Tag Archive for 'giuliani'

Education Reform & Republican Presidential Candidates

I am a teacher in the public school system with an M.Ed from the University of Oregon. Over the last several years, I have seriously studied the American educational system and worked in it as a kindergarten and first grade teacher. These are my thoughts on the educational policy statements made by some Republican Candidates for President. I wanted to include all candidates in this article, however after three weeks of researching and writing it, I have decided to publish it as is.

Parents and teachers alike should look closely at candidates statements on educational policy. Many candidates make “feel good” statements offering little or no solution as to how they actually plan to implement their grand ideas for improving the state of public education. Additionally, candidates often have track records in other areas that set a precedent that suggests how they might handle or implement their educational policies. It is also important to remember that most people view education in one of two ways:

Education is the role of the state: the government is ultimately responsible for educating children, and as such is also responsible for the quality and regulation of education across the board: public schools, private schools, home-school laws. Thus, because the state has total authority, secular state values supersede parental values.

Education is the role of parents: a child’s guardians or parents are ultimately responsible for educating children, and as such are also responsible for the quality and regulation of their children’s education regardless of if they attend private, public, or home schools. Thus, because the parents have total authority, parental values supersede secular state values.

Rudy Giuliani
Giuliani claims he wants to reform the public school system by allowing parental choice via vouchers or charter schools (which are publicly funded and thus government controlled schools). These are not subject to the same regulations as other public schools, and there are a number of problems with them. For example, most students are unable to enroll in such a school as there are long waiting lists and the state controls how many charter schools can be created.

  • Real Actions: He recently created an “Educational Advisory Board” to work on school choice, although he claims that parents should be the ones making the choice on how to educate children. Creating an advisory board (such is the function of the Dept. of Education) is relatively harmless, although I fail to see how this board full of government people is a step towards parental choice and control (seems like creating more government bureaucracy to me.)
  • Guiliani has proposed to open schools on weekends for remedial students to catch up. This idea sounds a little backwards, especially considering how poor the schools were to begin with in New York. If the schools were not working for children attending them Monday through Friday, how will sending them for an additional day using the same methods make a difference?
  • He started a Charter Schools Initiative.
  • Guiliani also sought greater power and control over Schools. This means greater government and less local control as the legislation would have given power over to mayors instead of school boards, yikes!
  • Guiliani also created the Bilingual Education Task Force. This move also maintains the idea of reform coming down from the top levels of government, i.e. more centralized government control is the solution to failing schools. However, Giuliani does appear to at least be consistent in his statements.
  • He views education as a “civil rights” issue. This is NCLB language by the way, but, I’ve got to hand it to him on opposing the teachers unions, that takes some guts. In all, Guiliani talks some semi-interesting talk, but his actions or attempted actions don’t always match up in the end.

Mike Huckabee
Huckabee wants to release “Weapons of Mass Instruction” in arts and sciences and believes schools should be judged by “results” (does not say what these results should be based upon, standardized tests or what?). He takes credit for raising test scores as governor and claims to support parental choice, to want more charter schools and wants a “clear distinction” between federal and state roles in NCLB.”States must be allowed to develop their own benchmarks,” according to Huckabee. However, he is either grossly misinformed or he is just repeating republican rhetoric because states currently DO set their own standards under NCLB (that promise won’t be hard to achieve). As such, he supports NCLB as it stands today, which has significantly increased the role of the federal government in regulating and controlling schools - minimizing local control. Ultimately, NCLB will lead to federalized government schools that offer a nationally standard curriculum. Huckabee also claims to strongly support homeschoolers. He recently answered many questions regarding his educational policy. Huckabee does not believe that vouchers are practical and prefers improving public schools instead.

  • Real Actions: Passed the Omnibus Education Act 2003 in Arkansas which allowed the State to consolidate nearly 200 of the state’s 308 school districts as a way to afford a broader curriculum. This legislation effectively replaces local school boards and gives broader authority to the state.
  • Created the Smart Start, Smart Step, and Next Step programs, which put state selected facilitators in schools to help guide the principal and teachers in their professional development. From what I understand, these programs increase state control of teacher development and school wide goals as opposed to a teacher/principal himself choosing how to further their education.
  • He helped revise Arkansas’ public Charter School law in 1999. Charter schools are promoted as school choice, however, they are in fact a “faux choice” because of limited enrollment opportunities as well as the fact that they are public schools and cannot opt out of state control and state laws.
  • He supported the creation of Teacher-of-the-Year legislation which makes the teacher an ex-officio member of the state Board of Education and allows the teacher to travel across the state training others during the school year. Yes, that makes sense, if you have a good teacher, by all means pull them from the classroom to do state sponsored bureaucratic activities.
  • Huckabee raised teacher salaries and public school funds at the expense of taxpayers. Now, that’s nice but it is certainly not small government, nor is it supportive of true school choice as it simply reinforces the government monopoly on education.
  • Based on these kinds of actions, it’s really no surprise that the NEA has endorsed him. I happen to belong to this teacher’s union (as mandated by my state) and I know for a fact that this union believes that education is the role of the state, and is anti-homeschooling, anti-school choice and vouchers.
  • Huckabee signed and allowed Arkansas state legislature to pass new laws that were more restrictive for homeschooling families.
  • Huckabee opposed a legislative proposal by the Murphy Commission (a think-tank he started) to reform the education system and start a voucher system in the state of Arkansas. Huckabee may “believe” that parents should be able to make a choice, however, he certainly does not act on that belief.

