Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Weintraub Misleads on Proposition 76
In today's Sacramento Bee (free subscritption required), Daniel Weintraub states the following:
If you think the people you elect to the Legislature and future governors should be allowed more leeway to set school budgets annually in accordance with the revenue that's coming in from taxes, you should probably vote for Proposition 76. If you prefer the status quo - setting school budgets by a strict formula in the state's constitution - you should probably vote against this measure.
What Weintraub fails to mention in his article is that if there is a fiscal crisis in the future, the governor would have the ultimate say in the budget, thus trashing the idea that the legislature has the power of the purse.
The fact that California would have a different concept of the separation of powers than the one that exists in Washington D.C. is neither new nor wrong. The October 2005 issue of the California Bar Journal shows just that in its coverage of Marine Forests Soceity v. California Coastal Commission (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1 where the appointment powers for commissions has been shown to be constitutional in California when it is shared by the governor and the legislature. The question in Proposition 76 is whether or not the power should be shared except when the legsislature and the governor cannot agree on mid-year budget cuts when revenues do not meet expectations. Proposition 76 would allow the governor to ignore the wishes of the duly elected legislature to cut what he (or she) wants. That is a bad idea on its face as it allows for no check on the governor's power.
Proposition 76 needs to be rewritten if it is going to actually be helpful and keep with the traditions that have been shown to work in our great nation and state. The idea of tossing out constitutional mandates so that our elected officials can actually do their jobs is a good one. Allowing a governor to have unchecked financial power in economic downturns is a posion pill that the voters should not swallow.
If you think the people you elect to the Legislature and future governors should be allowed more leeway to set school budgets annually in accordance with the revenue that's coming in from taxes, you should probably vote for Proposition 76. If you prefer the status quo - setting school budgets by a strict formula in the state's constitution - you should probably vote against this measure.
What Weintraub fails to mention in his article is that if there is a fiscal crisis in the future, the governor would have the ultimate say in the budget, thus trashing the idea that the legislature has the power of the purse.
The fact that California would have a different concept of the separation of powers than the one that exists in Washington D.C. is neither new nor wrong. The October 2005 issue of the California Bar Journal shows just that in its coverage of Marine Forests Soceity v. California Coastal Commission (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1 where the appointment powers for commissions has been shown to be constitutional in California when it is shared by the governor and the legislature. The question in Proposition 76 is whether or not the power should be shared except when the legsislature and the governor cannot agree on mid-year budget cuts when revenues do not meet expectations. Proposition 76 would allow the governor to ignore the wishes of the duly elected legislature to cut what he (or she) wants. That is a bad idea on its face as it allows for no check on the governor's power.
Proposition 76 needs to be rewritten if it is going to actually be helpful and keep with the traditions that have been shown to work in our great nation and state. The idea of tossing out constitutional mandates so that our elected officials can actually do their jobs is a good one. Allowing a governor to have unchecked financial power in economic downturns is a posion pill that the voters should not swallow.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
It's a Quagmire!
Yes, the constitution was rejected in Iraq and the Marines are burning babies somewhere while Haliburton rapes the Iraqi countryside... blah, blah, blah....
Or, maybe we can start reading posts like this one, and ignore the biased MSM and the blowhards of AirAmerica who blow every negative out of proportion while ignoring the positive in Iraq.
Or, maybe we can start reading posts like this one, and ignore the biased MSM and the blowhards of AirAmerica who blow every negative out of proportion while ignoring the positive in Iraq.
The Anti-education Staw Man?
Much of the right of the blogosphere and talk radio in California seems to be enamored with the recent declaration by the controller of the California Teachers' Association that the funds of the three-year $60.00 assessment has already been spent, and that additional monies need to be borrowed or else the CTA will cease to exist.
Is this the Propositional Straw Man? In other words, will this issue now be used by those supporting the governor's bad ideas found in the special election to bash the CTA and "prove" that the CTA is a deceptive organization that "obviously lies about everything" that it doesn't like? This straw man seems to have been rolled out since the governor and his supporters have provided no evidence that tenure or the current removal process is actually hampering student achievement.
On a side note, the special assessment is not a tax like many of its opponents claim. The power to tax is a governmental power. The special assessment was approved by the duly elected representatives of the CTA membership. If you are a CTA member and do not like it, then vote for new representatives or run yourself!
This is not to say that CTA does not have some explaining to do! The potential financial crisis for the CTA and its members is very real. However, it is a different issue and should not be confused with the debate about what is needed to reform public education in California for the great good of all.
