Friday, October 21, 2005

No On Propositions 74, 75, 78 and Y In The Nov. 8 Special

Adding to my recommendations against Proposition 75, the Schwarzenegger measure to disarm the public employee unions, and the drug industry's Proposition 78, I also am announcing opposition to Proposition 74, changing the teacher tenure law, and Measure Y, the $4.6 billion school bond issue prematurely put on the ballot by the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Billed as a new means of getting rid of bad teachers, Proposition 74 might well, instead, increase the opportunities for backbiters to do in good teachers.

Already, there's considerable danger in the teaching profession that nonconformists who speak out about weaknesses in public education can become the recipients of unwarranted personal attacks, like whistle-blowers in industry or government.

The present tenure law affords adequate opportunity to rid school systems of inadequate teachers. Their shortcomingings usually come to light quite quickly.

The teacher's union, of course, is advertising heavily against measures proposed on the schools by Gov. Arnold Schwarzegger, who made a promise to repay $2 billion he _borrowed" from the state budget for education, and then, conveniently, forgot he made the promise.

The late Gov. Edmund G. (Pat) Brown, by contrast boosted education. Schwarzenegger doesn't seem to have it as a particularly high priority.

However, the school bonds put on the ballot by the Los Angeles Unified School District are unneeded at the moment, since earlier bonds have not yut been expended. The Los Angeles Board of Education is getting greedy, and, for now, its latest bonds ought to be rejected.

The special election is really unnecessary and even undesirable, since it seeks a distorted electorate to pass often poorly-conceived measures by a partisan governor.

Two other measures on the ballot, Propositions 79 and 80, have uncertain consequences. While I'm not opposing them at this time, I'm not supporting them either.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Already, there's considerable danger in the teaching profession that nonconformists who speak out about weaknesses in public education can become the recipients of unwarranted personal attacks, like whistle-blowers in industry or government.

And who is it that poses that danger? Why it's the Union! The very people you feel will be "disarmed" by prop 75.

So Ken - suppose you graduated from college at age 22. If you stick with a teaching job for 2 years (18 months actual work), you get essentially a lifetime appointment. Now don't you think that's a pretty powerful inducment to stay with something that perhaps your not very good at, or even don't enjoy doing?

If you were offered that choice, how would it have affected your career?

And how come existing labor laws and wrongful termination suits are adquate for the rest of us, but teachers get an additional layer of protection?

How about using your reporter's skills to find out how many teachers have really been fired in the last ten years. Not transfered to a non-teaching position or paid leave. I mean fired as in no longer drawing a paycheck. I think you'll find it is a vanishingly small number of people, assuming the union will divulge this information.

Give me what the LA Times denies me - real in depth reporting, or at the very least, ask the obvious questions.

Lawrence

10/21/2005 3:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How is LAUSD becomming greedy?
Suplies are low and quality of the schools starting to degrade. Atleast the two billion dollars borrowed should be returned.

11/03/2005 10:16 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home