Continue reading ‘Education Reform & Republican Presidential Candidates’

Liveblog: The Iowa GOP Debate

For the first time, we are going to liveblog today’s GOP debate (before the blog, a long time ago, there was this, this and this). It is the final debate before the Iowa Caucuses. The debate starts at 1:00 EST. Stuck at work? No cable? You like hacks like us? We’re going to bring the action live, with commentary. Tune back here around 2:00pm EST.

1:55 - Welcome everyone. Looking forward to getting this thing started.

1:57 - I wonder if John Cox is still ticked off that he isn’t invited to these debates.

1:59 - I’ll be watching via the fox news stream, where all the candidates seem to be practicing at being statues before the cameras come on. What terrible audio!

2:02 - Thank goodness, no discussion on Iraq.

2:03 - They seem to have a grip on the applause. Another positive. A well disciplined audience gives a lot more time to the candidates.

2:06 - Giuliani says that economic crisis is not a issue of national security - thank goodness. Ron Paul says it is, and ties it to foreign policy.

2:09 - Tancredo miraculously does not tie this question to immigration.

2:09 - Thompson speaks truth - the debt is going to really hurt future generations. Romney decides to sound upbeat and polished. His breathing and pacing is quite measured.

2:10 - Huckabee speaks to his socialistic/protectionst roots: a country is responsible for feeding itself, fueling itself and fighting for itself.

2:11 - Keyes argues to abolish the income tax, replace it with a sales tax.

2:12 - excellent question: what sacrifices should the American people make to relieve debt. Giuliani says its not the American people, it is the government. “Rather than relying on government as a nanny government, we should rely on people to make their own choices”

2:14 - Paul goes to foreign policy again… wow. “No need to sacrifice… we need more liberty!”

2:14 - Huckabee calls current healthcare model “intervention based” - is this a rip off of Paul. Are these geeky libertarian words becoming cool again?

2:16 - The tenor of this debate is so different than other debates. All the candidates sound like radicals compared to their former selves at the start of the campaign. They are demanding to “follow the constitution” and seeking to radically cut taxes and spending. Tancredo right now “don’t ask the government for womb to tomb protection.”

2:18 - Thompson says he’ll run debts for military and infrastructure. The guy that a lot of conservatives loved before he entered, is the biggest left-winger on the stage right now.

2:19 - Question: who is paying more than their “fair share” in taxes?

2:20 - the interviewer tries to interrupt Alan Keyes while he’s bouncing back and forth like a muppet - bad idea.

2:21 - Thompson is quite witty - would like to be rich like Romney so he doesn’t have to care about taxes.

2:22 - Ron Paul talks about the “inflation tax” as the “most evil of all taxes.” Iowa republicans say “wha?”

2:23 - free statement time! Wasn’t this supposed to be a debate. And now a round of commercials from the candidates…

2:25 - Paul asked about keeping foreign markets open while protecting American jobs. Paul talks about opening individual trade agreements, and fixing monetary problems. Again, probably over everyone’s head.

2:27 - Huckabee with another “three things” speech. How simple all our problems are! I’m surprised Huck doesn’t pull out the chalkboard.

2:28 - McCain - “I’m the biggest free-trader” Ha! But then makes a bold point about eliminating subsidies for farms. Guy has gusto!

2:30 - Tancredo: “NAFTA is a disaster” - here he goes on immigration now. Hits up on national sovereignty also. Duncan Hunter, peaked eyebrow and all, “trade deals are business deals between nations” - awesome!

2:32 - Paul: “We have no chance if we don’t restrain the government.” Thomspson talks about how afraid we all should be about terrorists.

2:33 - Thompson fights the host and wins some applause. Anarchy has now broken out. Everyone talks about global warming at once.

2:34 - Giuliani: climate change is real. Everyone else doesn’t want to answer the question, but they all want to speak. Such are the quandries of politicians.

