Wis GOP hits new low (is that even possible...?)

Apparently lying to senior citizens isn't enough for supporters of Tommy Thompson in his campaign for Wisconsin's US Senate seat.  Now, someone on his behalf is sending recorded calls to senior citizens in Washington County and using their individual doctor's name, saying that Obama's Affordable Health Care Act may prevent them from ever being treated by their doctor again.  And then callers are reminded to vote for Tommy Thompson.

Seriously?  Is that all you got, Tommy?  Trying to scare seniors into voting for you?  Why not just say that "death squads" will take care of seniors under Obamacare? (oh, wait, that's right, the GOP said that already...).

The clinic and doctor in question vehemently denied any association with the calls and uncategorically stated that neither the doctor nor clinic endorses or has endorsed any candidate.  Oh, by the way, a clinic employee said they had also received a call from someone who got the same call using Romney's name.

Very, very classy, GOP.

Real-life effects of WIS GOP on education

Now that the rhetoric has died down regarding Walker's union-busting here in Wisconsin, here's how it has affected me--a teacher--my students, and my school. 

The moment Walker's Act 10 took effect, my school board froze salaries, changed the upcoming school calendar (which had been agreed upon with the union a couple months earlier), canceled already scheduled, out-of-school-day continuing education for its staff, created a grievance procedure that is, in effect, settled by the district superintendent or a district-selected third party, instituted health care changes without real input from the insured, and, as of yet, six weeks into the school year, has not provided a handbook with conditions of employment to its teachers.

Despite Walker's declarations that districts will save money (despite state funding cuts), our district has eliminated some aide positions, sacrificed some curriculum updating, and reduced staff development opportunities.

As a result of district changes, my teaching time has increased, my prep time has decreased, and there are new policies to provide more and daily information on student progress and lessons (the added "transparency" will take me an estimated 30+ minutes per day, with no apparent link to improving student learning).  There are less services for students requiring additional reading help, and no specific plans or staff for students demonstrating severe behavioral problems.

My salary, including new health care deductibles as well as pension and health care payments, is down about 10%, while new state mandates require more actual work in the classroom including more identification, specific work with, and documentation for students who are below level.

Some parents, now that our state government has led the way in calling teachers (or their representatives) greedy, slobs, and thugs, voice similar opinions.  I documented in an earlier post parents cursing and hurling insults at teachers as we walked down the street in our town in a show of non-confrontational solidarity. When the local parent-teacher group's budget revealed a thank you gift for teachers at Christmastime, one parent rolled her eyes and said, "You've got to be kidding me."

And upcoming changes (should we ever be provided a handbook), will very possibly include a "pool of money" for teacher salaries, from which the subjectively determined "better" teachers will score more than their subjectively-judged "lesser" peers.  For all the district initiatives and admonitions to promote collaboration, pitting colleague against colleague for their wages certainly doesn't seem like a very collaborative or efficient or wise thing to do.

Lastly, I have been advised by a third party consultant that continuing a blog reporting my district's policies or providing criticism of state government policies so ardently backed by the locals--and identifying myself with my real name, background, or photo--could actually come back to haunt me in terms of disciplinary action (now that I may no longer have a union).

And all these individual concerns don't even include the low-income families here that are affected by cuts to programs they may utilize, or those that may not be able/willing to vote because of new voter ID laws, or a government that changes laws to suit personal agendas or kowtow to businesses at the expense of those in need, or changes in environmental policies that affect everyone's quality of life, or the deep and abiding breach of trust between a people and its elected government.

I'm unsure whether I will continue this blog.  If so, it will be under an assumed name (as advised by the previously mentioned consultant).  There are many wonderful blogs out there fighting this good fight, and I have yet to determine, with the added responsibilities and scrutiny of my job, if I have the ability to do this justice.  Until then, my state senator Grothman is still (as I have termed him before) a major d-bag, and my governor is still a liar.

Thanks for visiting over the last year.

