California Conservative

(Espanol aqui)

Laws for the liberal education of youth, especially of the lower class of people, are so extremely wise and useful, that, to a humane and generous mind, no expense for this purpose would be thought extravagant.

The antebellum South neglected to provide for the education of its people. Planters controlled the governmental revenues that could have financed public education, but they saw no need to do so. Their slaves were forbidden to learn; their own children were educated by private tutors or in exclusive and expensive private academies.

Forward

I am a consumer. I’m not a college graduate or an educator. My children and I attended public school. My daughter teaches public school. Before posting this paper, I asked for advice from several educators who possess more than a century of public education experience. Their most common critique was that I could have included more detailed information, examples, anecdotes, and analysis. While I agree that my effort could include thousands of pages, I see no point.

I’ve driven dozens of cars, motorcycles, and aircraft. I didn’t need an engineering degree or detailed analysis to know which vehicles were more reliable than others. Competition provides all the education one needs to make informed decisions. Consumers don’t need to know why some products do better than others. Besides, that’s a company problem, not a consumer problem.

On the other hand, politically-supported monopolies like the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) expect consumers to be patient as they respond to symptoms of their fundamental failure. Although millions of American children have needlessly suffered from our public schools, districts like LAUSD still expect parents to be patient while we pay more to get less. Except for a small percentage of success stories (driven mostly by vouchers, charter schools, and competition), America’s public schools are a proven failure. Until taxpayers and parents end the relationship between teacher unions and the politicians they buy, taxes will continue to rise and our children and country will continue to suffer.

Introduction

Most people don’t need others to warn them when milk is bad. There’s no need to sniff when it pours in green clumps. When milk goes bad, consumers switch to competing brands.

But when the milk company is a monopoly, consumers have no alternatives. Company officials blame, order studies and demand more money, responses that can never deliver fresh milk the way competition does. Within free market economies, when a brand of milk goes bad, consumers have other choices.

Free markets empower consumers that empower businesses. When service and products fail, the company suffers the burden to fix problems or go out of business.

Politicians empower monopolies that empower politicians. When services and products fail, consumers suffer the burden to resolve problems that never end. And when consumers suffer, monopolies can extort higher fees, often in the form of increased taxes.

Like protection rackets, unions strike to coerce taxpayers to pay more, often for less. Teacher unions spend millions to empower politicians who support unions, and attack those that threaten unions or the politicians they buy.

The Problem

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) employs thousands of outstanding teachers. While these educators are responsible to teach our children, they have little authority in their classrooms. Classes often include gang members and disruptive, abusive, or failing children that teachers have little control over. Under the pretext of inclusiveness, students are stuffed into packed classrooms to generate funding, distracting other children who want to learn and succeed.

School administrators who manage teachers have authority, but no responsibility to teach our children. LAUSD’s 363 page contract hardly mentions accountability, and while a third of our public school students will fail or drop out this year, less than a handful of LAUSD employees will be held accountable. I don’t blame teachers, for they are as much hostage to their unions as their students and parents.

The LAUSD monopoly controls 746,000 students, 80,000 employees, and a $13.4 billion annual budget, not including Federal Title One funds. (Romer) This translates into more than $18,000/yr per child - nine students for each employee. Of this $18K/yr, only $8,200 is spent on children: And LAUSD’s $10 billion health and welfare deficit will soon cut student spending down to $6,100! These numbers will get much worse if Rob Reiner’s push for public pre-schools (bad idea) and Phil Angelides’ proposal to double the number of public school counselors are passed.

Our children need a better education, not bigger unions and bureaucracies. California’s education history proves that the more parents and taxpayers pay, the less that our teachers and students receive.

Like the classic pyramid scheme, LAUSD requires increasing numbers of students, union members, and tax dollars to reward those at the top of the pyramid. Union bosses who manage the scheme pay off supporters (Democrats), and attack reformers as anti-child or anti-teacher.

Money is the lifeblood of politics. Union bosses coerce millions of dollars from their members and direct them toward politicians who empower the union bosses. I say coerce, because benefits like liability and medical insurance often require union membership, depending upon the union.

The United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA 43,000 members) are affiliated with the National Education Association (NEA 2.7 million members), American Federation of Teachers (AFT 1.3 million members), California Teachers Association (CTA 335,000 members), the California Federation of Teachers (CFT 120,000), and the AFL-CIO (9 million members in these affiliates). These unions are among the nation’s top soft-money political contributors.

Teacher unions endorse and fund politicians who empower unions and school boards that dictate who, when, how, and where our children attend school. Because of their control, California’s public schools are ranked near the bottom in the US and other countries. But unlike the politicians and union bosses who can afford to choose between public and private schools, the rest of us are stuck with the gangs, drugs and violence that typifies California’s public school system.