2:36 - Keyes started out with a great moment after the anarchy… then goes on a rant unrelated to global warming. He’s waddling again. He’s unstoppable. Thompson just makes fun of him. Best debate ever!

2:38 - Huckster: “We don’t own this earth.” I think someone just started humming “Imagine.”

2:39 - Huck: “Let the government be the marketplace and we’ll create the demand that lowers the price.” This guy is insane.

2:40 - Tancredo makes the best statement of the season on global warming - the government has no idea how to set mandates, they have no clue what they are doing. I trust the market ore than the government.

2:42 - Huckabee cites the founding fathers. Yes, they really would have loved that last statement on making the government the market.

2:42 - Going to education now. Let’s see if anyone can tie it to terrorism. Go!

2:44 - Giuliani calls current education model a “government command” model. Duncan Hunter tells campfire stories about education as a response. “Let’s inspire them to reach for the stars.”

2:47 - Romney wants the fed to be like his state program - give free tuition to students in the top 25% of graduate exams.

2:48 - Huck says that education should be a state issue, and then says that the federal government. Huckabee says to release “weapons of mass instruction.”

2:49 - Keyes is fighting the host and wins. Get’s 30 seconds, and demands one minute. This lady is going to get fired. Claims he’s being ignored. He uses his time to preach. There goes the bobbing. This guy should never be at another debate again.

2:50 - Back to Paul, who politely waited for Keyes to stop babbling. Wants to get rid ofDept. of Education and give tax credits to teachers and encourage homeschooling. Wants parents to have control again. Very strong answer - first for Paul on the night.

2:52 - Thompson calls out the NEA. Have fun swimming with the fishies!

2:53 - Tancredo gives a strong answer and gets applause attacking Huckabee. Nice one! Huckabee gives back cool word-twist: “communicator in chief.”

2:55 - Romney attacks the Union too, but he’s got an army of Mormons to fight for him. Thompson only has a bunch of actors on his team.

2:57: Duncan Hunter: “The sky is falling!” Talks about all the potential enemies we could have and how we should strengthen the military.

2:58 - Paul, in one year, would end the war and reestablish diplomatic relation.

3:00 - first mention of “radical Islam” - took a whole hour. Astounding!

3:01 - Romney is ready for universal health care. Huck says that the president should be “a president of all the united states.” Does this guy ever say anything of substance?

3:02 - Keyes is probably the only motivational speaker that can hold a flame to Huckabee. Talks over the host again. Still going… Still going…

3:05 - Keyes plugs his “political army of america’s revival.” Only has to be reminded to shut-up once.

3:07 - Video time.

3:09 - Keyes attacks Romney about flip-flopping. Then says that our creator is more important than the constitution. Attacks Giuliani. Is asked to shut-up twice.

3:12 - Thompson says that the intelligence and military has been “neglected” and that is why no one trusts their reports. Says we need to rely on other country’s intelligence.

3:13 - More videos.

3:14 - Huckabee asked about examples in healthcare and education. Guy is quick witted. Takes the golden rule and applies it to health care. Missed the last bit - as my internet broke and is restarting.

3:19 - Tancredo grilled on foreign policy. Says debate can be narrowed to the idea that we can’t leave Iraq, but we can stop being the police-force in Iraq.

3:20 - Paul grilled on how in the world he’s going to do all this stuff. Other candidates laugh. “Freedom is unifying,” says Paul. Claims that he has the ability to unify congress. Me thinks not.

3:23 - New years’ resolution time. Keyes dodges it. McCain asks for unity. Huck says he’ll be careful about what he says. Romney, wants to “come together.” Thompson wants to be a better man. Tancredo actually answers, by saying Huckabee is poor on immigration, Paul says follow the constitution, Hunter says to buy american, and Giuliani says we should have a sense of optimism.

3:25 - Debate is over.

Weekly Links: God Ordains Huckabee, Price Controls are Cool Again

God Strikes Again
At Liberty University, Mike Huckabee basically claims that he’s getting a helping hand from God.

God must really be wanting a smoking ban and a national sales tax. Naturally of course, we all thought God was already voting for Giuliani, seeing as how he wants all those terrorists dead.

Price Controls Are Back
Welcome back price controls, we missed you! George Bush has decided to freeze interest rates to “help out” poor people of course. But this rhetoric is not to be confused with the “save our economy” talk as well - isn’t it nice when these two things magically line up. Of course, no one is talking about the fact that interest rates were dramatically lowered in 2001 and 2002, likely well below market levels causing the very malinvestment that we are paying for today. Unintended consequences are already being predicted.

More Politics
John Edwards’ latest ad says the systems is rigged against you. (video)

Matthew Yglesias says Mitt Romney’s problem is that he did not decide to flip-flop on religion by abandoning his Mormon faith for something more palatable to the Republican base.

