP is destroying it

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Harold Myerson is among the most thoughtful and knowledgeable opinion writers at the Washington Post. (Unfortunately,the mythical "liberal" media tends to promote only the Post's syndicated columnists and right-wing ideological flaks David Broder, George Will, Kathleen Parker and Charles Krauthammer. Note to Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow: add Harold Myerson to your regular guest list alongside the Post's Eugene Robinson and E. J. Dionne, Jr.)

Myerson wrote a column several days ago that was spot on about the history of the UAW and the rise of the middle class in post-war America, a middle class under assault from GOP economic policies since the early 1970's. Harold Meyerson - The United Auto Workers as the Architect of U.S. Prosperity ("Destroying What The UAW Built").

Myerson's first point is that the UAW has always been far more visionary than the auto companies and their out-of-touch corporate executives.

In 1949, a pamphlet was published that argued that the American auto industry should pursue a different direction. Titled "A Small Car Named Desire," the pamphlet suggested that Detroit not put all its bets on bigness, that a substantial share of American consumers would welcome smaller cars that cost less and burned fuel more efficiently.

The pamphlet's author was the research department of the United Auto Workers.

By the standards of the postwar UAW, there was nothing exceptional about "A Small Car Named Desire." In its glory days, under the leadership of Walter Reuther, the UAW was the most farsighted institution -- not just the most farsighted union -- in America. "We are the architects of America's future," Reuther told the delegates at the union's 1947 convention, where his supporters won control of what was already the nation's leading union.

Myerson's second point is that the UAW served as a model for the union movement which built the middle class in post-war America by improving the wages, benefits and working conditions for all Americans, union and non-union workers alike.

At the end of the war, [Reuther] led a strike at GM with a set of demands that included putting union and public representatives on GM's board.

That proved to be a bridge too far. Instead, by the early 1950s, the UAW had secured a number of contractual innovations -- annual cost-of-living adjustments, for instance -- that set a pattern for the rest of American industry and created the broadly shared prosperity enjoyed by the nation in the 30 years after World War II.

The inability of the UAW to put union and public representatives on the boards of The Big Three proved to be significant, however. Without these interested stakeholders at the table, the insular corporate culture of The Big Three made a series of short-term profit driven decisions over the next several decades that are largely responsible for the situation in which The Big Three finds itself today. The insular corporate culture of The Big Three does not do the long-term "vision thing" to maintain its position as a successful venture. They should have listened to the UAW which has a vital stake in maintaining the continued success of The Big Three.

Finally, Myerson discusses the broader contributions that the UAW has made to progressive movements in America, which helps to explain why conservatives have such disdain for the UAW.

The architects did not stop there. During the Reuther years, the UAW also used its resources to incubate every up-and-coming liberal movement in America. It was the UAW that funded the great 1963 March on Washington and provided the first serious financial backing for César Chávez's fledgling farm workers union. The union took a lively interest in the birth of a student movement in the early '60s, providing its conference center in Port Huron, Mich., to a group called Students for a Democratic Society when the group wanted to draft and debate its manifesto. Later that decade, the union provided resources to help the National Organization for Women get off the ground and helped fund the first Earth Day. And for decades after Reuther's death in a 1970 plane crash, the UAW was among the foremost advocates of national health care -- a policy that, had it been enacted, would have saved the Big Three tens of billions of dollars in health insurance expenses, but which the Big Three themselves were until recently too ideologically hidebound to support.

Narrow? Parochial? The UAW not only built the American middle class but helped engender every movement at the center of American liberalism today -- which is one reason that conservatives have always held the union in particular disdain.

It is this conservative ideological hatred for the UAW which explains the GOP's myopic opposition to a bridge loan to The Big Three. (If these were non-union plants, you can be certain there would not have been any GOP opposition).

Over the past several weeks, it has become clear that the Republican right hates the UAW so much that it would prefer to plunge the nation into a depression rather than craft a bridge loan that doesn't single out the auto industry's unionized workers for punishment. (As manufacturing consultant Michael Wessel pointed out, no Republican demanded that Big Three executives have their pay permanently reduced to the relatively spartan levels of Japanese auto executives' pay.) Today, setting the terms of that loan has become the final task of the Bush presidency, which puts the auto workers in the unenviable position of depending, if not on the kindness of strangers, then on the impartiality of the most partisan president of modern times.

Republicans complain that labor costs at the Big Three are out of line with those at the non-union transplant factories in the South, factories that Southern governors have subsidized with billions of taxpayer dollars. But the UAW has already agreed to concessions bringing its members' wages to near-Southern levels, and labor costs already comprise less than 10 percent of the cost of a new car. (On Wall Street, employee compensation at the seven largest financial firms in 2007 constituted 60 percent of the firms' expenses, yet reducing overall employee compensation wasn't an issue in the financial bailout.)

In a narrow sense, what the Republicans are proposing would gut the benefits of roughly a million retirees. In a broad sense, they want to destroy the institution that did more than any other to raise American living standards, and they want to do it by using the power of government to lower American living standards -- in the middle of the most severe recession since the 1930s. The auto workers deserve better, and so does the nation they did so much to build.

New York Times opinion writer Bob Herbert has described the GOP's labor policy as A Race to the Bottom. 

In testimony before the U.S. Senate this month, the president of the United Auto Workers, Ron Gettelfinger, listed some of the sacrifices his members have already made to try and keep the American auto industry viable.

Last year, before the economy went into free fall and before any talk of a government rescue, the autoworkers agreed to a 50 percent cut in wages for new workers at the Big Three, reducing starting pay to a little more than $14 an hour.

That is a development that the society should mourn. The U.A.W. had traditionally been a union through which workers could march into the middle class. Now the march is in the other direction.

Mr. Gettelfinger noted that his members “have not received any base wage increase since 2005 at G.M. and Ford, and since 2006 at Chrysler.”

Some 150,000 jobs at General Motors, Ford and Chrysler have vanished outright through downsizing over the past five years. And ... the autoworkers are prepared to make further sacrifices as required, as long as they are reasonably fair and part of a shared effort with other sectors of the society.

"The economic downturn, however severe, should not be used as an excuse to send American workers on a race to the bottom, where previously middle-class occupations take a sweatshop’s approach to pay and benefits."

Personal note to Vic Williams

by David Safier

From Steve and Mariana, frequent commenters on BfA:

Hey Mr. Vic Williams:
We met you several times at Drinking Liberally and we were impressed with your honesty and integrity. You told us about your business and how you paid your employees good wages and established real rapport between you and them.
What's the story with this $400 deposit owed to Tasha? Why don't you tell us the real problem with refunding the money? Why don't you do the right thing and return the money? Steve and Mariana

Christmas for Cowboys

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I was raised in the Northern Plains and the Rocky Mountain West. I have always been awestruck by the immense beauty of the American West, and at the same time humbled by how much one is at the mercy of its harsh environment.

One of my favorite Christmas songs is "Christmas for Cowboys" performed by the late John Denver. It captures the prayerful gratitude for the simple gifts of the natural beauty of the American West. I hope you enjoy the song as much as I always have. This is my Christmas card to you. Wishing all of you peace and happiness at this joyous season.

This is a good idea

by David Safier

This sounds right to me for so many reasons.

Nine American Indian graduates of The University of Arizona's College of Education will begin their professional careers as teachers or administrative leaders on the Tohono O'odham Nation or in schools with high American Indian enrollment thanks to a program funded by Tohono O'odham Community College.

[snip]

These nine graduates are part of Project NATIVE III, a program run by Tohono O'odham Community College with a grant from the U.S. Department of Education. The college entered into a partnership with the UA in 2000 to recruit and prepare American Indians to serve as K-12 public school teachers.

If I went to teach at a school with high American Indian enrollment, I might be a terrific teacher, but I couldn't have the positive effect as a role model these new teachers will bring. There's nothing that says, "You can do it" better than someone who comes from your background who has done it. I could say, "You can do it," but they're living proof.

Every time one person from a racial/ethnic group that is underrepresented in professional circles succeeds as an educated person and a professional, ten others in the next generation are a step closer to doing the same thing. It works on the kids inside the community who see evidence of the possibilities of them succeeding, and it works on the rest of us outside the community who become more accustomed to the idea that "those people," whoever they are, can do what everyone else does and deserve to be accepted at the highest levels of attainment.

One of the few things I give Bush credit for is putting Colin Powell and Condi Rice into the public eye. I'm not fond of either of them, but I have to ask myself, would Obama be president right now if they hadn't been in the spotlight for the past eight years, at the highest levels of power and influence? My guess is, Obama very well might have been an also-ran in the primaries. Like everyone else, he stood on the shoulders of those who came before him. Powell and Rice are two whose shoulders he stood on. And who knows how many African American kids and young adults are right now climbing on top of Obama's shoulders for a look into their futures?

Let's hope a whole bunch of American Indian kids climb on the shoulders of these new young teachers and see farther into the realm of possibility than others who came before them.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Republican Legislature!

by David Safier

Today's editorial in the Citizen is none too happy with some Republican legislators. They're delaying the building of dorms at UA.

Here's the truly weird part. Building more dorms won't cost the state any money.

Most aggravating about this situation is the fact that the dormitory projects are funded by the students' rent payments - not by the state budget.

And money for the construction already is being collected: UA dorm rates were increased by 9 percent in March - with 5 percent of that increase earmarked to pay for the three Sixth Street dormitories.

When the legislative Joint Committee on Capital Review canceled a meeting to review a number of building projects (cough, Russell Pearce, cough), the dorm construction was among the projects to be discussed.

