Desultory Thoughts

I think it’s important to stay on top of important issues that might have an effect on our children. Many times this can be easily accomplished just by staying informed. State School Board Chairman Kim Burningham (who has recently announced that he will step down from his Chairman position but will continue to serve on the State School Board) was kind enough to send out an email to let us know that two such issues would be discussed at an Education Interim Committee meeting. I was unable to attend in person (they didn’t have time for public input anyhow) but I did take the time to listen to the audio. The following is a fairly detailed synopsis of the discussion regarding legislation that would effect the State School Board.

During an Education Interim Committee meeting on November 14, 2007, modifications to the State Board of Education were discussed. These modifications would expand the membership of the State Board of Education from 15 members to 29 members whose districts would then be identical to the State Senate districts and also would change the election procedures to a non-partisan board to a partisan board.

The question to the committee was, “Is there a sponsor for this bill?”

The answer was, “Right now it belongs to the Committee.”

More confusion: “Who do we address the questions to? Who is going to answer the questions?”

The answer – even more confusion: “The Wizard of Oz.”

“Let’s pull the curtain back then!”

They finally determined that Senator Stephenson and Dee Larsen (Associate General Counsel) would be able to answer questions regarding the proposed legislation.

Representative Holdaway asked, “Why are we doing this, number one? Number two, in my mind and in many people’s minds this system is not broken.”

Representative Wimmer’s answer (paraphrased): This dates back to the 2006 election. My wife will kill me for this, but I’m going to use her as an example. With the advent of early voting some people voted several weeks prior to the election day. Finding information about State School Board candidates was nearly impossible because they didn’t hold town hall meetings, that we could see. My wife ended up not voting for a State School Board member because she couldn’t find any information. This bill will make the school board members, who do a good job, and puts them through the process where they will make them more visible. As they go through this process there is much more initiative on their part to hold town hall meetings, to hold debates, to hold Meet the Candidate events so the people can see, so that this will shine a light for the public. I don’t see this as anything but good. They are not required in any way shape or form, to pick a political party. What it does is bring it to the people; bring it to the grass roots level where the citizens will be able to shine a light on the candidates and have more of a view of who they are going to vote for. That’s my reason and purpose for it.

Senator Jones then made a comment (paraphrased): I interview people for a living. People really don’t know who their school board members are and sometimes don’t even know who their Governor is. What the public is clamoring for right now is less partisanship, not more. And in my view this does nothing to improve the current system; nothing whatsoever. And in fact, I think it makes it worse because it would include so much more partisanship in the process. It would be incredibly unfortunate for a very capable person to campaign and have people vote against her just because she has Republican behind her name.

Rep. Hughes asked (paraphrased): How many people are aware of the process we have now? How many people are aware that we have a selection committee? That is a partisan selection committee. You have members of the business coalition and members of the education community and they’re coming together as a committee to decide who gets to put their name on a ballot. We can live and die by that process but I don’t know that everyone is going to see that process as being nonpartisan and free of politics. I think we have a process in place that I think could be revisited. He continued to explain that he thinks that the convention process is a great way to elect officials. Anyone that has to go through that kind of refiners fire make a candidate a better public servant. He thinks that the size of the school board districts are too big for people to have one-on-one conversations with constituents; the numbers are too big. This will help bring the process to the people and have them be more a part of who their State School Board members will be.

Senator Stephenson (paraphrased): I agree with this concept. It would elevate the stature of the State School Board. At the same time I realize that anything we pass in the coming session would not have an effect for the 2008 general session because the process is already in place. Should we consider this legislation in the coming session or put it on the interim study list for the 2008 interim and have a thorough hearing process and then bring it back in the 2009 session so that it would be implemented in time for the 2010 legislature. I don’t think it could currently take affect in the 2008 legislature.

Rep. Wimmer concluded (paraphrased): I’m tremendously supportive of what Senator Stephensen said. This is an issue that cannot go away. That’s the way I view it. I’ve received some emails that accuse me of being a partisan hack in this issue. This has zero to do with partisanship. This has everything to do with shining the light on those who represent us. I’ll bet that less than one half of one percent of the citizens can name their school board members. I understand that most of our citizens can’t name us, but those who go to the caucuses can, those who go to convention can, those who are involved in the processes can; they know who we are and they help dictate the government. Right now our state school board members are way too far away from the people they represent. Being that it could not take effect until 2010 I have no problem with Senator Stephens’ suggestion.

A motion was made to have the item formerly placed on the interim study list and that they direct staff to make sure that that happens.

The motion was not recognized but it was the general consensus that this bill would be studied further and brought up in a future legislative session (not 2008).

Representative Wimmer believes that this issue cannot go away, so we’ll certainly see this revisited in the future.