Working-class parents and children have no choice. Many of our children are shuffled from one dysfunctional school to the next, while union-protected lemon teachers are transferred between classrooms and schools. Parents declared unfit to raise children teach elementary school, while teachers who challenge school administrators and unions are punished with classrooms packed with the most dangerous and disruptive students. LAUSD’s best and brightest teachers often quit within five years, leaving our children with teachers who are rewarded not for performance, but for waiting long enough for their under-funded pensions to mature.

During the past three decades, achievement for the average public school student has been stagnant while per pupil spending, adjusted for inflation, has doubled. The Civil Rights Project of Harvard University describes many of California’s public schools as dropout factories. California’s minority graduation rates are abysmal, with a 57 percent dropout rate for blacks, 60 percent for Hispanics and 52 percent for American Indians.

Half of the black males who enter ninth grade receive a diploma four years later. California’s overall graduation rate is somewhere between 71-87 percent, but these averages are lower in Los Angeles.

There’s no incentive for principals to report dropouts because no one checks the data. Tracking dropouts would also draw more money from classrooms, generating more employees and union dues that enrich unions and weaken education.

Former industrial education teacher Richard Becker [Email] blames the inordinate focus on college that is presumed to be the only legitimate post-high school pursuit. Many capable students who don’t want jobs that require college become bored by the lack of relevance and drop out. Others succumb to the academic pressures by counselors to attend college, only to become one of the 40%-50% of freshmen who never graduate. Many of these dropouts later find options that require training in machining, auto technology and other vocational-technical fields that have required an academic high school education equal to college preparation, but then need remedial work to complete those courses. Vocational and technical options should reflect the identical status as college preparation, rather than something of a lesser stature.

The National Association of Manufacturers reports that manufacturing contributes to a quarter of the US economic output and offers incomes 20 percent higher than most American workers – including health benefits. Yet many of these jobs go unfilled because of our failing public education system, even though many of these jobs only require technical degrees or skill certificates.

One recent Ohio high school Valedictorian made news when he turned down college in favor of his first choice — automotive technician. High school students should be given that option rather than being pushed into college.

These are only some of the failures that are creating America’s growing underclass. According to Milton Friedman, the problem is that 85 percent of our children attend government-run schools:

Its a monopoly that has been taken over by the teachers unions, which have tremendous influence. Probably the strongest political force in the United States today are the teachers unions. (A) quarter or so of the delegates to the Democratic presidential nominating convention were — members of the teachers (unions) — if you’re going to promote schooling you must subsidize students, not schools. Charlie Rose, 26 Dec 2005

Teacher unions are the financial engine of the Democrat Party. Teacher unions and school boards cripple American education, forcing many of our undereducated to seek artificially high wages in other union jobs: jobs that feed the Democrats who empower the teacher unions that cripple our children, extort millions from taxpayers and kill businesses and jobs.

To influence tomorrow’s voters, union teachers like Jay Bennish indoctrinate our children as effectively as Hamas indoctrinates theirs. Although teachers don’t have a right to veer from school board curriculum, parents have few alternatives when school boards ignore or facilitate social indoctrination of their own children.

How can those who promote a woman’s right to abortion, deny a mother’s right to choose where her children attend school? Until parents, teachers, and union members throughout California are empowered by vouchers, our children will suffer, our economy will slow, our democracy will erode, and our national defense will be threatened.

Solutions

Although direct attacks on these union racketeers and the politicians they buy is unlikely to succeed, parents and students must be empowered by vouchers so they can choose between public, private, charter, and alternative schools. Instead of being forced to waste $18K for schools that are failing, why not offer parents half ($9,000 voucher) and direct the rest to taxpayers or private schools that support special-education or at-risk students?

For example, 100 voucher students from South Central, Brentwood, or Pacoima would generate $900,000 annually, more than enough to encourage entrepreneurs and educators to establish innovative private schools throughout Los Angeles.

Although entry-level LAUSD teachers already earn a decent wage ($39/hr plus benefits), private schools could offer merit pay and bonuses that rewarded top-performing teachers far above what public school teachers currently earn. Competing schools could scout for talent much like private companies and professional sport teams do now. Competition would cause the best schools to flourish and the worst schools to close. Private schools would pop up like mushrooms throughout Los Angeles, ending the union stranglehold that kills education.

I recently asked a new LAUSD teacher whether he would accept a teaching job in the heart of South Central LA that started at $60K. His answer – In a heartbeat. We have the teachers, students, and entrepreneurs, so all we need are enough parents willing to say NO to unions that bankroll political campaigns and advertising. Vouchers would empower parents to make this happen.

Like Tiger Woods and Kobe Bryant, great teachers don’t need tenure to keep jobs. Top performers are always in demand. If America instills a sense of competition in education, our parents, teachers, students, and America will dominate in education, leaving the politicians and union bosses to look for gainful employment. Empowered Americans don’t need union jobs or minimum wage to succeed.

Arguments

Although some argue that vouchers do not guarantee entry into schools of choice, we must remember that we currently have unequal access. When public schools fail, affluent families have choices that working class families do not. Vouchers provide choice that affluent politicians and union bosses already enjoy.