The cancellation portends the near-certain abandonment of the package, which was intended to not only improve our universities, but also revive Arizona's construction industry and create jobs.

When Dolores Huerta famously said "Republicans hate Latinos," she got a whole lot of guff from Republicans and the compliant media. No comment right now on Huerta's statement, though I commented awhile ago. But let me add my own inflammatory rhetoric:

Republicans hate students.

Republicans hate the construction industry.

Republicans hate construction workers.

Republicans hate the future.

Sorry if I've left anything or anyone out.

Note: Jonathan Paton, who rode the "Republicans hate Latinos" horse as far as he could, has gone on record against cutting the dorm building project. Good for him -- this time.

Deposit-gate: This is getting ridiculous

by David Safier

This thing has gone on much longer than I imagined possible. I honestly don't know what's going on in Vic Williams' head. Here is a comment from Tasha Downum on one of my recent Deposit-gate posts.

dec 22nd, Still havent heard from Vic Williams, or his Lawyers at John Cavalero's office... :( Donell is the woman I spoke with, almost a week ago, she said she was fed-ex'ing the check to me, still havent received it or got a phone call from either of them

Maybe FedEx will deliver it today or tomorrow, I don't know.

Will someone please explain to me why Vic Williams didn't put an end to this long ago and send Tasha her money?

If you haven't been following the deposit-gate saga, here's the original story about the unreturned $400 rental deposit that turned into $1845.20 after Tasha took Vic to small claims court. If you want to read about more recent developments, you can start here and work backward through the links.

It's so crazy it just might work!

by David Safier

From a post on Daily Kos: Call Their Bluff! Tie CEO pay in the U.S. to CEO pay in Europe and Japan:

In 1950, the average pay of an S&P 500 CEO was less than 30 times that of an average U.S. worker; by 1980, prior to the "Reagan Revolution, the average pay of the S&P 500 CEO was approximately 50 times higher than that of an average U.S worker.  But by 2007, the average pay of an S&P 500 CEO had soared to more than 350 times as much as that of an average U.S. worker.

This is both immoral and unsustainable in a democracy.  By way of comparison, in Europe, an average CEO only makes 22 times as much as an average worker, and in Japan, only 17 times as much.

If America wants to be competitive again, we need to reduce CEO pay to a level comparable to CEO pay in Europe and Japan.  I know exactly how to accomplish this feat.  The UAW should agree to immediately lower U.S. union worker pay to a level equal to the level paid by their non-union, non-American competitors.  In return, auto CEO’s must agree to permanently lower their compensation to only 20 times that of an average union worker.

Scrooge or Santa? Your call, Vic

by David Safier

State Representative Vic Willams (R, LD-26) in the holiday spirit.

More on the private school tax credit

by David Safier

I commented last night that I don't understand the mechanism of the private school tax credits, called back-door vouchers or neovouchers by those of us who dislike the idea. I know you can give money to private schools and get your money back when you pay taxes, but I don't know if you can give it directly to the school or if you have to go through one of the tuition tax credit organizations.

Here is an answer from AZW88, but I'm not sure it clears the matter up:

I believe that the tuition tax credit organizations can use the money as they see fit unless specifically designated by the donor. (BTW: this is something that you can do with your public school donations: you can designate the purpose and/or program that your $$ goes to)

These organizations were set up to get around the separation of church and state issue, since the donation goes to a 'separate organization' and not directly to the school. To make things worse, you can give $1000 to these organization, whereas you can only give $400 to a public school.

My question remains: if I want to give my tax credit dollars to one private school, can I send my check to that school like I can to a public school?

I think the answer is No. It looks like it has to go through a "School Tuition Organization" (STO). And according to Arizona law, the requirement for the STO is that it

allocates at least ninety per cent of its annual revenue for educational scholarships or tuition grants to children to allow them to attend any qualified school of their parents' choice.

That means an STO can keep 10% of all the tax credit money it collects. Great work if you can get it.

According to the Arizona Educational Association, guess who owns the biggest STO in the state. 

Representative Steve Yarbrough owns the largest STO that took in over $10.9 million of tax credit money in 2006, over 21% of all tuition tax credit dollars collected.

Great work if you can get legislate it.

Teachers can be crazy (in a good way)

by David Safier

If you want to read a wonderful, this-is-what-teaching's-all-about story, go no further than Bodfield's story, Bell doesn't end this teacher's day, in this morning's Star. Sarah Clements quit a perfectly good job as executive director of the Tucson Arts District Partnership to put up with all these kids. Lower pay for longer hours. Go figure.

Her mother was a teacher. And it wasn't until she followed her mother's path that a mystery became clear. "I could never understand why my mother would get home and just collapse," she said. "Now I do."

Good thing there's no Sanity Clause in teacher's contracts, or half the great teachers might have to leave the profession.

But then again, I've heard there ain't no such thing as Sanity Clause. Ba-da-Boom! (Thank you Chico Marx, A Night at the Opera.)

The latest on Deposit-gate

by David Safier

Here's an email from Tasha Downum in response to my question, "Any more word from Vic or his 'people?'":

nothin yet.. :( no email, no phone calls.. nothing

If you've been following the recent installments in the saga of the $400 rental deposit Republican Vic Williams (LD-26) didn't return to Tasha, an Iraq Vet and single mother, which ballooned to $1,845 when she took Williams to small claims court, you'll know that Jim Nintzel of Tucson Weekly picked up the story from my posts, called Williams and covered the story in The Skinny. I guess Nintzel's call must have jarred Williams, because his lawyer called Tasha and asked her to send a letter of satisfaction, after which Williams would write her a check. Nobody's fool, Tasha said she won't sign something saying she's satisfied when she hasn't gotten satisfaction. First she wants to see the money.

The call from Williams' attorney was Monday or Tuesday. Today is Friday. Tasha has heard nothing since.

Your move, Vic. As I see it, there are 6 days until Christmas, and you're looking a whole lot like Scrooge right about now.

Reformer is the new Maverick

by David Safier

If you're like me, you can't stand to hear the word Maverick after the steady barrage during the campaign.

"You have to admit John McCain is a Maverick. He's been a Maverick in the Senate for 30 years, the original Maverick."

"What do you expect? We're a couple of Mavericks. You don't expect a couple of Mavericks to agree on everything, do you?"

The same thing is happening these days with the word Reformer when conservatives talk about education.

Reformer-reformer-reformer-reformer. Like machine gun fire.

In case you haven't followed the discussion in the press or read my earlier post on the educational reformer/establishment spin, the "reformers" are the people who want to bust teacher unions, fire teachers, establish merit pay systems, increase the number of charter schools and maybe institute voucher programs. If the "reformers" sound a lot like Bushies, well, now you get the idea. That's who they are, along with Democrats who have bought into the neocon ed model. And the stick-in-the-mud "establishment" in this spin cycle is made up of teachers, unions and progressive education profs.

I was listening to an NPR discussion this afternoon that included David Brooks, the conservative columnist. He almost broke the Maverick record, using Reformer about eight times in 30 seconds. Here's what it sounded like, from memory:

"Now there are some real Reformers out there, like the Reformer superintendent in D.C. and the Reformer head of the New York schools. Those folks are real educational Reformers. Now I think Obama's pick for Secretary of Education is a Reformer too, but he's quieter about being a Reformer. But I think Obama picked him because he wants some real Reform."

Brooks' main reform idea? Fire 10% of the teachers. The weakest 10% of course. And replace them with better teachers. This assumes that excellent teacher candidates are being turned down right and left, and all we have to do is cherry pick from the huge surplus of applicants and Presto Change-o! Great schools!

Great idea, Brooks.

Here's a take similar to mine on the misused term "reformer" by a well know educational writer, Alfie Kohn, in The Nation.

For Republicans education "reform" typically includes support for vouchers and other forms of privatization. But groups with names like Democrats for Education Reform--along with many mainstream publications--are disconcertingly allied with conservatives in just about every other respect. To be a school "reformer" is to support:

• a heavy reliance on fill-in-the-bubble standardized tests to evaluate students and schools, generally in place of more authentic forms of assessment;
• the imposition of prescriptive, top-down teaching standards and curriculum mandates;
• a disproportionate emphasis on rote learning--memorizing facts and practicing skills--particularly for poor kids;
• a behaviorist model of motivation in which rewards (notably money) and punishments are used on teachers and students to compel compliance or raise test scores;
• a corporate sensibility and an economic rationale for schooling, the point being to prepare children to "compete" as future employees; and
• charter schools, many run by for-profit companies.

Southern Insurrection: Destroying The Big 3 to Kill The UAW

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Eugene Robinson noted in a recent column that the Republican Party has positioned itself as being against unions, against America's domestic auto industry, against the blue-collar middle class -- and also, incredibly, against the Rust Belt states that are home to UAW-represented auto plants and that also regularly tip the balance in presidential elections. Eugene Robinson - The Senate GOP Seems Set on Hastening the Death of Detroit

There are a multitude of historical reasons why Southern Republicans in particular have adopted this short-sighted and ultimately self-destructive strategy. Some recent commentaries (links below) help to explain the complexity and nuances of this issue. It is not the simple narrative that the mainstream news media is reporting.