And recall Walker.

Bad time for Bad/No Internet

Personal note: I'm having trouble finding reliable Internet service where I'm at to adequately research and post new info on this blog.  Until my next post, please continue to visit lefty blogs-Wisconsin and the scores of pro-Wisconsin sites as we count down to Senate recalls later this summer.  Thanks.  --Curt (Teacher in Cheeseland)

Predicting WI's future: GOP's b.s. claim--Vouchers work!

At this time next year, Wisconsin's Republicans will shout from the rooftops, "SEE?!!  Vouchers work!"  The numbers may look that way, but it will merely be more incredible spin from the right to their incredibly gullible backers.

Don't believe it.  It's garbage--just a natural function of the way Walker has carefully crafted the state's new private school voucher system.  Voucher (choice) school scores will go up, and public school scores will go down, but the Republicans will build their case by ignoring three vital factors.

1) Vouchers were originally set up to provide economically-disadvantaged students the chance to attend private schools, and theoretically, receive a better educational fit than they could from a public school. Results show that students from such disadvantaged backgrounds have performed much lower academically than their non-disadvantaged peers.  Compared to similarily disadvantaged students (those that receive free or reduced lunch) in public schools, choice school students generally performed the same or worse than their public school counterparts on state tests in 2010-11, the first year choice schools were even required to take the same assessments. Now, with an unlimited number of Racine and Milwaukee students from more economically-sound homes able to use vouchers thanks to new state budget provisions (the income level requirement for a family of four went from $39,111 to $74,050, if headed by a married couple), such students will tend to skew the results upward, while economically-disadvantaged students--the students in most need--will still founder. 

2) In 2010-11, about 20% of the student population of Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) had special needs.  During that same year, voucher schools in Milwaukee self-reported that 1.6% (that's one-point-six) of their students had special needs.  A lawsuit from the ACLU details these discrepencies, as well as includes alleged examples of private schools dissuading students with special needs from attending their schools.  Theoretically, then, private voucher schools can more likely cherry-pick the students that would do well in their schools, and more easily rid themselves of students that don't make the grade (including behaviorally-and cognitively-challenged children).  And, based on my conversations with private voucher school personnel, they do just that.

3) Because of additional resources and personnel required, students with special needs require more money to educate than do their peers.  With private voucher schools having fewer such students, and public schools having their large numbers of the same, thanks to Walker's budget, public education is expected to lose $1.68 billion in revenue authority and $835 million in state school aid over the next two years, according to the Dept. of Public Instruction and the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.  That means much less money for public schools, while still being required to provide more services than private voucher schools.  Do the math.  Which schools do you think have a fair shot at improving their test scores? 

An excellent example of the challenges that are faced even in urban-based, private voucher schools appears in Sunday's Journal Sentinel via Alan Borsuk. The article details the troubles at CEO Leadership Academy in Milwaukee, a private voucher (choice) school that seems to have a lot going for it--including the guiding hand of big-time choice advocate and former MPS Superintendent Howard Fuller.  Real-world circumstances in students' lives at CEO make large-scale success difficult.  So much so, the private voucher school will become a charter school , authorized by Milwaukee city government, and thus increasing its yearly per-student voucher payment from $6442 to $7445, because more funds are needed to try to effectively reach these students.

These problems don't even cover not having state-directed curriculum, employing teachers without teaching certification (they just need Bachelor's degrees--sect. 119.23-- with no training in teaching methods or the study of how children learn), requiring no educator background checks, dividing community by diminishing the importance of a neighborhood public school, and the possibility that Walker's veto pen (or his Legislature's backdoor dealings) will surreptitiously include even more cities in this attempt to destroy public education and, most vile of all, put disadvantaged urban youths at even more disadvantage.

More funding will be taken from public schools and given to private schools through the voucher program. State Superintendent Tony Evers calls such expansion of the voucher system "morally wrong."

And it is.