Some private school parents fear that their schools will be forced to accept students that conflict with the school’s established culture. This should not be a concern. Successful schools should be allowed to assess a student’s abilities and require standards of conduct before entry. If students fail assessment screening or fail to maintain minimal behavioral guidelines, principals must have the authority to release students to other schools that match their needs. Schools should be run like businesses, not asylums. Vouchers would empower parents to find suitable public or private schools.

Schools that service at-risk or special education students can be provided additional funds to meet those needs. These can be funded by the unused portion of other voucher students.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that publicly funded vouchers can be used to attend secular or religiously affiliated schools.

Parents who cannot afford to live in a large city can take their voucher to a smaller town. A $9000 voucher would probably go farther in small towns as well, offering more choices to working families who make education a priority. Families will not have to move to major cities to find good schools for their children. Vouchers will drive market forces to satisfy demand.

Remember that none of these solutions require additional funding and will reduce educational costs. A $9000 voucher represents half of what is currently spent on our children in public schools. While some of that unused portion can be directed toward at-risk or special education students, the balance can be returned to taxpayers.

Vouchers offer more choices to more parents. Parents who do not want to participate in the program can keep their children in public school.

Recommendations

1. California must make school vouchers available so parents can choose between public or private schools.

These vouchers should represent at least half of the gross annual per-student costs of the state. This amount can be modified to accommodate special education or at-risk children. (More voucher alternatives here).

2. Expansion of fully independent charter schools must occur.

The RAND Corporation found that students in startup charter schools with classroom-based instruction have higher test scores than comparable students in traditional public schools. It also found that charter schools attract underserved students, who choose charters as a way to increase their academic achievement. Currently, 35,000 students attend 97 approved charter schools in LAUSD. Schools that were once seen as dumping grounds for disruptive students are now boosting scores as charter schools.

For at-risk students, schools like these exist today and more can be built privately as demand grows. Because of the increased costs of at-risk and special education children, vouchers funds could be increased to offset the added costs.

Middle schools (6th-9th grade) pose the greatest challenge for developing students (ages 12-15). Private middle schools can provide more choices for parents before their children reach this critical age.

3. Teacher tenure must end.

Imagine the performance of tenured athletes who must wait thirty years to retire and receive their pensions. Corporate leader Jack Welch kept General Electric strong by regularly weeding out his weakest employees. Like other professionals, some teachers burn out. With today’s demand for great teachers, top performers no longer need tenure. Teachers who can’t find schools to hire them are not suitable teachers anyway.

4. High school students (9th-12th grade) should be encouraged to focus on college-prep courses OR trade courses.

Not all children want to attend college. Today’s demand for carpenters, electricians, plumbers, contractors, computer and auto technicians offers as many rewards as jobs that many college graduates fill today. Schools like Napa’s New Technology High School partner with apprenticeship programs within the local business community, benefiting students, businesses, and the community. The New Technology Foundation is leading this effort. Vouchers could facilitate these approaches throughout California.

Conclusion

No organized criminal enterprise has done more harm to our children than our school boards, teacher union bosses, and the politicians they buy. With America facing many foreign and domestic challenges in the coming years, our ability as neighbors and as a nation to overcome those challenges depends, directly or indirectly, on the excellence of our education. Without a fundamental education, a moral influence, and the skills necessary to think critically, our children will grow up to rely on emotional cues that often leads to undemocratic, socialist, and fascist ideals.

Until parents are given choices in education, these union racketeers will stay empowered, and we can expect higher taxes and the continuing failure of education. After decades of failure, it’s time that parents take a more active role in education. School vouchers will help parents take the important first step.

I set July 4, 1881, as the day for the opening of the school in the little shanty and church which had been secured for its accommodation… There were not a few white people in the vicinity of Tuskegee who looked with some disfavour upon the project. They questioned its value to the coloured people, and had a fear that it might result in bringing about trouble between the races. Some had the feeling that in proportion as the Negro received education, in the same proportion would his value decrease as an economic factor in the state. These people feared the result of education would be that the Negroes would leave the farms, and that it would be difficult to secure them for domestic service.

For more information see:

Stupid in America
John Stossel’s forum and web site
Teachers thank Stossel (Informative Q & A found here)
Reports & Research on Vouchers
Alliance for School Choice
Black Alliance for Educational Options Center for Education Reform

RELATED:
Free Rides For Student Protesters

Clark Baker is a senior contributor* to CaliforniaConservative.org. He is an author, a filmaker, a father and a retired LAPD officer. And he’s currently running for a seat on the California Assembly.

You may read more of Clark’s work here and regarding his campaign here (Scroll down). For more, visit JoinClark.com, the official campaign website.

This entry was posted on Monday, March 27th, 2006 at 9:00 am and is filed under Author: Clark Baker, Clark Baker for Assembly, Education, Los Angeles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.