For the past century, the South has had a development plan that relied upon poaching Northern industries to relocate to the South. Southern states used the lure of cheap land, government sponsored infrastructure and financial incentives and subsidies, and above all else, a pool of cheap labor that Southern states promised to keep that way with anti-union labor laws. The South enjoyed early success in luring away the textile industry from New England, and to a lesser extent, steel production and ship building. (The South, as well as the rest of the U.S., subsequently lost these industries to corporate globalism and free trade as these companies pursued cheaper labor in Asia).

Beginning in the mid-1980's, when corporate globalism and free trade became the watch words of conservative economic theory, foreign-owned auto manufacturers were encouraged to build domestic auto plants in the South, again with lucrative government incentives and subsidies, and the promise of cheap labor that would remain non-union. The development plan was a success.

Over the past 25 years, a second auto industry has emerged in the South: foreign-owned and non-union. Which brings us to today.

Southern Republicans are doing the bidding of these foreign-owned companies by trying to destroy  their American-owned competitors, "The Big 3" (General Motors, Ford and Chrysler). It is true that these companies have brought much of their misfortune upon themselves through a corporate culture of mismanagement. But there is something unseemly, even anti-American about watching these Southern Republicans doing the bidding of foreign-owned companies to destroy the American-owned auto industry and American jobs with it.

Their broader goal, however, is to kill the United Auto Workers Union (UAW), one of the last powerful unions still standing. The death of the UAW would likely hasten the demise of other less powerful unions. GOP: 'Action Alert - Auto Bailout' (GOP Memo: "Republicans should stand firm and take their first shot against organized labor...") This would bring joy to the dark hearts of Republicans, who have always had a visceral hatred for unions, because it is unions and the blue-collar middle-class they represent who have successfully campaigned against and defeated Republicans in elections.

If the UAW is killed, then the foreign-owned auto manufacturers in their states will be the only game in town and they can begin to reduce their employee wages and benefits to the prevailing compensation in the states in which they are located - substantially below the competitive wages and benefits they are currently paying to compete with the union shop auto plants in the North. Southern auto workers, who are indirectly enjoying the benefit of this unionized labor competition, will be the next workers targeted by their foreign-owned employers. (Maybe these Southern auto workers should consider the consequences before being so quick to condemn their Big 3 competitors to the graveyard.)

For a better understanding of this strategy I recommend that you read the following articles: Auto bailout's death seen as a Republican blow at unions - Los Angeles Times ; UAW busting, Southern style - Los Angeles Times ; Southern Comfort | Newsweek.com ; Salon.com | The economic Civil War.

The death of The Big 3 will not be limited to auto manufacturing plants in the Rust Belt. It will have a large mutiplier effect upon auto parts manufacturers and suppliers, auto dealerships, banks and lenders, and every business that relies upon the broader automotive industry. This could have catastophic consequences not just for the U.S. economy, but for the world economy as well. Potential GM bankruptcy catastrophic for economy "The lost GM output could easily lower GDP growth over a quarter by four percentage points or more. It would be a stunning blow to the U.S. economy," said Cary Leahey, senior managing director at Decision Economics in New York. "If you lose GM's...output for a period of time, you are talking about losses of $150 billion to $200 billion in GDP, just from GM alone," said Leahey.

"Motor vehicles and parts contributed $440.4 billion to the U.S. economy, unadjusted for inflation, in 2007, according to government data, roughly 3.2 percent of GDP."

"The impact on jobs would be equally devastating, analysts said. GM, Ford and Chrysler employ nearly 250,000 people directly and 100,000 more jobs at parts suppliers could hang on their survival. The companies say one in 10 U.S. jobs are tied to the auto sector, which adds up to several million."

"According to Gary Burtless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Instution in Washington, in mid-November there were roughly 2.1 million workers engaged in the production of vehicles, supplying parts and dealerships."

Then there is the multiplier effect upon the communities in which these businesses are located. "Burtless warned of major spills to other sectors not directly linked to the auto sector in the event of bankruptcy filings by both GM and Chrysler."

"You have to add a couple of 100,000 workers at banks, retail stores ... which are in the communities where auto assembly, part plants and dealerships are located," he said.

Many American communities could be reduced to blighted ghost towns in a short period of time.

In addition, "GM [alone] has $36 billion in unsecured debt and another $6 billion owed to secured creditors." A default would exacerbate the current credit crisis, and quite possibly trigger a global depression.

An "orderly bankruptcy," as President Bush suggested on Thursday, would not prevent this result from occuring but likely would hasten it. Who is going to buy a car if you cannot trust that the manufacturer will still be in business ten, five, or even one year from now?

But Southern Republicans are willing to risk all of this, to destroy the domestic auto industry, to destroy related automotive industries and other businesses and the jobs of all the Americans whom they employ, to destroy American communities, and to throw the U.S. and possibly the world into a global depression, all to do the bidding of their corporate masters, the foreign-owned auto manufacturers in their states, in the hope of realizing their long-cherished dream of destroying the unions. Some might call this Southern insurrection against their fellow American citizens by conspiring with foreign-owned corporations to destroy American industries, American jobs, and the American economy "treason." (If we were at war with Germany and Japan it would be).

By the way, our own Senators Jon Kyl and John McCain voted with these treasonous Southern Republicans. "Country First" my ass!

Ideal world/Real world world of school tax credits

by David Safier

The Arizona legislature is talking about doing away with school tax credits, not this year, but next year, to help close the budget deficit. I've been telling people to give $200 for a single and $400 for a couple to public schools before December 31, but I think the whole tax credit thing is awful. So let me explain the difference between the ideal world and the real world of tax credits.

Ideal World: Abolish School Tax Credits. The only reason for school tax credits is because our schools are woefully underfunded. If I'm given an opportunity to make the state give more money to schools -- and that's what happens with the tax credit. I give the money, and the state gives me my money back, which means the state gives more money to schools -- I'm going to take it.

But it's a blatantly unfair system. Schools with rich families get lots more tax credit money than schools with poor families. And the credits have to go for extracurricular activities, which means they do nothing to lower class sizes or bring needed supplies and materials into the classroom.

We should abolish the tax credits and fund schools at a decent level, equitably. Our modest goal should be to climb from 49th in school funding to, say, 30th.

The other, really awful part of the tax credits -- and one I purposely didn't mention in my earlier posts -- is that you can also give tax credit money to private schools that goes toward scholarships. This is a back-door voucher system, pure and simple, a way to support private schools with public funds, to the tune of $54 million last year. This should absolutely be done away with in both the ideal and real worlds.

[Question: I don't know nearly enough about the private school tax credits. Anyone who is better informed, please answer these two questions for me. (1) Can the private schools use the tax credit scholarship money for anyone in the school or only kids from low income families? (2) Do you have to give the credits through intermediary companies that take 10% off the top, or can you give them directly to the private schools?]

Real World: Keep Public School Tax Credits. Until we fund our schools at a reasonable level, let's keep the public school tax credits. If we want to save taxpayer dollars, abolish the $54 million tax dollar giveaway to private schools.

Goldwater Institute: cut ed, commerce, art, etc.

by David Safier

From the Phoenix Business Journal:

In a likely precursor to proposed budget cuts in 2009, the Goldwater Institute advocates $1 billion in cutbacks to help solve projected shortfalls of up to $2 billion over the next two years.

The Libertarian group calls for elimination of the Arizona Office of Tourism and Department of Commerce as well as state money for all-day kindergarten, autism funding and a 10 percent cut to university budgets.

Go to the article for all the gory details.

As goes the Goldwater Institute, so goes Arizona? We'll find out in a few months.

Charter/voucher proponents out in force

by David Safier

The educational "reformers" -- meaning the people who agree with the Bush folks (Is that reform we can believe in?) -- have been out it force getting their word in the media. We've had all kinds of articles and op eds about the glories of vouchers lately, now that the courts are deciding whether Arizona's limited voucher program is constitutional.

Today it's the charter proponents talking up an Arizona Republic reporter about how enrollment's on the rise at charter schools.

It's true, and as I've said before, I like the concept of charter schools. I just want to see adequate oversight of the education in the schools -- inspectors going in and seeing how the schools go about teaching their students -- and financial oversight as well -- thorough bookkeeping to show how they're spending state money.

But when the two main "experts" the reporter talks to are Matthew Lardner from the Goldwater Institute and Eileen Sigmund, president and CEO of the Arizona Charter Schools Association, you know the article is a puff piece, not reporting.

There are two howlers toward the end of the article which the "reporter" simply lets slide. One is a lie, and the other doesn't pass the logic test.

Paraphrasing Sigmund, the writer says there are "stringent laws and oversight" relating to charter schools. Anyone who knows our charter school laws is aware that ours are some of the loosest in the nation, which is why we have more total charters than any state but California and more students in charters per population than any state in the nation. It's very easy to get a charter school approved and very difficult to do something bad enough to get one shut down.

Here's the howler from Lardner:

"There is a measure of quality control," Ladner said. "If a charter school has really bad test scores, then parents can say they don't want to go to that charter school. It is a very positive phenomenon that doesn't happen in public schools." [emphasis added]

Let's take Lardner's statement apart. The "quality control" he cites is that parents can see the school's test scores and pull their children out if the scores are low. This ignores the fact that you have to be very sophisticated to figure out what scores mean related to a given population of students. The only way parents could be truly informed consumers is if the state published reports about the charters based on careful observation and analysis. Without that, the "invisible hand of the marketplace" is truly invisible. Kind of like it's been in the financial sector lately.

And then he says parents can take their children out of a charter school, but can 't leave a public school. Tell me Matt, how did all those folks get into the charter schools? By leaving public schools, right? And people have the choice of leaving one public school and choosing another. They can even choose to put their kids in a different district.