But, mark my words, next year, Wisconsin Republicans will say vouchers work.  And it may seem that way.

But not to the kids who need it most.


Photo from FoxNews

WI GOP Senate: Dissing the Dems, education, and "forsaking" the next generation

Like ducks at a shooting gallery, Democratic amendments to the Walker budget--this time in the Senate--are being shot down one after another (watch the carnage at WisEye.org).   Yesterday (and early this morning) Assembly Democrats went 0 for about 40 in getting any amendments into the budget.  Now it's the Senate's turn.  So far, the first amendment (read highlights here), which included repealing provisions that loosen child labor laws, was tabled by GOP Senators.

It was the second amendment, though, that brought the declarations of Sen. Robert Jauch (D-Poplar) that as far as responsibly educating the next generation the Republican majority was "forsaking them, forgetting them," calling the Republican plan the "most anti-education budget" in the history of the state.

Instead of the unfathomable $800+ million cuts to education, the second amendment asked for repeal of expansion of choice/vouchers, restoring $356 million to K-12 funding, repealing elimination of funding for programs dealing with students with gifted and talented needs as well as numerous other useful and successful educational grants and programs.  Jauch provided examples from rural districts in which the educational gap will widen as a result of the new budget. He also suggested that $250+ million in corporate tax breaks could be better used in educating the children of people working in those corporations.

Jauch called out fellow Senator Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), saying she claims to have never voted for an anti-education budget, but, in essence, she was doing it up big time today.

Sen. Lena Taylor (D-Milwaukee) pointed out that with such cuts to education, Milwaukee would stand to lose $182 million, with none of Walker's "tools" to fix it because Milwaukee's teachers and elected officials came to their contractual agreement even before Scott Walker became governor.  Taylor claimed (and I can't see how anyone could dispute it), "We're setting up failure for the largest school district in the state."

Jauch said the amendment would counter the budget provisions that he termed, "Anti-public education, anti-teacher, and anti-Wisconsin values."

And then the GOP shot it down.

Info and quotes from Wis Eye Assembly Bill 40  televised debate, 6/16/11\

AMENDMENT UPDATE:
#3--Repeal changes to Badger/Family/SeniorCare: SHOT DOWN
#4--Increase transparency, reduce political appointees: SHOT DOWN
#5--Restore funding for commuity services: SHOT DOWN
#6--Increase funding for busing, pedestrian and bike projects: SHOT DOWN
#7--Restore funding for environmental issues (inc. recycling): SHOT DOWN
 #8--Repeal collective bargaining changes: SHOT DOWN
Visit the WisPolitics Budget Blog for great amendment summaries/updates

(10 PM): SENATE PASSES BUDGET (no amendments)

Unbelievable quotes from yet another unbelievable WI day

With Wisconsin's Supreme Court giving the go-ahead for the gutting of collective bargaining, there were plenty of unbelievable things popping out of the mouths of those in Madison on Tuesday.

"We conclude," reads the majority decision of the State Supreme Court's ruling on the collective bargaining bill, "that the Legislature did not violate the Wisconsin Constitution by the process it used." 
Rep. Peter Barca (D-Kenosha) said, "The majority of the Supreme Court is essentially saying that the Legislature is above the law."  And Barca's right.  Lower courts (including that which is presided over by Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi) were presented with evidence and had already said, "Yeah, you broke the open meetings law."  And for those that purport Sumi was merely advancing her own agenda, why would she have said the same bill could be passed immediately--with no questions--if the Republicans just posted the meeting properly and took another vote?  Or why would she have dismissed other cases against the bill's passage?

Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald's kid brother) said, "We didn't violate any rules.  We upheld the Constitution all the way through..." 
Maybe the Supreme Court agrees with you, Representative, but certainly Republicans violated the spirit of the law. Even the Walker-backing Milwaukee Journal Sentinel said in an earlier editorial that the Republican argument to the Supreme Court was "bizarre"--that even locked doors with but one member of the public as witness constituted an open meeting.  As was the meeting decried by the Walker-backing Wisconsin State Journal.

