Wednesday, May 18, 2005
The Errors of Citizens to Save California, Part II
In the Put the Kids First Act (PKFA), the goal of the governor and his misguided supporters is to put the teachers last. The text of the initiative has virtually no content that actually appears to focus on "the kids." Rather, it is a blatant attempt to kill the power of a political opponent (teachers and their unions) that is intellectually dishonest and against the great traditions of republican democracy as seen in the Federalist Papers.
PKFA's "Findings and Declarations" section is a collection of unsubstantiated claims about the teaching profession (unfortunately, most initiatives have this type of section). The PKFA makes it sound as if teachers make all the decisions in teaching assignments. This claim is so silly, it would make one laugh if the charge were not so serious. If the claims are true in any school district, then those districts and their boards need to fix the problem if it is seen as a problem. A state-mandated solution is not a cure-all for all districts in this particular case.
PKFA has several serious problems, but the two most glaring ones deal with tenure and political association. PKFA would not do away with tenure, but those who are granted tenure at the end of this fiscal year would actually lose it under the proposed changes. Thus, the rules of the game are being changed after the outcome has been decided so that the outcome may be changed. Also, the proposed change to a five-year plan (sounds like something Stalin would have liked) for tenure relies on the silliness found in The Excellence in Teaching Act upon which I commented yesterday.
Further, the proposed new law has several subsections which makes firing a teacher a matter of personal whim. For example, one cause for firing a "permanent" employee reads, "evident unfitness for service." What is "evident unfitness?" The PKFA fails to address this point.
One can also be fired for "immoral of unprofessional conduct." Immoral? I certainly hope that administrators do not take to sitting outside of the confessionals of their Catholic employees to see who comes out. Immoral is not defined.
One can also be fired for "physical or mental condition unfitting him or her to instruct or associate with children." The governor seems to want to yank your job, health plan, and the plug in one pull. Once again, not providing specifics allows for people to be fired for minor infractions or problems. How can this possibly entice people to enter the profession or for young teachers to stay in it?
Speaking of old Uncle Joe, the new law would allow a permanent employee to be fired if there was a "knowing membership by the employee in the Communist Party." The governor seems to want to borrow from the ideas of both Joes: Stalin and McCarthy. Politics does indeed make strange bedfellows.
Ronald Reagan, a former governor of California who had much better poltical judgement than our current one, testified before the HUAC during the red scare about communists in the Screen Actors Guild when he was president of that organization. Although he was a strong anti-communist (as am I), he did not think that the party should be outlawed. In fact, his position can be traced to Madison's position on how our system of government deals with factions. Below is part of Reagan's testimony (which can also be seen in the A&E Biography of him):
"So that fundamentally I would say in opposing those people that the best thing to do is to make democracy work. In the Screen Actors Guild we make it work by insuring everyone a vote and by keeping everyone informed. I believe that, as Thomas Jefferson put it, if all the American people know all of the facts they will never make a mistake.
Whether the party should be outlawed, I agree with the gentlemen that preceded me that that is a matter for the Government to decide. As a citizen I would hesitate, or not like, to see any political party outlawed on the basis of its political ideology. We have spent 170 years in this country on the basis that democracy is strong enough to stand up and fight against the inroads of any ideology."
The governor's silliness needs to be stopped before he further wrecks the public education system of California.
PKFA's "Findings and Declarations" section is a collection of unsubstantiated claims about the teaching profession (unfortunately, most initiatives have this type of section). The PKFA makes it sound as if teachers make all the decisions in teaching assignments. This claim is so silly, it would make one laugh if the charge were not so serious. If the claims are true in any school district, then those districts and their boards need to fix the problem if it is seen as a problem. A state-mandated solution is not a cure-all for all districts in this particular case.
PKFA has several serious problems, but the two most glaring ones deal with tenure and political association. PKFA would not do away with tenure, but those who are granted tenure at the end of this fiscal year would actually lose it under the proposed changes. Thus, the rules of the game are being changed after the outcome has been decided so that the outcome may be changed. Also, the proposed change to a five-year plan (sounds like something Stalin would have liked) for tenure relies on the silliness found in The Excellence in Teaching Act upon which I commented yesterday.
Further, the proposed new law has several subsections which makes firing a teacher a matter of personal whim. For example, one cause for firing a "permanent" employee reads, "evident unfitness for service." What is "evident unfitness?" The PKFA fails to address this point.
One can also be fired for "immoral of unprofessional conduct." Immoral? I certainly hope that administrators do not take to sitting outside of the confessionals of their Catholic employees to see who comes out. Immoral is not defined.
One can also be fired for "physical or mental condition unfitting him or her to instruct or associate with children." The governor seems to want to yank your job, health plan, and the plug in one pull. Once again, not providing specifics allows for people to be fired for minor infractions or problems. How can this possibly entice people to enter the profession or for young teachers to stay in it?
Speaking of old Uncle Joe, the new law would allow a permanent employee to be fired if there was a "knowing membership by the employee in the Communist Party." The governor seems to want to borrow from the ideas of both Joes: Stalin and McCarthy. Politics does indeed make strange bedfellows.
Ronald Reagan, a former governor of California who had much better poltical judgement than our current one, testified before the HUAC during the red scare about communists in the Screen Actors Guild when he was president of that organization. Although he was a strong anti-communist (as am I), he did not think that the party should be outlawed. In fact, his position can be traced to Madison's position on how our system of government deals with factions. Below is part of Reagan's testimony (which can also be seen in the A&E Biography of him):
"So that fundamentally I would say in opposing those people that the best thing to do is to make democracy work. In the Screen Actors Guild we make it work by insuring everyone a vote and by keeping everyone informed. I believe that, as Thomas Jefferson put it, if all the American people know all of the facts they will never make a mistake.
Whether the party should be outlawed, I agree with the gentlemen that preceded me that that is a matter for the Government to decide. As a citizen I would hesitate, or not like, to see any political party outlawed on the basis of its political ideology. We have spent 170 years in this country on the basis that democracy is strong enough to stand up and fight against the inroads of any ideology."
The governor's silliness needs to be stopped before he further wrecks the public education system of California.