I don't fault Lardner, much. I'd like him to be a little more honest, but hell, he's just pushing his agenda. But a reporter should do his homework, or just check what he's been told against common sense.

I would love to see more genuine reporters and fewer stenographers.

Tucson to Jonathan Paton: Don't Tread on Me!

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Ah, senator-elect Jonathan Paton (R-Dist. 30) is up to his old tricks again. Paton is in the business of "gimmicks-R-us" to generate news ink to keep his name in the newspapers. (Unfortunately, I will have to indulge his narcissism once more here.)

Who could forget when Paton got the vapors and his delicate sensibilities were offended by a speech given by labor activist Dolores Huerta at Tucson High in which she said that "Republicans hate Latinos." Paton and his Republican cohorts immediately turned to demagoguery by branding Huerta's comment "hate speech" and held a committee hearing to consider limiting the First Amendment rights of free speech and political expression in public schools. (Why is the first inclination of every Republican to always attack the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?) Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed and a more reasonable compromise was reached.

More recently, Paton staked out a new role as the defender of children and families against the big bad Child Protective Services (CPS). In the interest of full disclosure, I have in the past represented clients against CPS and I would be the first to agree that reforms were both needed and necessary. Principally the obvious fact that CPS is woefully understaffed, overworked and underfunded by the Arizona Legislature to enable that agency to do its job in the manner expected by the Legislature. But Paton was moved by his penchant for demagoguery on this issue, once again. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed and more responsible reforms were enacted.

Now Jonathan Paton suddenly fancies himself some kind of an expert on election law. With recent speculation about Congressman Raul Grijalva going to the Interior Department and touching off a series of resignations and appointments of state legislators and county supervisors, Paton proposed a new law requiring that a special election be held to fill any vacancies which occur in office. Even though we just held an election in November. And even though the state would never offer to reimburse the counties for the expense of a special election. Paton's true interest was the purely partisan interest of a second bite at the apple, so to speak, in a special election. Hopefully his lame-brained proposal is dead on arrival.

The news story that his proposal generated must have whetted his appetite for more news ink, because now Paton is proposing that the Arizona Legislature override the City of Tucson Charter, and the express will of its voters, by dictating that Tucson's city council elections must be both "nonpartisan" and "ward only." Tucson's election process is under fire Oh, this totalitarian dictate has generated Paton some news ink alright, but not quite what he expected.

The Arizona Daily Star correctly noted that "Tucsonans have rejected nonpartisan elections at the polls many times, most recently in 1993. Efforts since, including an initiative drive in 1998 and lobbying campaigns in 2001 and 2003, failed to make it to the ballot. Initiative drives to change the city's ward system have failed as well, most recently in 2007."

Paton's bill would "also abolish Tucson's unique system where its council members are nominated by ward but are elected citywide.

That system has been in place since 1929 and has survived several public votes and failed initiative drives."

The Arizona Daily Star editorialized on Tuesday Tucsonans should decide how city is run:

[P]aton, a Republican, is planning to introduce legislation in the Legislature to to impose a nonpartisan City Council system on Tucson, according to a story Monday by O'Dell. Please note: In January, this body will be dominated by Maricopa County and by highly partisan Republicans.

Well, don't tread on us, Phoenix.

If Tucson's City Council system is to be reformed, the changes must flow up to the ballot from local citizens and must be accepted or rejected by Tucson voters. Our local governance choices are none of the Legislature's business, nor Paton's.

The editors concluded that we "see it purely as a matter of local autonomy. Tucson voters should run Tucson city government."

Rep. Phil Lopes (D-Dist. 27) weighed in with a guest opinion on Thursday Republicans imposing their will on Tucson in which he wryly noted that:

State Sen.-elect Jonathan Paton, a Tucson Republican who is slated to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee, plans to use his power in Phoenix to mandate ward elections. Apparently he doesn't care that Tucson has repeatedly rejected the idea. Democracy, it seems, is a messy process that must be discarded when it gets in the way.

Lopes pointed out that Paton claims the current system, in which candidates are nominated at the ward level but are elected citywide, disenfranchises certain segments of the city's populace.

And who would that be? Would it be minorities?

Currently there are two Hispanics serving on the council. This level of Hispanic representation is on the low side. Previous councils have had three or more Hispanic members. For eight years we had an African-American council member.

Are women disenfranchised? Currently four of the seven members are female.

Business owners? Several current members have small-business backgrounds, and Mayor Bob Walkup once was a manager for one of Tucson's largest employers.

Just about the only group that lacks much representation is the Republican Party. In 2005, city voters removed two GOP council members from office, leaving Walkup as the sole Republican. In 2007, voters rejected all the Republican candidates.

If people wanted more Republicans on the council, they could elect them, but apparently they're happy with the current ratio.

Now Paton and his fellow Republicans have several ways to address this inequity. They could nominate candidates who are capable of winning city elections. They've done it in the past, and presumably they can do it again. Walkup, after all, has won three elections in a row.

Or if they truly believe that the City Charter needs to be changed, they can refer the question to voters again, and let the political process decide.

* * *

If Paton believes his own party's rhetoric, he should leave the issue up to the people. If he wants to argue for ward elections, he ought to present his case to city voters, and let them decide.

Even long-time "ward only" elections advocate Jim Sinex of FairElect.org agrees that "The problem with Paton's call for nonpartisan elections is that he hides his partisan proposal under the ideal of fair elections. Removing information from a ballot does not improve an election and allows ideologues to hide behind a veneer of nonpartisanship." Tucson's election system is unfair, but Phoenix should back down Sinex correctly notes that "The state... gives power over local elections to chartered municipalities; so he should therefore concentrate on state elections. There is much to be done there."

Jonathan Paton's narcissistic need for news ink, and his penchant for demagoguery and to dictate to others has grown both tiresome and worrisome. We should keep a wary eye on Jonathan Paton.

(The Gadsden Flag from the American Revolutionary War)

Your Republican legislature at work

by David Safier

A lawmaker-approved plan to spend $1 billion on building projects at the state's three universities and stimulate the construction industry is likely dead after a legislative committee set to review the package canceled its meeting.

There's not much more to say, is there? (But I'll say it anyway.) Pearce & Co. think it's a bad idea to sell bonds that will put out-of-work builders to work on projects that will enhance our universities.

Projects like:

• $470 million to expand the Phoenix biomedical campus, which would have added classrooms and other facilities.
• $90 million for a 150,000-square-foot Environment and Natural Resources Building, which would have housed the Institute for the Study of the Planet Earth.
• $12 million to renovate Centennial Hall by replacing old seats, upgrading the acoustics and installing extra bathrooms.
• $68 million to repair more than two dozen campus buildings, including McKale Center and the Main Library. The legislative committee approved a portion of those projects.

The Centennial Hall project is an upgrade that could probably be put off with little harm done, but the first two are value-added projects to make the University more academically vibrant, and the last means repairing buildings now instead of spending far more to repair them later.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you your Republican Legislature.

A tax on sugar water

by David Safier (TASL)

Nicholas Kristof has a great column this morning about a proposed 18% tax in New York on soft drinks with sugar and other nondiet sugary beverages.

The reasoning is, sugar water doesn't curb your appetite. It actually increases it. So sugared beverages are as much or more of a contributor to obesity as, say, Twinkies, which at least fill you up a bit.

If sugared beverages cost more than water or diet drinks, people won't drink as many. They'll consume fewer calories, which will lower their weight. Kristof compares it to increased cigarette taxes, which did more to lower the rates of lung cancer than all the anti-smoking campaigns combined.

A sin tax on sugar water. I like that. I know, I know, lots of overweight people chug diet drinks and still gain weight. It won't solve the country's growing problems with obesity, but if it keeps a few pounds off people, especially younger people, and lowers the rate of diabetes, that's something.

Vic Williams gets it from Nintzel on Deposit-gate

by David Safier

I mentioned that the story of newly elected state rep Vic Williams (R, LD-26) stiffing Iraq vet Tasha Downum for her rental deposit was developing. The latest development is, Jim Nintzel picked the story up from my posts and ran with it in Tucson Weekly's The Skinny.

Nintzel talked with Downum and moved the story ahead a notch. When I wrote my posts, Williams had not contacted Downum about the unreturned $400 deposit -- now $1,845 after a small claims court judgment against Williams (He didn't show for the hearing). But after I talked to Williams, then Nintzel followed up, he decided he'd better do something.

So what does he do? He takes sleaze to the next level.

It was only after we talked to Williams--and a day after he had been slapped around on Blog for Arizona--that Downum got a call from a woman who identified herself as Williams' attorney. (If Williams is now paying an attorney to make calls on his behalf, the expenses on this measly $400 are really piling up!)

Downum tells us that Williams' representative assured her that Williams would be sending her a check--but she then asked Downum if, in the meantime, she would mind faxing a letter to Williams stating that her claim against him has been satisfied.

Downum was having none of that: "I told her, 'I'm not signing anything until I receive the money.'"

Let me get this straight. Williams wants a letter from Downum saying she's satisfied with the way he dealt with the claim before he deals with the claim??? Maybe he thought he could just wave her letter around and say, "See, it's all over. She's satisfied." And not pay her.

There's something Williams doesn't understand about being a public figure. If Downum was foolish enough to let herself be conned into writing a letter of satisfaction before Williams paid her (which she wasn't), does he think the story would go away? I've already shown that I'm on this until Downum gets her money back, along with the extra money the judge tacked on for good measure.