In Iraq, “The size of the corruption exceeds the imagination”.

A timeline has just been created of significant acts by the Bush Administration to curtail civil liberties and privacy rights.

Watch what you say on this and other blogs - you may be arrested.

An application for analyzing political values: http://idealog.org/

In Addition
Chris Tilling asks what “proof-texting” means.

An interesting look at Pullman’s Hid Dark Materials trilogy (you know, what the movie Golden Compass is based on): link

The Dangers of Political Pragmatism

Generally in presidential elections, voters really aren’t ecstatic over either candidate A or B (yes, even if there were a C and a mythical third party, people still could care less). Instead, they cast their vote based on who will likely not screw it up the most.

This election is no different - if Clinton and Giuliani win out, we will see republicans likely tossing out more than half of their major ideals to vote for a guy who, relative to the emblematic republicans of old - looks like Chairman Mao.

Why in the world do they do this?

The answer is pragmatism. Republicans see Clinton as a rabid, feminist, socialistic… well, Clinton. So even though they are actually voting for an anti-gun, pro-choice, pro-taxer, big spending, illegal immigration supporting, big-government politician - it’s ok because the pragmatic alternative is supporting Hillary. Forget the fact that, for all intents and purposes, they are voting for a democrat in everything but name.

Ironically, these people openly talk about why they are sorely disappointed with George W. Bush’s big-government legacy, as though they totally forgot that Bush openly ran as a big-government conservative. His immigration stance, spending-philosophy, government health care and big-government education program were all out in the open in both 2000 and 2004 - but republicans were terrified of Al Gore and John Kerry. Again, pragmatism.

Where Strategic Thinking Goes to Die
This is the ultimate danger of such a voting philosophy - pragmatism is only good for one battle - one moment in the thousands of moments of A versus B. When we elect a president, for example, we aren’t picking a winner and then everyone goes home. They stay in office for at least four years - and they do all the irresponsible things that we ignorantly hoped they wouldn’t do, but blatantly indicated they would.

As it has been said before - the lesser of two evils is still evil. And pragmatism is not a strategy -it’s suicide. Death by hanging or by jumping off a cliff?

Genuine strategy, the kind that is above base pragmatism, takes into account total wins and losses in each battle, and attempts to gain victory in the end. In other words - it’s not the end of the world if one battle is lost!

The candidate that a voter actually likes may be in tenth place, or in some obscure party which has no chance of winning. Of course, the battle will certainly be lost and the candidate will be soundly defeated - but that is one less person choosing not to play the game when the rules are stacked against them. It’s one more kid picking up their ball, and going home. Eventually, the only ones left are the bullies and thugs, and their threats and lies are exposed for the world to see.

That is the moral victory - and yes, even in amoral politics there are moral victories - the size of both A and B’s electorate and donation base just got smaller. Eventually, and maybe it takes twenty years, the politicians realize that a good number of people are actually voting on principles and not pragmatism and adjust accordingly. Now that would be real change!

The Motivation for Pragmatism is Fear
Are pragmatists afraid? Yes. They get caught up in every election - which is built up by both A and B - that this is the defining battle between the two sides. They and their pundits will say that compromise is essential, because there is just too much at stake. If you don’t vote for A, B will raise your taxes, socialize your health care and make you use lightbulbs that cost $400 a piece. But if you don’t vote for B, A will instate a draft, round up the Muslims and start arresting you for jaywalking.

It’s fear people. The heart of pragmatism exposed.

How to Break the Cycle
In choosing pragmatism, the only safeguard built into the plurality system is neutered: idealism. When democrats, for example, who overwhelmingly oppose the war, pick Clinton who has no qualms about keeping troops in Iraq another five years - they are saying that they don’t really care about ending the war. In the next congressional election, democratic candidates are going to be more moderate on that issue because they know they can win without being an ideologue. Eventually, ending the war gradually fades from the platform.

However, if Giuliani gets elected, then the democrats in the congressional elections react strongly against the war - and win - because that’s what the democratic electorate really wants. In other words, even though it’s only in baby steps, the parties are gradually shaped back into what people actually want them to be, and not what they are willing to settle for to prevent that other crazy party from getting power.

Is all of this even realistic? Probably not. People will go on, voting for their own destruction, until the whole thing breaks (if it isn’t there already). But the vision should be held, because even when this country finally breaks beyond repair, a new one is going to have to be built from scratch.


Archives

You are currently browsing the Zeal For Truth weblog archives for 'giuliani' tag.

You are currently browsing the Zeal For Truth weblog archives for 'giuliani' tag.

October 2008
M T W T F S S
« Sep    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

You are currently browsing the Zeal For Truth weblog archives for 'giuliani' tag.