Is this the Propositional Straw Man? In other words, will this issue now be used by those supporting the governor's bad ideas found in the special election to bash the CTA and "prove" that the CTA is a deceptive organization that "obviously lies about everything" that it doesn't like? This straw man seems to have been rolled out since the governor and his supporters have provided no evidence that tenure or the current removal process is actually hampering student achievement.
On a side note, the special assessment is not a tax like many of its opponents claim. The power to tax is a governmental power. The special assessment was approved by the duly elected representatives of the CTA membership. If you are a CTA member and do not like it, then vote for new representatives or run yourself!
This is not to say that CTA does not have some explaining to do! The potential financial crisis for the CTA and its members is very real. However, it is a different issue and should not be confused with the debate about what is needed to reform public education in California for the great good of all.
War on Life
My school is proposing that we collect money during the Halloween season for UNICEF. I immediately balked at this upon receiving the information this morning as UNICEF supports abortion.
On a more positive note, Roe of Roe v. Wade recently addressed L.A. Hispanic Catholics.
On a more positive note, Roe of Roe v. Wade recently addressed L.A. Hispanic Catholics.
Leftist Nonsense
Well, the left isn't helping education much either with their theatrics. The goofiest ones are convinced that there is an evil Bush regime in control, and, well, they are going to something about it!
Like, what, you may be asking?
By not working and not going to school on November 2! Yes, students, you can do your Marxist best and resist (OR DIE!)! AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Such silly drama!
Like, what, you may be asking?
By not working and not going to school on November 2! Yes, students, you can do your Marxist best and resist (OR DIE!)! AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Such silly drama!
What Proposition Will Fix This?
Our district's textbook budget just suffered a $250,000 cut when we need to buy new books in the K-8 cycle.
Our district is not alone.
What, exactly, is the actor doing to fix this mess?
Our district is not alone.
What, exactly, is the actor doing to fix this mess?
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Hugh the Ant
The man has lost his mind. Let's see... Hewitt posts that Rove backs the Miers nomination because she has been so involved with the process of judge selection and knows what the president wants.
The first President Bush was certainly loyal to President Reagan while the former was VP (even after whacking the latter in the primaries with "vodoo economics");however, the first President Bush was certainly notloyal to the Reagan legacy and Reagan's endorsement when Bush broke his campaign pledge and raised taxes.
Many of us voted for the first President Bush since we knew we had no other reasonable choice. That is definitely not the case with the Miers nomination. At least we knew the potential negatives as well as the positives (for the most part) of the first Bush. We know no such things about Miers.
Pehaps Hewitt should change his theme song to "the ants go marching one by one, hurrah, hurrah..." because that is the tune he is marching to "down, down into the ground" to get out of the conservative rain!
The first President Bush was certainly loyal to President Reagan while the former was VP (even after whacking the latter in the primaries with "vodoo economics");however, the first President Bush was certainly notloyal to the Reagan legacy and Reagan's endorsement when Bush broke his campaign pledge and raised taxes.
Many of us voted for the first President Bush since we knew we had no other reasonable choice. That is definitely not the case with the Miers nomination. At least we knew the potential negatives as well as the positives (for the most part) of the first Bush. We know no such things about Miers.
Pehaps Hewitt should change his theme song to "the ants go marching one by one, hurrah, hurrah..." because that is the tune he is marching to "down, down into the ground" to get out of the conservative rain!
Hewitt vs. Neuhaus
We all know that Hugh Hewitt has smugly and firmly planted his feet in the shoes of loyalist hack for the White House. Just the other day, he was predicting not only confirmation for Miers, but conservative conversion for her. He was just as smug and certain about this as he was about finding WMDs in Iraq.
Then there is Fr. Neuhas' take on the issue in First Things:
I'm glad to see the Wall Street Journal weighing in, from an angle more sensible than that of the Interfaith Alliance, on the use of religion in promoting the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. A similar ploy was used when Justice Anthony Kennedy was nominated. Senator Jesse Helms said to Kennedy, "I think you know where I stand on abortion." Kennedy responded, "Indeed I do and I admire it. I am a practicing Catholic." We know what that means—or doesn't mean. Once he was on the court, Kennedy helped entrench the unlimited abortion license in the Casey decision of 1992, and has since "grown," as they say in Washington, in sundry other liberal directions. It is very good to know that Ms. Miers is born again, but that doesn't tell us a whole lot about her views on the legal protection of the unborn. As Dr. Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School, a Baptist institution, will remind us when he delivers FIRST THINGS annual Erasmus Lecture next week, the Southern Baptist Convention was still supporting Roe v. Wade as late as 1980, and many evangelicals have still not been converted to the pro-life position. It seems Ms. Miers is definitely pro-life, but that doesn't tell us how she would read the law with respect to abortion. As I said earlier, I expect Ms. Miers will not withdraw (and) her nomination will likely be confirmed by the Senate, and, if she turns out to be a constitutional textualist along the lines of Scalia and Thomas, the present row will soon be forgotten, with only wounded conservative egos to show for it. On the other hand, if...