Vic, pay up. Send Tasha a check for the $1.845, preferably before Christmas so she can splurge a little on her five year old son's presents. He deserves a little extra after being separated from his mother for a year while she served in Iraq. It's time to put this one behind you.

I'm not the only one on the story now. Here's how Nintzel ends his piece:

So will Downum finally see a check from Williams? We'll let you know in the second installment of Screwed-Over Iraq Vet Watch.

Obama's Secretary of Education

by David Safier

It's all but official that Arne Duncan will be the next Secretary of Education. While no one is ecstatic about the choice, no one is angry about it either. That seems to be the watchword for Obama's cabinet picks. It may be a great strategy, choosing people who can work with all sides rather than picking polarizing figures. We'll have to see.

He represents a compromise choice in the debate that has divided Democrats in recent months over the proper course for public-school policy after the Bush years.

In June, rival nationwide groups of educators circulated competing educational manifestos, with one group espousing a get-tough policy based on pushing teachers and administrators harder to raise achievement, and another arguing that schools alone could not close the racial achievement gap and urging new investments in school-based health clinics and other social programs to help poor students learn.

Mr. Duncan was the only big-city superintendent to sign both manifestos.

[snip]

“Obama found the sweet spot with Arne Duncan,” said Susan Traiman, director of educational policy at the Business Roundtable. “Both camps will be O.K. with the pick!”

According to the article, Duncan has been an effective superintendent in Chicago who has managed to maintain good relations with the unions while being tough on teachers and schools -- not an easy task. He's an advocate of early childhood education, possibly the most important missing link in our school systems, increasing the number of 3 and 4 year olds in school by at least 1000 each year.

And most important, he played professional basketball in Australia and is only 44. So Obama can knock on his door and say, "Hey Arnie, can you come out and play?"

Another reminder

by David Safier

Yet another reminder to give $200 for one person or $400 for a couple to the public school (or divided among the public schools) of your choice by December 31 and get it all back when you pay your state taxes.

I think it's a good idea. Ann-Eve Pedersen,a founder of Tucson Unified School Supporters who wrote an op ed in this morning's Star, thinks it's a good idea. It must be a good idea.

The Star lists the websites of nearby school districts along with the op ed.

Developing story: Deposit-gate

by David Safier

Yes, Deposit-gate. Create a hypenated word with "gate" at the end, and everyone knows what kind of story it is (though, I wonder if people remember that Watergate had nothing to do with Water.)

Yesterday I wrote a story about newly elected Rep. Vic Williams (R, LD-26) not returning  a $400 rental deposit to Tasha, an Iraq vet and a single mother who rented his beach house in Newport. She took him to small claims court in early November (he didn't show), and the judge ruled that Williams had to pay Tasha $1845.20.

As of this moment, Williams has still not paid Tasha the money he owes her. When I spoke to him yesterday, he told me he and Tasha were in the midst of working it out, which was news to Tasha who hadn't heard from Williams since the court date.

Well, it looks like things are beginning to move, and I'm hoping Tasha and her five year old son Javier get their money in time for the holidays. That would be a wonderful, well deserved present for both of them.

I'll tell you more when I know more.

D.C. Charter school successes, at $12,000+ per student

by David Safier

Washington D.C. has lots of charter schools, and a Washington Post article says their students are surpassing the regular public school students in test scores.

If so, they're accomplishing something that hasn't been accomplished elsewhere, since most studies say charters don't exceed other public schools in student achievement. I don't know how rigorous the D.C. studies are. It's tough to create an equivalence between students whose parents choose to put them in a charter and students whose parents are possibly more passive about their children's education. But let's assume for a moment that the article is right about the improved achievement of the kids in the charters. Let's see why it might have happened.

Here's a hint. The charters are not on a level playing field with the public schools. Many of them have lots more money to play with, and the right to get rid of students they don't want.

According to the article, a D.C. charter gets $11,879 per student in tax dollars. That's roughly the same amount that follows D.C. students to the traditional public schools. But $3,000 of that is supposed to pay for buildings, and some charters are housed in facilities that cover all or part of the building costs. They get the dollars anyway. That can add up to a surplus of as much as $3-4 million per year -- a hell of a lot of money considering most charters are fairly small -- which can be used to hire extra staff and pay for things like white boards in preschool classes, laptops for every student, and value-added items of that sort.

On top of that, the charters get lots of grants from foundations like those set up by Bill Gates and the family that owns Wal-Mart, along with others. And they get loans from the D.C. Public Charter School Credit Enhancement and Direct Loan Funds Committee that can also add up to serious dollars.

The $11,879 taxpayer money per student is only a starting point for their funding.

Excuse me for using a phrase I despise, but don't conservatives who will soon be trumpeting the successes of the D.C. charters call this "throwing money at education"? (Are you listening, Arizona Republican legislators?)

And the charters can expel students who are behavior problems. And some charters like the KIPP schools (KIPP runs many of the charters. Their schools around the country are deservedly credited for their educational excellence) are known for high student attrition rates and the number of teachers who leave after a year or two because the demands made by the schools are too great.

I like the idea that some D.C. kids have the chance to get an excellent education. The traditional public schools there have an awful reputation, and some of the charters clearly offer a viable alternative which can change a child's life for the better. But keep in mind that the charters have advantages, like more money for extras, the ability to demand the strictest cooperation from students -- and from parents who often have to sign contracts saying they will work with their children every night, attend regular conferences, etc. And if a student or parent doesn't cooperate, the kid is gone, back to one of the regular public schools.

There are lots of lessons to be learned here, I think. But they're not easy to sort out. You can be sure, however, the charter/voucher proponents will be saying this proves that charters are superior to traditional public schools and vouchers would make things even better. They're not likely to include the caveats I've mentioned, all of which are in the article.

Iraq Vet Sues Vic Williams for Unreturned Rental Deposit

by David Safier

When Tasha Downum returned from Iraq in June, 2008, she took her five year old son, her mother and her grandmother on a two week vacation to Newport Beach, California. Her son had never seen the ocean, and after a year in Iraq's heat and sand, she was looking forward to being around all that water.

She found a beach house online that belongs to Vic Williams, who was recently elected to the Arizona State House (Republican, LD-26). She paid him a $400 deposit and the rent in advance, took her family to Newport and had a wonderful time. But when the vacation was over, she couldn't get Williams to return her deposit.

After repeated unsuccessful attempts to have Williams return the money, she took him to small claims court.  Williams didn’t show up. The judge awarded Downum $1845.20. She still has not received the money.

The first I heard of this situation was when Tasha’s mother, Cathy, wrote a comment on a story I posted about Williams’ temper tantrum at an educational forum during the campaign, where he didn’t respond to numerous invitations to attend the forum, then showed up and bullied his way onto the stage. Cathy and I emailed back and forth about the unreturned deposit. She sent me a number of documents, including the court papers. Then I talked with Tasha over the phone and learned more details from her.

Here is the story, based on my email conversations with Cathy and the documents she sent to me, along with my phone conversation with Tasha.

Tasha was stationed in Iraq for a year as part of the motor pool unit of the 325th Combat Support Hospital. Toward the end of her tour, she decided she wanted to take a four-generation vacation with her son Javier, her mother and her grandmother. They talked about going on a cruise but decided a trip to the beach would be more fun. Since Tasha and her family live in Missouri, the beach would be a real treat for everyone. It would be her son's first time at the ocean, she has relatives in southern California, and she couldn't imagine a better break from her long, hot tour in Iraq than a few weeks at the Pacific Coast.

Tasha found what looked like the perfect place in Newport Beach advertised on vrbo.com, a beach house owned by Vic Williams -- close to the bay and a short walk to the Newport Beach Fun Zone. A cousin who lives in Southern California looked it over and gave the place her OK. The cousin signed the rental contract and wrote a check for half the rent, including a $400 security deposit. Tasha reimbursed her cousin and paid Williams the remainder.

Tasha's return home from Iraq in June was covered by her local newspaper,including a heartwarming photo of her playing with Javier at the airport. In early July, the family headed to Newport Beach and stayed in the rented beach house for two weeks. They had a wonderful time.

On the last day of her stay, Tasha emailed Willams: "Wanted to thank you for letting us rent this place for 2 weeks!! It's beautiful, and we enjoyed our time!! Just wanted to give you my information so the deposit can be returned to me!!!" She included her mailing address.

Willams replied a few days later that he couldn't return the deposit to her. It had to go to her cousin, who signed the contract. He promised to cut the check and put it in the mail in the next two days.

That was July 30, and it was the last time Tasha heard from Williams. Her cousin emailed Williams repeatedly after that, asking him to send the check, but she didn't receive it.

After waiting a month, Tasha took the case to small claims court in Laguna Hills, CA. On October 3, Williams was personally served with a summons. The court date was set for November 3.

Tasha flew to California for the November 3 court date and appeared along with her cousin. Williams did not show up. The judge awarded her $1845.20 -- three times the unreturned $400 deposit, plus $500 for Tasha's travel and lodging and $145.20 for miscellaneous expenses.

The notice of the court's decision was mailed to Williams November 5. According to both Tasha and her mother, he has not paid the money or contacted them.

I talked with Williams briefly over the phone. He acknowledged the lawsuit and said he and Tasha are in the midst of working it out. He told me he didn't want to comment further on the case.

During my phone conversation with Tasha and email correspondence with her mother, I didn't get the impression they think the lawsuit is being worked out. They told me Williams had not been in contact with them since the court date.