Alberta Darling weighed in with her latest version of "Here's why I should be recalled," by laying the mess in Madison on Sumi and not the Republicans: "(Sumi) stepped all over the people of Wisconsin.  You think of all the chaos and discord that's gone on in this Capitol as the result of her decision...To me, it was despicable."
Um, excuse me, Senator?  The chaos was called by Sumi's action? Not by Republicans stripping collective bargaining? Not by Republicans cutting funding to schools and social programs? Not by Republicans courting business in Wisconsin at the expense of its people?

Perhaps the most remarkable came in the written declaration of Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, pointedly directed at her majority-voting colleagues: (from JS Online):
... the majority has "reached a predetermined conclusion not based on the facts and the law, which undermines the majority's ultimate decision."  The majority justices "make their own findings of fact, mischaracterize the parties' arguments, misinterpret statutes, minimize (if not eliminate) Wisconsin constitutional guarantees, and misstate case law, appearing to silently overrule case law dating back to at least 1891."
In other words, she's accusing her colleagues of neglecting the proper execution of their duties--very strong words from the State's Chief Justice.  I'm guessing she wouldn't have uttered those words unless she had sound basis to do so.  For even more of Abrahamson's criticism, visit the Wisconsin State Journal article here.

Unbelievable.  And we're only six months into Walker's regime. Hopefully, it's halfway over.

Surprise! UPDATE:Supreme Court doesn't care whether open meetings were violated; budget repair is law

Fox 6 Milwaukee read from the statement of the Court (I guess that's what it was) that Republicans did NOT violate the open meetings law (Please see FINAL UPDATE below) --so I guess the collective bargaining bill is law.  Gosh, who'dathunk the WI Supreme Court (aka David Prosser and the Conservatives) would have ruled that way?

FINAL UPDATE: I'm not changing all the subsequent "Updates" here (to keep the integrity of what I've already posted, such as it is), but there obviously was some confusion about the Court's actions among a lot of sources.  As it stands right now, it appears that the Courts did say the committee of legislators was NOT subject to open meetings laws, making Sumi's actions (and those of any lower court) void. (JS Online)

UPDATE 1: The law was upheld because the Court said Sumi did not have authority to void it, so it will go into effect.  However, it still seems pretty evident that the Republicans likely violated the open meetings law, but, unfortunately, the Court didn't even consider that. 

Since the process of the bill's passage into law still is still sullied because of the undecided open meetings question (which actually Sumi said there was a violation), it makes it all the more laughable to read the hot air of Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald: "We've been saying since day one that Republicans passed the budget repair bill correctly, so frankly this isn't much of a surprise. We followed the law when the bill was passed, simple as that." (Wisconsin State Journal). 

Yeah, keep telling yourself that, Fitzgerald.


UPDATE, PART 2: It seems even the Court has trouble making a clear decision. 

From the Wisconsin State Journal:  The court, however, declined to step into the dispute over whether the March 9 conference committee meeting violated the state's open meetings law, leaving it to the Legislature to set its own rules.
"In the posting of notice that was done, the Legislature relied on its interpretation of its own rules of proceeding," the court wrote. "The court declines to review the validity of the procedure used to give notice of the joint committee on conference."

From WisPolitics: A brief description on the court's site said the court concluded the Legislature did not violate a provision in the Wisconsin Constitution that the doors of each house shall be open except when public welfare requires secrecy.

From JS Online: The court found a committee of lawmakers was not subject to the state's open meetings law, and so did not violate that law when they hastily approved the measure and made it possible for the Senate to take it up.

I'm sure it will be all sorted out, but it still smells.  There are numerous challenges outstanding against the collective bargaining law, including "bad faith" negotiating claims (which Walker knows something about  from his days as Milwaukee County Exec).  It's a long way from over.