I will go with the good Father on this one who, as a convert to Catholicism, has a better understanding of what is at stake than the one has turned from the complete Truth.
Then there is Fr. Neuhas' take on the issue in First Things:
I'm glad to see the Wall Street Journal weighing in, from an angle more sensible than that of the Interfaith Alliance, on the use of religion in promoting the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. A similar ploy was used when Justice Anthony Kennedy was nominated. Senator Jesse Helms said to Kennedy, "I think you know where I stand on abortion." Kennedy responded, "Indeed I do and I admire it. I am a practicing Catholic." We know what that means—or doesn't mean. Once he was on the court, Kennedy helped entrench the unlimited abortion license in the Casey decision of 1992, and has since "grown," as they say in Washington, in sundry other liberal directions. It is very good to know that Ms. Miers is born again, but that doesn't tell us a whole lot about her views on the legal protection of the unborn. As Dr. Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School, a Baptist institution, will remind us when he delivers FIRST THINGS annual Erasmus Lecture next week, the Southern Baptist Convention was still supporting Roe v. Wade as late as 1980, and many evangelicals have still not been converted to the pro-life position. It seems Ms. Miers is definitely pro-life, but that doesn't tell us how she would read the law with respect to abortion. As I said earlier, I expect Ms. Miers will not withdraw (and) her nomination will likely be confirmed by the Senate, and, if she turns out to be a constitutional textualist along the lines of Scalia and Thomas, the present row will soon be forgotten, with only wounded conservative egos to show for it. On the other hand, if...
I will go with the good Father on this one who, as a convert to Catholicism, has a better understanding of what is at stake than the one has turned from the complete Truth.
Learn to Drive
I have a saying that my wife, unfortunately for her, has heard way too many times,"If you don't know how to drive the vehicle, you shouldn't be allowed to drive the car!"
Now, that saying is not directed at my wife; rather she has to suffer hearing it while I scream at people driving by braille in their large SUVs. I am not against large SUVs, just the idiots who buy them but don't know how to drive them. These are the folks who cause accidents but aren't in them as the rest of us react to their poor driving.
The worst drivers appear to be those who own Hummers. Well, here is a place that they can go to get their faux-outdoor experience and to get that bad driving out of their systems... I hope. On second thought, maybe they will have such a good time that they will not come back! Of course, if they just want to learn how to drive that monstrosity, they should take a class offered by the folks who build the beast. PLEASE!
Now, that saying is not directed at my wife; rather she has to suffer hearing it while I scream at people driving by braille in their large SUVs. I am not against large SUVs, just the idiots who buy them but don't know how to drive them. These are the folks who cause accidents but aren't in them as the rest of us react to their poor driving.
The worst drivers appear to be those who own Hummers. Well, here is a place that they can go to get their faux-outdoor experience and to get that bad driving out of their systems... I hope. On second thought, maybe they will have such a good time that they will not come back! Of course, if they just want to learn how to drive that monstrosity, they should take a class offered by the folks who build the beast. PLEASE!
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Another Reason to Vote Against the Austrian's Plans
John McCain, the anti-conservative Republican, now supports the governor's plan.
Alexander Hamilton on Harriet Miers
In Federalist Paper #76, Hamilton wrote about the role of the Senate in its advise and consent capacity as follows:
To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity. In addition to this, it would be an efficacious source of stability in the administration.
President Bush has appointed someone who appears to fall into the category of "favoritism." Now, one can argue that this may be true in previous picks as well, and the Senate has confirmed them (to the bench or other offices). But two (or two thousand) wrongs don't make a right. For those of us who are strict constructionists, Hamilton speaks to us now"
"Just say,'no' to Harriet Miers."
To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity. In addition to this, it would be an efficacious source of stability in the administration.
President Bush has appointed someone who appears to fall into the category of "favoritism." Now, one can argue that this may be true in previous picks as well, and the Senate has confirmed them (to the bench or other offices). But two (or two thousand) wrongs don't make a right. For those of us who are strict constructionists, Hamilton speaks to us now"
"Just say,'no' to Harriet Miers."
The Face of God
The last couple of weeks at the house have been rough, especially for my lovely wife. The end came yesterday with the "official" miscarriage at about 11 weeks, although we have known for two weeks that the event was likely to occur.