Tasha simply wants to get the money Williams owes her, which is now almost five times what it would have been if he had returned the deposit promptly. Williams states in his resume that he is involved in "Acquisition, maintenance, renovation and management of investment properties." I'm certain he knows about his responsibility to return a rental deposit, and I'm also certain he knows the meaning of a court ruling.

What truly surprises me about this is that Williams is a newly elected state legislator. He must understand that one of the reasons people voted for him was they assumed he is a man of good character and judgement. This incident certainly throws those qualities into question. The fact that Tasha Downum is both an Iraq veteran and a single mother makes his refusal to return her deposit seem especially crass.

Tasha is one of those people who puts a saying at the bottom of her emails. Hers reads, "Love the people who treat you right. Pray for the ones who don't." I imagine she's praying for Vic Williams, and also hoping that he sends the money he owes her.

Educational "establishment" and "reformers" redux

by David Safier

A few days ago, I complained about how the media is using the terms "establishment" and "reformer" in the current educational debate. "Establishment" has come to refer to teachers, teacher unions and liberal education profs. "Reformers" is used to refer to people who agree with the Bushies on education -- merit pay for teachers, more charter schools, more vouchers. I'm exaggerating here, but not much.

A New York Times article noted the misuse of terms this morning, the first time I've seen it in the traditional media.

Editorials and opinion articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times have described the debate as pitting education reformers against those representing the educational establishment or the status quo. But who the reformers are depends on who is talking.

Bruce Fuller, an education professor at the University of California, Berkeley, used different terms in discussing the debate.

Dr. Fuller said it pitted “professionalization advocates such as Darling-Hammond,” who believe the policy emphasis should be on raising student achievement by helping teachers improve their instruction, against “efficiency hawks like Klein and Rhee.” The efficiency hawks, he said, emphasize standardized testing, cracking down on poor school management and purging bad teachers.

“It’s tough love without any love,” he said

Tough love without any love. Ouch! Sounds like a definition of "compassionate conservativism" as well.

Democratic educational "reformers" should take note. An idea is not necessarily wrong because it comes out of conservative think tanks, but it needs to be inspected very, very carefully. The reasons given for the idea are very often red herrings on the spin cycle.

How we can be more like Finland

by David Safier

According to Matt Yglesias, in Finland, teacher education programs turn away five applicants for every one they accept, and the applicants 

typically come from the top half of upper secondary schools which themselves only basically the top half of Finnish primary school graduates (the rest go to vocational schools).

Why? It's not the salaries. He says teacher pay is roughly equivalent to ours. But he makes one distinction.

The relative salary is higher because other professionals such as lawyers and doctors earn less in Finland than do their US equivalents.

There's the answer. We don't have to pay teachers more. Just pay other professionals less. Brilliant!

Yglesias also says Finnish kids have fewer discipline issues, which could be an added incentive for potential teachers, but that doesn't seem to me to be important enough to account for the far greater enthusiasm for the teaching profession. (Besides, it gets in the way of my thesis, so in the grand tradition of scholars everywhere, I'll ignore it.)

Teachers in other countries tend to have higher status in their society than they do here. That's a factor I definitely wouldn't discount in the career choice. Somehow, when someone who is intelligent and talented goes into the profession, people are likely to say (or think), "You mean you're only a high school teacher?" Makes you feel special, doesn't it?

Stupidest. President. Ever.

by David Safier

According to an AP article, Bush was "reflective" during a speech at Texas A&M. Listen to what passes for reflection in this deeply shallow and uncaring man.

According to the article, Bush told graduates that "popularity is capricious and what matters is whether they think they’ve done what is right."

Not whether it's right, but whether they think it's right.

In his words:

"If you go home at night, look in the mirror and be satisfied that you have done what is right, you will pass the only test that matters."

Since he's speaking in an academic setting and talking about tests, let's put his statement to the idiocy test. Let's say I take a final in a course I'm woefully unprepared for. Add to that, my roommates have been feeding me the wrong answers, telling me I'm up to the task and assuring me, "When it comes to choosing the right answers, you're the decider."

So I take the test with a song on my lips and confidence in my heart. I get every answer wrong. Then I go home, look in the mirror and say to myself, "I'm satisfied that the answers I have given are right."

According to the man who has led us into the Iraq War and the current economic debacle, he has passed the only test that matters.

Idiot!

Now, to show that he's an asshole as well as an idiot:

Bush had the nerve to say that every day of his presidency has been "joyous." Joyous! September 11? The reports of mounting death tolls in Iraq? . . . I could go on, but why bother? Any man who has presided over the past eight years and says he hasn't spent some days and weeks in the deepest anguish and heartache is either a liar or a man without any sense of empathy.

And speaking of lack of empathy, here's Bush's attempt at humor.

"To those of you with jobs lined up, congratulations. To those of you not exactly sure what comes next, I know how you feel," he said.

He thinks it's funny to compare these young people starting out their adult lives without job prospects, thanks in good part to his administration's anti-regulatory dogma, to a rich man who is leaving the presidency and has to worry about such questions as,"Should I play golf this morning?" and "Maybe I'll have someone drive me down to the ranch so I can clear a little brush."

Worst. President. Ever.

More on school tax credit suggestions

by David Safier

The Citizen ran articles yesterday and today about the public school tax credit. (Here is my explanation about what it is and how to give a donation and get 100% refunded to you when you pay your taxes. Remember, you must make your donation by Dec. 31 to get a credit on your 2008 taxes.)

Yesterday's article had the graphic at right about who is getting how much tax credit money in Pima County. No surprise, the amount per student drops off sharply below 22nd Street where incomes go down.

Today's article lists the schools in Sunnyside, Amphi and TUSD that received the fewest donations last year.

Sunnyside: Sierra Middle School, $3,600. 5801 S. del Moral Blvd. (ZIP 85706); Craycroft Elementary, $4,100. 5455 E. Littletown Road (85706); Rivera Elementary, $4,150. 5102 S. Cherry Ave. (85706)

Amphitheater: Mesa Verde Elementary, $12,105. 1661 W. Sage St. (85704); Rio Vista Elementary, $13,415. 1351 E. Limberlost Road (85719); Holaway Elementary, $14,167. 3500 N. Cherry Ave. (85719)

TUSD: Warren Elementary School, $4,200. 3505 W. Milton Road ( 85746); Maldonado Elementary School, $4,800. 3535 W. Messala Way (85746); Cavett Elementary School, $5,100. 2120 E. Naco Vista Drive (85713)

 If you're a spread-the-wealth type of person, these are the schools you'll think about first.

Robin Williams on America's election - from London

Posted By AzBlueMeanie:

A friend of mine forwarded this video to me from Francine and asked me to post it. Will do.

John Cleese and Robin Williams take to the stage for one night only at the New Wimbledon Theater to mark Prince Charles' 60th Birthday on the comedy program We Are Most Amused - ITV

"The reign of error is over. America is officially out of rehab."

You mean Obama is planning to put in regulators?

by David Safier

Here's my  nominee for today's best quote in a daily newspaper. The Washington Post has an article about Obama's three top picks for environmental posts.

Many environmentalists are happy with the picks, while some think they're a bit too moderate. That tells me they're probably excellent choices.

But the U.S. Chamber of Commerce isn't sure if they like the people Obama has chosen.

Industry groups were more cautious. At the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Vice President William Kovacs said the group worried that the new officials would use their power to limit greenhouse-gas emissions and impose painful new costs on energy use.

"I think that they could be aggressive, and we're hoping that they're really going to look at the circumstances" of the economic downturn, Kovacs said. "That is our biggest single concern, because literally all three of them have a regulatory bent." [bold/italics mine]

All three have a regulatory bent. I suppose industry groups were hoping at least one of them would say, "Just keep doing what you're doing. It's been great for the environment so far."

On a totally different subject

by David Safier

Watch the documentary, Who Killed the Electric Car?, available on Netflix.

Then ask yourself, if GM created a reliable electric car in the 90s with something like a 90 mile range before needing a charge, leased them in California to ecstatic drivers, then took them back from the drivers (who begged to keep them), shipped them to Phoenix and crushed them so GM and the oil companies wouldn't have to worry about making any more of the frustratingly successful vehicles that used no gas and needed few repairs, . . . 

Why can't the car be brought back from the dead and improved with the technological gains we've made in the past ten years as an answer to the prayers of the American auto industry and our drivers?

It's a very well made documentary, by the way, enjoyable and informative, like a 90 minute expansion of an excellent piece of "60 Minutes" investigative journalism. And "as current as today's headlines," as they say in Coming Attraction Land.

It's the teachers, stupid!

by David Safier (TASL)

I always keep an eye on what the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is doing in the education arena. They spend a hell of a lot of money, so they're real players, which makes their giving patterns important. But I also sense that they have no political agenda. Bill Gates wants his legacy to be, he changed the world for the better. He's not satisfied being the guy who made gazillions by selling computer software. Since the Foundation is trying to do good regardless of which education camp supports their efforts, and they have lots of money to get things done, what they say and do tells a lot about what might work in the real world.

The Gates Foundation has focused lots of money and effort on creating school environments that are more conducive to learning. It believed small schools are a big part of the answer. Now it's not so sure.

In remarks at last week’s gathering, Mr. Gates said the foundation had seen success with some of the small high schools it helped create through its emphasis on that school improvement strategy, but that much of that work did not deliver the academic gains the foundation had hoped for.

“To be successful, a redesign requires changing the roles and responsibilities of adults, and changing the school’s culture,” Mr. Gates said. “You can’t dramatically increase college readiness by changing only the size and structure of a school.