Stay tuned for a synopsis of the second issue that was discussed that could have an effect on our children.

Before the committee met I wrote a letter to my representative (James Gowans) who sits on the committee and argued that a partisan State School Board would not be in the best interest of our children.  I’m fairly certain he agrees, although I have not received a response to my email.  This is an issue I’ll certainly continue to follow.

Tonight was the first night that I was seen on TV speaking out against vouchers. Appearing in a commercial about such a hotly contested issue is not something to take lightly. I’m already getting a lot of phone calls, mostly from people who can’t believe they saw me on TV. Frankly, I can’t believe it either. But I did it because I truly believe that House Bill 148 has major flaws and loopholes.

I know by now “flaws and loopholes” sounds like rhetoric; and it would be if I didn’t know what the flaws and loopholes were. Hundreds of articles in as many blogs and newspapers have been written to identify these flaws and loopholes. I would like to concentrate on the two biggest, but before you read further I would suggest that you familiarize yourself with what exactly House Bill 148 [le.utah.gov] says. The following posts from Accountability First do a great job of breaking down the legal lingo.

1. So, what does House Bill 148 say?
2. What does House Bill 148 say (Part 2)?
3. What does House Bill 148 say (Part 3)?
4. What does House Bill 148 say (Part 4)?

Now that you’re more informed, which is the only way you can really make a good decision anyway, please read on for what I and others perceive to be the flaws and loopholes.

• Very Little Accountability
  • Private schools do not have to be accredited, and they can employ teachers without a college degree or a state license. Furthermore, voucher schools aren’t subject to any performance audit requirements, can discriminate based on religion or ability to pay and aren’t required to dismiss teachers for criminal conduct. [source: Utahns for Public Schools]
    • Supporting articles:
      • How many Mark Twains have we had?
      • Where is the accountability?
      • Teachers in New Ad Explain How Referendum 1 Fails Utah Families
• Does Not Help Most Children
  • With more than 96% of Utah children currently attending a public school, why are we diverting so much money to private schools where there are far fewer children in that category to be helped? Why aren’t we putting the money (and all this effort that we put into fighting for/against vouchers, for goodness sakes) into the public school system to make it better?When talking about money we have to look at the long term, not just the next five years where the districts are held “harmless”. What about when all private school students apply for vouchers in 18 years when the program is completely phased in? That’s when the damage is really done and that’s when it’s probably too late. That’s why the fight is happening now, before the “experiment” goes horribly wrong.By now, hopefully you realize that the way pro-voucher ads describe the money by using Oreo cookies is over-simplified. They look at the classroom and only consider the first five years. They don’t take into account the fixed costs that schools incur; the cost of the school, electricity, the half empty bus that still costs the same to drive and fill with gas, etc. It also doesn’t help that many low-income families couldn’t afford a private school even with a full $3000 “scholarship”. Especially if there is more than one student in the household.I recently attended a Legislative Convention where vouchers were a topic of discussion and a parent that was in attendance admitted that she sent one of her children to a private school and the other to a public school because she couldn’t afford to send both to a private school. However, despite the burden, she admitted that it was her choice (yes, we all have the choice) and as such also her obligation to incur the cost. Why aren’t more people as reasonable?
    • Supporting articles:
      • Is this realistic for Utah families?
      • Who exactly is supposed to benefit from vouchers?
      • Average tuition at Utah’s private schools is $4,520

There are more flaws and loopholes, but those are the biggest ones. I haven’t written anything tonight that 100 other bloggers haven’t already written. Nothing original about this, more of a summary if anything. But the last reason I choose not to support vouchers is not only because of the plain information and facts that are laid out before me, helping me see that it is indeed flawed, but all the other individuals and organizations that are advocating on behalf of our children and hoping Referendum 1 is voted down on November 6.

The latest happens to be one of our wonderful Representatives here in the Tooele area, Rhonda Menlove, who I admire and respect. An article was published today in the Tooele Transcript Bulletin that she authored and it reads as follows:

Utah voters have the unique opportunity to vote either for or against a referendum that would OK the use of state tax dollars to fund vouchers for school-age students to attend private schools.

Ironically, this would be the richest private school voucher program in the nation. In Utah, we pay the lowest amount in the nation per student to fund our public schools. We already have an underfunded public education system and an underfunded charter school system. Now we are being asked to start a new private education system, which will also be competing for tax dollars.

Much has been said about whether or not vouchers would save or cost local school districts. The answer depends upon the number of students who leave. This is a very important issue. However, the larger issue relates to whether or not this will cost taxpayers more. It will.