When a personal tragedy hits, it is quite tempting to ask, "Where is God?" Or, to blame Him outright. I found the face of God in all of the people, family and friends, who have expressed their sympathy and empathy (I had no idea how many women have suffered with the same fate) from people of various religious backgrounds and affiliations. Your prayers have been a comfort to us all.
Yes, we have seen the face of God in all of your kind faces.
One of the teachers with whom I work and who has gone through the same traumatic experience, suggested that we plant a rose bush in memory of our lost child so that we will think of Faith Xavier whenever it blooms. I planted the bush shortly after the event yesterday morning. The variety I chose to plant was Angel Face.
God Bless and thank you all.
When a personal tragedy hits, it is quite tempting to ask, "Where is God?" Or, to blame Him outright. I found the face of God in all of the people, family and friends, who have expressed their sympathy and empathy (I had no idea how many women have suffered with the same fate) from people of various religious backgrounds and affiliations. Your prayers have been a comfort to us all.
Yes, we have seen the face of God in all of your kind faces.
One of the teachers with whom I work and who has gone through the same traumatic experience, suggested that we plant a rose bush in memory of our lost child so that we will think of Faith Xavier whenever it blooms. I planted the bush shortly after the event yesterday morning. The variety I chose to plant was Angel Face.
God Bless and thank you all.
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
Will v. Hewitt
Well, on one side, we have George Will in the Washington Post (free subscription required) who obviously is not gushing out the Bush talking points on the Miers.
Then we have party hack Hugh Hewitt who is marching along with the rest of the mouthpieces of the administration. In one of his posts, he delcared that Miers was a "solid B+ pick."
With very little information on her qualifications, it is obvious that Professor Hewitt is grading on a curve. I hope he is more rigorous at Chapman Law School.
Then we have party hack Hugh Hewitt who is marching along with the rest of the mouthpieces of the administration. In one of his posts, he delcared that Miers was a "solid B+ pick."
With very little information on her qualifications, it is obvious that Professor Hewitt is grading on a curve. I hope he is more rigorous at Chapman Law School.
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
Separation of Powers - Proposition 76
Does anyone remember Montesquieu? Does anyone remember the Federalist Papers? Does anyone in California remember that our state republican form of government is modeled after the Federal government and its three branches, separation of powers, and checks and balances?
Well, the folks who have brought you the dangerous Proposition 76 seem not to care one whit about the solid legal traditions of our country or our state.
Under the guise of trying to control the budget, Arnold and his troops have crafted a system that wrecks the idea that the power of the purse resides in the legislature. Now, when a Republican governor is in office, and if this proposition were to pass, it might mean that cuts would be made, I and many other Republicans would rejoice. But what happens when a Democrat resides in the governor's chair? Would that Democrat cut areas that are dear to Republicans (like police, prisons, etc.)?
Tampering with the separation of powers goes against the conservative principle of having too much power reside in the hands of one person. If the Republicans wish to sponsor an initiative that rids California of all pre-set spending so that the legislature could do the job it has been elected to do, I will happily sign on the dotted line even if it means gutting the pro-education Proposition 98. Unfortunately, this initiative is short-sighted and could cause more damage than it supposedly will fix.
Well, the folks who have brought you the dangerous Proposition 76 seem not to care one whit about the solid legal traditions of our country or our state.
Under the guise of trying to control the budget, Arnold and his troops have crafted a system that wrecks the idea that the power of the purse resides in the legislature. Now, when a Republican governor is in office, and if this proposition were to pass, it might mean that cuts would be made, I and many other Republicans would rejoice. But what happens when a Democrat resides in the governor's chair? Would that Democrat cut areas that are dear to Republicans (like police, prisons, etc.)?
Tampering with the separation of powers goes against the conservative principle of having too much power reside in the hands of one person. If the Republicans wish to sponsor an initiative that rids California of all pre-set spending so that the legislature could do the job it has been elected to do, I will happily sign on the dotted line even if it means gutting the pro-education Proposition 98. Unfortunately, this initiative is short-sighted and could cause more damage than it supposedly will fix.
Monday, October 03, 2005
Fire This Man!
Bad coach, bad, bad coach! Use your last time out and get your FG unit settled!
Okay, maybe not fire, but slap him around some!
Sheesh!
Okay, maybe not fire, but slap him around some!
Sheesh!
Thursday, September 29, 2005
In Search of Problem Teachers
This July article in the SF Chronicle shows that the Prop. 74 folks simply did not do their homework.
What is very interesting to note is that the California School Boards Association opposes 74, and they are the collection of districts that would supposedly benefit from 74. Makes you wonder if Arnold has any integrity at all.
What is very interesting to note is that the California School Boards Association opposes 74, and they are the collection of districts that would supposedly benefit from 74. Makes you wonder if Arnold has any integrity at all.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)