So now the Foundation plans to focus more of its energies on "teacher effectiveness." That means trying to identify what makes for effective teaching, but it also means finding ways to "retain and compensate teachers based on their effectiveness, and help ensure that high-quality teachers are place in schools that need them the most."

So teachers are more important than playing around with school size and structure, eh? What a surprise!

The Bush Legacy: Epic Failure

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Los Angeles Times reported this week that Bush administration officials received a two-page memo entitled "Speech Topper on the Bush Record," the talking points state that Bush "kept the American people safe" after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, lifted the economy after 2001 through tax cuts, curbed AIDS in Africa and maintained "the honor and the dignity of his office." For Bush's staff, upbeat talking points on his tenure - Los Angeles Times

Say what?

"Bush World" is not part of the reality-based world. As an unidentifed White House aid told author Ron Suskind several years ago, "we create our own reality." Bush World is a world of ideological propaganda and talking points regurgitated daily from the Drudge Report, to talk radio, to Faux News, to conservative columnists, newspapers and publications. An entire echo chamber of conservative media has been built to delude Americans - and themselves - into believing that up is down, black is white, and war is peace. It is the nightmarish world of George Orwell's 1984 writ large.

Despite this echo chamber's best efforts to reform the legacy of George W. Bush through revisionist history, reality-based history will remember George W. Bush simply: "Worst. President. Ever." The Bush legacy is one of epic failure.

(The descendants of Presidents James Buchanan and Millard Filmore may now rejoice in finally being relieved of their title.)

Osama Bin Laden in his wildest dreams could not have imagined causing as much destruction to the United States as George W. Bush and his sycophant supporters have succeeded in inflicting upon this country in eight short years.

Bush failed to protect America from foreign attack on 9/11, ignoring repeated intelligence warnings of an impending attack. His response was to shred the Constitution and set the Bill of Rights afire. His war of choice has ground our military into the dust of Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving our preparedness to defeat an enemy Bush has failed to defeat after seven long years still in doubt, and America more vulnerable than ever. Bush enjoyed birthday cake and playing guitar, indifferent to the suffering of his fellow Americans who were dying in the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. And for his final act, Bush has succeeded in destroying capitalism and begun our descent into socialism in an attempt to forestall possibly the next Great Depression into his successor's administration. Someone else will have to clean up the disaster that George has made of this country.

No George, history will not be kind to you. History will condemn you, and deservedly so.

Turning kindergartens into sweat shops

by David Safier

This morning's Star has a letter by Ken and Yetta Goodman, professors emeritus and emeritra who live in Tucson. 

(I had no idea "emeritus" had a feminine form: "emeritra." I'll add that to my store of who-cares-but-English-teachers word facts, like the singular of "data" is "datum," and the singular of "criteria" is "criterion." [When I hear someone say "There is only one criteria for . . ." it's like fingernails scraping on a chalk board. Which confirms the 19th century historian Henry Adams' statement, "No man, however strong, can serve ten years as schoolmaster, priest, or Senator, and remain fit for anything else."] But I digress.)

The Goodmans are none too fond of No Child Left Behind. Like me, they're disturbed by the idea that educators closest to the ideas held by the Bush administration are labeled "reformers."

NCLB is not a reform. It turns kindergartens into sweat shops where 5-year-olds are labeled failures if they fail DIBELS ( a mandated test in Arizona). NCLB makes the school curriculum test preparation. The arts, social studies and everything except skill drills in reading and math are gone. Even recess has disappeared. High-school students are being forced out and dedicated teachers quit or retire early.

Amen.

Ken Goodman is credited as the scholar who developed the theory of language acquisition which led to the Whole Language movement. I had the pleasure of talking with him over dinner at a mutual friends' home. I've written a few times about the travesty that is Bush's $6 billion dollar Reading First program, which used only one program, a drill-and-kill phonics approach to reading instruction. The Dept of Ed's own studies showed it had no effect on students' reading comprehension. (The previous post is my most recent rant.) Ken and Yetta were the ones who confirmed my misgivings about the program, adding heaps of understanding and scholarship to my semi-educated dislike of the use of letter-syllable-word recognition as the sole method of teaching reading.

Reading is language. Language isn't simply reading (or listening to) words. It's a complicated comprehension process involving skills that go far beyond word recognition. I suppose you can disregard the human portions of language acquisition if you're teaching a parrot to, well, parrot words. But when you're dealing with those marvelously creative, flexible minds children possess, you need to do much, much more than teach them decoding skills.

Karl Reiner: There is a war raging in our backyard

By Karl Reiner

The production and distribution of illegal drugs is big business. According to estimates compiled by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, American consumers spend about $65 billion per year on illegal drug products. If the illegal drug trade was ranked as an American business, it would be among the nation’s 30 largest enterprises. Its annual dollar volume would put it in 28^th place, producing slightly less revenue than Boeing and just ahead of COSTCO.

The illegal drug business operates with low overhead costs, pays virtually nothing in taxes and employs a quick and brutal method of resolving disputes among vendors and customers. Even when the losses inflicted by law enforcement are factored in, the return on investment is high. Despite the risks, the drug trade will always attract people primarily interested in large monetary gains.

Although some Tucsonans may be unaware of the problem, the 350 mile Arizona-Mexico border has become a haven for some of the Mexican trafficking organizations servicing the illegal drug market in the United States. Located only 65 miles from the border, Tucson is considered by the Drug Enforcement Administration to be a transshipment hub for a portion of the cocaine, heroin, marijuana and methamphetamine smuggled into Arizona.

The contraband moves across the border hidden in commercial trucks and private vehicles. As an alternative shipping method, it is transported through rough border terrain areas on pack animals and by human backpackers. Although local drug production is reported to be minimal, Tucson is a site where illegal drugs are warehoused prior to distribution to other stateside locations.

The slowing national economy is not having much of an effect on the drug trade. U.S. Customs and Border Protection reports a 200 percent increase in the amount of heroin seized at Arizona’s ports of entry thus far in 2008. Due to the lucrative nature of the U.S. market, competition is ferocious in the drug underworld. In Mexico, rival gangs are battling each other for control of the transportation routes.

Prodded into action by the U.S. government after years of ignoring the problem, Mexican authorities are now attempting to suppress the traffickers. Army units have been deployed to support the police. More than 48,000 traffickers have been reported arrested in Mexico since late 2006.

The drug lords are hitting back, often killing at will. The chief of Sonora’s state police was ambushed and killed in Nogales, Sonora in early November. The highly respected officer was one of the latest casualties in the escalating fight between the powerful drug cartels and law enforcement.

Through November, the city has suffered 103 confirmed homicides, up from 52 for the entire year 2007. The new murder rate record is a cause for concern. As a consequence of the spreading violence, the State Department added Nogales, Senora to its travel alert list. The travel warning has hurt the city’s once vibrant tourist business because the number of visitors from Arizona has drastically dropped.

As the drug gangs fight with each other for control of the profitable routes into the United States and resist the government’s effort to crack down on organized crime, casualties soar. Across Mexico, over 4,000 people have been killed thus far this year. By way of comparison, the U.S. has suffered 4,207 military deaths in Iraq since 2003.

The drug mobs have amassed massive amounts of money and firepower, enabling them to often outgun the police. Mexican officials point out that many of the 24,000 illegal firearms they have seized originated in the United States.

Awash in ill-gotten cash, the mobs have the ability to corrupt officials at the highest level. In one of the latest scandals, senior officials in the Mexican attorney general’s office and an employee of the U.S. Embassy were arrested for cooperating with the mobs.

Mexican authorities have begun moving to clean up the country’s scandalously corrupt police forces. Mexican President Calderon has candidly agreed with estimates that about half of the members of the state and local police forces are untrustworthy and that the federal service is riddled with corrupt officers.

Earlier this month, the U.S. government released $197 million of a $400 million aid package to Mexico. Providing equipment sorely needed in the drug battle, it is an indication of a closer and more cooperative effort by the two governments as they attempt to deal with the problem.

Tucson police believe drug-related crime is responsible in part for Tucson’s soaring homicide rate. The residents of Tucson have reason to feel less secure. If the ongoing struggle along the border slides up the supply chain, we should be prepared to see an increase in violence in Tucson.

"Good money after bad"

by David Safier

Bush has some qualms about the $15-25 billion proposed to help out the auto industry.

"These are important companies, but on the other hand, we just don't want to put good money after bad."

Let's talk good money after bad. When you ship pallets piled with bricks of money to Iraq and ask contractors "How many of these bricks do you need?" then continue to give the same failed, crooked, no-bid contractors money over and over and over, that's good money after bad.

When you take a $700 billion chunk of change and give it to failing financial institutions with a "No questions asked" handshake and expect the greedy, corrupt, apparently incompetent CEOs to spend the money wisely, that's good money after bad.

But here's my personal favorite, though it's a mere $6 billion example. I know, I know, that's chump change. Except it's education money, which makes it huge.

Bush's Dept of Ed spent a billion a year for six years on its Reading First program, to improve children's reading. The money was only supposed to go to scientifically tested reading programs. For the Bushies, that meant choosing the one program they like, a drill-and-kill phonics program, and rejecting the others, saying they have no scientific foundation.

The effectiveness of the programs have been studied by the Dept of Ed three times. 

First study. There was no evidence the billion-a-year reading program produced better readers than teachers who worked in schools without the Reading First funding. Bush's Ed folks said, it's too early to tell if the program will yield positive results.