The state of Utah has two tax funds — the education fund and the general fund. Pro-voucher supporters are proud to say that vouchers will not take money from the education fund. That is true for now. Tax dollars that you pay will be taken from the general fund to pay for the vouchers. It is important to understand that all government functions outside of education are supported by tax dollars from the general fund. These services include transportation, highway patrol officers, senior citizen meals and programs, state agencies, parks and recreation, health and human services — just to mention a few.

The voucher program will grow each year by millions of dollars. Just think what those dollars could be spent on and how much we already invest in a public education system available for all students and funded by tax-payers. My vote is to use our tax dollars to improve what we have and not to start a new private education system. If parents want another choice, that is their option, but they, not the taxpayers, must pay for that choice.

In addition, there are very few private school options in Tooele County. If we choose to spend our tax dollars to send students to private schools, the bulk of the money will be spent along the Wasatch front, not in our county.

More than 95 percent of Utah’s school children attend public schools. We already have a state-funded education system for all students.

I was elected to be a steward of your tax dollars and to use them wisely. I take that job seriously. I will be voting against Referendum 1. I can’t tell you how to vote, but I strongly encourage you to cast your vote so your voice will be heard.

I’ve been meaning to write about my feelings on private school vouchers for quite some time now. This is a hot topic in Utah right now. I don’t want to bother with the history, although the history of the topic plays into the issue quite a bit so if you’d like to educate yourself on the topic, this blog [http://accountabilityfirst.blogspot.com] is a good place to read up on it starting with this post and then read on from there.

My point is to clear up some of the misconceptions that people may have about vouchers. Some misconceptions come from what seem like very reasonable commercials that I originally thought were funded by an organization called “Parents for Choice in Education” or PCE for short. But while researching the commercials for this post I found out that they were produced by Crowell Advertising for a client who wants to remain anonymous.[source: Salt Lake Tribune]

The commercials (I’ve only heard radio spots so far but you’ll no doubt see TV spots as November comes closer) take a single talking point, competition for example, and speak to it in terms of why it will be a good thing to help the students of Utah. I only remember two of the commercials specifically so those are the ones I will speak to, but I hear there were four; now probably just three because one of the spots was pulled, which I was glad to hear.

The first one I heard talked about how vouchers will create competition and competition is a good thing for business, right? Anyone hearing these commercials would naturally agree on the point that competition is good for business so you pretty much get trapped into agreeing with the commercial. Pretty clever. In reality, competition when it comes to public schools in Utah wouldn’t really make them better. They’re already great! Perfect? Of course not…there is always room for improvement. But improvement for our public schools comes not from pumping public money into private schools. How exactly is that going to make our public schools better? One of the biggest complaints I have about our public schools is that our teachers don’t get paid enough for how important their job is. The way this commercial portrays competition just doesn’t apply when it comes to public schools vs. private schools. The ad is misleading.

As I talk to people about vouchers competition is one of the points they bring up the most. Their argument is valid until they start looking at the big picture and realize that it just doesn’t apply in this case. It’s like talking to people about how rain is so good for plants, something we can all agree on, and then trying to apply the argument to pavement. No, I’m not trying to liken public schools unto pavement, but you get the idea. Maybe I’ll come up with a better analogy later.

The other commercial that I remember was one that I was surprised by. It was the one that quoted 3 Nephi 6:12 [lds.org] from the Book of Mormon. I couldn’t believe anyone could get away with that, and apparently they couldn’t because this is the one that they stopped playing. It didn’t seem right for them to use holy scripture for political purposes; something that the LDS church does not condone or allow. Some may have been tricked into thinking that vouchers were the popular opinion among those that believe in or read the Book of Mormon. And why not tailor your propaganda to a large majority of the State of Utah? Another clever and logical, but very sneaky ploy.

The last misconception that I’ll speak to tonight is concerning Charter Schools. It may be news to many of you that Charter Schools are not Private Schools! Yes, that’s right. Charter Schools are in fact Public Schools! So if you thought that parents could apply for a voucher to get their children into the latest Charter School that just opened up down the street, it’s not going to fly. This is a misconception that many people have and if they realized that 96% of Utah children attend public schools they may look at the issue a little different.

I know this is a very controversial subject and I should have left this one up to guest blogger D. Sirmize who has the luxury of posting anonymously on this blog. I don’t have that luxury but I’m the one with the strong opinion on this topic. D. Sirmize is still surmising, but we’ve talked at length on the subject and I welcome his comments.

Certainly my strong involvement in the PTA influences my opinion, but not everyone in the PTA agrees on this issue either, but it is the official stance of PTA that vouchers are not good for ALL of the children of Utah. And how can it be when there isn’t even a private school in all of the counties of Utah?