Second study. Again, no evidence of any difference. Again, Bush's folks said, we just haven't given the program enough time.

The third study just came out. It is said to be "One of the largest and most rigorous studies ever undertaken by the U.S. Department of Education." It found that the Reading First kids were somewhat better at decoding but there was no effect on reading comprehension. And that was true even though the Reading First kids spent more class time being taught how to read.

If the Bush folks said at the beginning of the Reading First program, "Let's use lots of different strategies for teaching reading," then evaluated them, we might have found that one or two of them were more successful than the others. That's valuable information. If, after the first and second studies, the Ed folks said, "OK, this doesn't seem to be working. Now let's add some different strategies to the mix," we also might have learned something about what kind of reading instruction works and what doesn't. Six billion dollars is an awful lot of money for results like that, but it would have been something.

Instead, we spent six billion badly needed education dollars, and all we learned is that one drill-and-kill phonics approach doesn't appear help children learn to read any better than if schools and teachers determine how they want to teach reading -- with no extra funding.

Now that's good money after bad.

Budget battles. Republican infighting?

by David Safier

The sausage-making process of creating a state budget is a bit out of my area of expertise, but this item seems to foretell the world we have in store for us with a Republican legislature sending bills to a Republican Governor.

The AP article is short, so I'm including the whole thing.

State Senate President Tim Bee says work on a proposed December special session on Arizona's budget crisis fell apart over disagreement on how much of the problem to tackle.

The Tucson Republican who is leaving office in January said Monday that current House Republican leaders insisted on tackling the entire projected $1.2 billion shortfall.

Bee said others at the negotiating table were willing to just do cuts and other changes adding up to $400 million. He said there wouldn't be common ground with Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano on more than that.

Bee and House Speaker Jim Weiers, a Phoenix Republican, told Napolitano in a letter Friday that her proposal was inadequate and that it was too late to call a special session contemplated for mid-December.

I read this to say that the Republicans are the reason the budget talks fell apart. The House wanted one thing, the Senate another. In the end, the Senate (Bee) went along with the House (Weiers) by mutually condemning Napolitano.

So what happens to the warring Republican budget factions when they don't have Janet to kick around anymore? Last session, when the Rs couldn't decide on a budget, the Ds and a few breakaway Rs crafted something they sent to Napolitano. This next session, that ain't gonna happen.

For Democrats, this could turn into a spectator sport. No need for cable. The Republican cage match is right up the road in Phoenix.

Update: Jdimytai Damour

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I have been trying to follow-up on reader requests, with little success. Here is what I have been able to learn so far.

Newsday, the daily newspaper of Long Island, reports that the family of Mr. Damour (pictured at right) has hired an attorney and is suing Wal-Mart and other entities for wrongful death. Relatives of NY worker killed in Black Friday shoppers' stampede sue Wal-Mart, other companies -- Newsday.com:

The family of the Valley Stream Wal-Mart employee trampled to death on "Black Friday" filed a lawsuit Wednesday in New York State Supreme Court in the Bronx, the Associated Press is reporting.

The wrongful-death lawsuit was filed on behalf of Elsie Damour Phillipe, the sister of victim Jdimytai Damour, a temporary employee who was trampled to death when an estimated 2,000 customers broke down doors and stormed into the store in the Green Acres Mall before dawn last Friday.

It claims store ads offering deep discounts "created an atmosphere of competition and anxiety" that led to "crowd craze."

The lawsuit also claims that besides failing to provide adequate security for a pre-dawn crowd estimated at 2,000, Wal-Mart "engaged in specific marketing and advertising techniques to specifically attract a large crowd and create an environment of frenzy and mayhem and was otherwise careless, reckless and negligent."

New York lawyer Jordan Hecht represents Elsie Damour Phillipe, the court appointed administrator of Mr. Damour's estate. I contacted Mr. Hecht regarding an address to where readers can send their condolences to the family, but I have not received any response.

A New Jersey lawyer has started a memorial fund for the family of Mr. Damour. Fund started to help Wal-Mart stampede victim's family -- Newsday.com

"I am truly disgusted by this situation," said Al Marmero, who practices real estate law in New Jersey. He described himself as a "fan of Christmas" who sees the frenzied crowd's behavior as "the antithesis of the Christmas and holiday spirit."

After reading about the killing of Jdimytai Damour on Friday, Marmero registered a nonprofit fund and got an IRS tax-exempt number. He said he is making the first donation of $1,000 himself this week. He hopes that others will contribute to help Damour's relatives, including his mother, a retired housekeeper from the Pierre Hotel who lives in Haiti.

I have also been unable to obtain any information regarding this memorial fund.

Anyone who has relatives living in the tri-state area who may have access to information from local news sources that you can share here, please post a comment for others.

One has to question why Wal-Mart did not immediately establish a memorial fund for the family and make a big contribution. That might have discouraged any lawsuit.

I have not been able to find any memorial or obituary notice in the New York newspapers. There is a publication fee, so the family may not have been able to afford one.

This report briefly describes Mr. Damour Trying to Make Sense of a Fatal Stampede at Wal-Mart - NYTimes.com:

Jdimytai Damour was a big man — 270 pounds, by one account — but he was a gentle giant to his friends, who said he loved to chat about movies, Japanese anime and politics.

* * *

“If you wanted to know about a show, this was the guy, and he had a great sense of humor,” said Jean Olivier, who met Mr. Damour eight years ago in the Rosedale section of Queens.

* * *

Mr. Damour, 34, ... was known to his friends as Jimbo, or Jdidread because of his dreadlocks.

And Newsday describes Mr. Damour in this piece Trampling victim was easygoing, helpful, friends say -- Newsday.com

Jdimytai Damour, 34, the Wal-Mart worker who died Friday after a stampede in a Valley Stream store, was an easygoing, helpful man who loved poetry, his friends and family said.

Family friend Ronald Jean Myrthil, of Brideport, Conn., said Damour came to pick him up after he had staggered across the Brooklyn Bridge, fleeing Manhattan on Sept. 11, 2001.

* * *

A Freeport High School graduate, Damour attended Nassau Community College for a year, his father said.

His family roots are in Haiti, and he had a brother and four sisters, said Nicole Jean, 60, a Rosedale woman who said she was a close family friend. Damour's mother, who lives in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, is flying up this weekend.

Myrthil, who is Jean's son, said Damour was a big man and had no apparent health problems. Damour did construction work for a time and installed fences, he said.

Damour loved poetry, and he was a fan of the late novelist Donald Goines, the friend said.

He was easygoing - a nice guy, Myrthil said. "A very good kid."

Certainly a better man than the animals who trampeled him to death without regard for human life. They did not even stop to render aid to Mr. Damour after realizing they stepped on him. These animals know who they are, and yet, not one of them has been so disturbed by a guilty conscience that they have felt compelled to turn themself, and others with them, in to the police to confess their culpability in his death.

Maybe Jdimytai Damour will become the symbol for reform of the advertising that encourages this mob mentality, and for greater employee security and safety in the retail workplace.

The Community Food Bank

by David Safier

Times are hard. Money is tight. Which is both a reason not to give money and a reason why giving money is even more important than usual. The need is greater than it's been in years.

I mentioned the public school tax credit in an earlier post, where you can give money to a school or schools of your choice by December 31 and get 100% of it back when you file your state taxes.

You have a similar option for giving to non-profits that help working-poor families. You can give $200 as an individual and $400 as a couple and get it all back when you file your taxes (assuming you owe more than $200-400 in state taxes). This one is a bit more complicated, in that you have to give more than you gave in an earlier, baseline year, which is either 1996 or the first time you filed an Arizona return and itemized charitable deductions. You can find the information on Arizona form 321.

Though I give elsewhere, my main giving goes to The Community Food Bank. The group has a flier in this morning's Star, which reminded me to write about it.

I'm cheap and I love a bargain, which is one of the reasons I give to the Food Bank. Every $1 I give means $9 of food will be distributed. That's what I call bang for your buck! And nothing seems more vital to me than putting food in people's stomachs.

They take check or plastic. They're happy to get one time donations, of course, but what they really love are guaranteed monthly donations where they take it straight out of you credit card every month. That's what I do. It means the money is gone before I have a chance to think about it.

Dr. Word: Impactful?

by David Safier

In a Star article this morning about Republicans wishing Napolitano would just go to D.C. already and quit acting like the Governor, Incoming House Speaker Kirk Adams (R-Mesa) said about the proposed budget Napolitano intends to submit:

"It wouldn't mean much or be very impactful."

Impactful? People who use the word "impactful" want their banalities to be more impactful have more impact. It's pure corporate-speak. 

An online source from Washington State University writes, 

Many people in business and education like to speak of things that have an impact as being “impactful,” but this term does not appear in most dictionaries.

My favorite definition comes from the Urban Dictionary:

A non-existent word coined by corporate advertising, marketing and business drones to make their work sound far more useful, exciting and beneficial to humanity than it really is. This term is most frequently used in "team building" seminars and conferences in which said drones discuss the most effective ways to convince consumer zombies to purchase crap they clearly do not need or even want.

"Impactful" isn't bad because it's not in the dictionary. After all, language is in a constant state of flux. Dictionaries add new words every year. As a linguist once said, a dictionary is a historian, not a law giver.

No, it's bad because the people who use it are less interested in communicating than in sounding like they have something important to say.

And it's bad because it's ugly. Impactful. Ugh! Sounds like a mouth full of bad molars, doesn't it?