To set the record straight, I am not against private schools. They’re just not held accountable to the standards of the Utah State Office of Education so in this issue I have to believe that they shouldn’t be getting public tax money since it’s not up to the public as to what is taught. Private schools, especially in the area of Special Education, serve a wonderful role to our children and make a remarkable difference, but that doesn’t mean they deserve our tax dollars in the form of vouchers.

I’m glad the people have the opportunity to decide this issue in November and I hope you’ll join me in voting NO on Referendum 1.

Other informative reading on the subject:

National Education Association
Jeremy’s Jerimiad
The Wall of Separation
Utahns for Public Schools
Singing Bravely

I’ve been involved with the PTA since my daughter began school in September of last year. I attended my second Leadership Training Convention on Thursday and Friday which happens annually in May. Last year I was inspired by Ronda Rose, Legislative Vice President on the Utah PTA Executive Board. She finished up her term this year and she will be greatly missed because of her ability to speak from her heart, stand up for her convictions, and truly inspire! All the effort I’ve given and all the effort I will continue to give will be, in part, inspired by this amazing woman.

This year I was inspired by the last workshop that I attended; one that I really didn’t have time to attend and one that I had to leave half way through, but the half that I was privileged to listen to proved extremely worthwhile. The workshop was entitled Rachel’s Challenge and was brought about by the tragic events of April 20, 1999 when two students killed 12 students and 1 teacher at Columbine High School. Rachel Scott was the first to die that dreadful day. But little did anyone know, except Rachel herself as she foreshadowed in her diary, that her death would touch millions of hearts.

After her death an essay that she had written for a class was found under her bed. The message of the essay inspired the family to share and challenge people everywhere to take upon themselves Rachel’s “Codes of Life“. There are five of them and they gel nicely with my personal beliefs. But put in perspective of her life and tragic death, they suddenly took on new light and meaning. How this girl of 17 was able to have such vision is a miracle.

I listened eagerly as Dana Scott, Rachel’s sister, shared her story with us. The presentation consisted of heartfelt narration by Dana along with video clips and slide show pictures. It was the best powerpoint presentation I had ever seen. I found myself watching Dana as she watched the video clips and I tried to imagine what she must have felt losing her sister and nearly losing her brother. I watched as her emotions changed from sadness and fear during the news clips that showed the tragedy of that day to pure joy when they showed footage of her as a child, full of joy (incidentally her middle name) and life. I felt myself empathizing, which has only begun to happen in my life as of two years ago.

Several years ago I had a friend who had cancer. I wasn’t being especially empathetic as I talked about the situation with my wife in the car one day. She chastised me for my lack of a Christ-like attitude. At first I didn’t accept that I needed to change. My feeling was that difficulties happen in everyone’s life and that you just accept it and get over it; a complete lack of empathy. But the fact that I recognized that it was not Christ-like to have such an attitude led me to search out that attribute and I began to pray for it.

Several months passed and nothing major had changed despite my prayers. I still had a general sense of disdain for other people’s burdens but continued to search out a change of heart. It was a hot day on the 18th of July, 2005 where Clint (a friend and co-worker) and I found shade under the curved steps of the Salt Lake City Library. Just as we were finishing our 7-11 hot dogs we heard what sounded to me like a skate board hitting the pavement, but much louder. It wasn’t long before we both realized that something terrible had happened. We ran over to where the noise came from and much to our shock we found the body of a woman lying face up on the brick-lain sidewalk. I’ll spare you the rest of the details, but suffice it to say, the woman had jumped from the top of the library to her untimely death, despite what paramedics tried to do for her.

I was still unaware how much this event would effect my life. Clint and I tried to deal with it the best we could through humor, but as the days went on it haunted me. I found myself reading her obituary and all of the online comments from the online version on the local newspaper’s website to try and find out who this woman was and why she would do such a thing. Her name was Michelle Marie Macy and she was only 39 years old. She was a pharmacist and married, but had no children. She loved cats. She had family who loved her. I began to recognize feelings of empathy within myself, but the true change of heart came when I found the courage inside to pray for Michelle – a complete stranger. I prayed for her family and those who must be feeling the pain of her untimely passing. I experienced true compassion and charity during that prayer and when I finished I found that I was crying. The change of heart that I had been praying for had finally come!

I hope Michelle’s family will find comfort that her death was not in vain, just as Rachel’s death was not in vain. My life was touched and I learned a lesson that was long overdue. I hope that one day I can give Michelle a hug and tell her that I love her. I don’t know what circumstances she must have been going through to come to that point, but I know that Jesus Christ loves her. I know that her family loves her.

So it was with charity and love that I listened to the message that Rachel’s sister had to share. Her message did not fall on unfertile soil. I will take the message to heart, re-evaluate my life, and strive to improve myself. That is the Purpose of Life – day by day, week by week, year by year.