This past year has been different from the previous year.
I have written more birthday cards. I have painted my living room. I planted and harvested a vegetable garden. I have read books just for fun. I have hiked a mountain and rafted a river. I have experimented with new recipes in the kitchen, new software on the computer, new hardware used with power tools, and new projects with the sewing machine. In short, I have taken on more varied projects during this year than campaigning allowed in 2008.
The similarities lie in the fact that I still enjoy relationships with old friends and new. I still have kept a paddle in the stream of politics. And I continue to find avenues of service to my community.
I watched with interest the birth of two different citizen initiatives during this past summer. Both addressed needs of our state government and I am pleased to be carrying both petitions to my neighbors these days. If you have not investigated the initiatives, called "Fair Boundaries" and "Utahns for Ethical Government", I encourage you to do so. The names above are linked to their respective websites. If you are registered to vote in Utah, I would be pleased to bring a petition to you to sign or arrange for someone else to do this.
The process of bringing a citizens' initiative to the voters' ballot next November is arduous but these issues are worth the trouble. I hope you will join me in supporting these initiatives.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Legislator v. the PTA
Senate Bill 199 is an example of vendetta legislation that has long range implications. It would make it illegal for schools to work with volunteer parent groups that require members to pay dues.
Many parent organizations charge membership dues but recognize that most of the activities at their individual schools are paid for by other fundraising efforts. PTA would literally be pushed out of the state since its state and national bylaws require membership dues. The dues that come from PTA members are what makes it possible for PTA to be a lobbying organization, advocating for children, families, and schools.
PTA was in the forefront of the push to get School Trustlands to produce an sizable and growing income in the state of Utah and legislators have been anxious to get their hands on funds being generated by the Trustlands ever since. PTA has been vigilant in protecting public schools' interests with Trustlands funds. This has been possible with their lobbying efforts.
Senator Curt Bramble is the bill sponsor and his political opponent in the past election is active in the PTA. He and PTA have been at loggerheads on a number of occasions, most recently in the voucher fight.
Senator Bramble would certainly be pleased to see the lobbying ability of PTA wiped out. This bill has the potential to do it.
Many parent organizations charge membership dues but recognize that most of the activities at their individual schools are paid for by other fundraising efforts. PTA would literally be pushed out of the state since its state and national bylaws require membership dues. The dues that come from PTA members are what makes it possible for PTA to be a lobbying organization, advocating for children, families, and schools.
PTA was in the forefront of the push to get School Trustlands to produce an sizable and growing income in the state of Utah and legislators have been anxious to get their hands on funds being generated by the Trustlands ever since. PTA has been vigilant in protecting public schools' interests with Trustlands funds. This has been possible with their lobbying efforts.
Senator Curt Bramble is the bill sponsor and his political opponent in the past election is active in the PTA. He and PTA have been at loggerheads on a number of occasions, most recently in the voucher fight.
Senator Bramble would certainly be pleased to see the lobbying ability of PTA wiped out. This bill has the potential to do it.
Need a job? Be a teacher!
Senate Bill 48 is said to address a teacher shortage, and would allow people to get jobs as teachers in public schools without the education background currently required.
The “shortage of teachers” may be affected by predictions of high unemployment.
But the real question to ask is whether “real world” experience can take the place of training in pedagogy for teachers. For example: would a banker or bookkeeper who has been laid off be prepared to teach math at the local middle school. Should a retired secretary with no other training be hired to teach English, or second grade? Pedagogy includes what motivates a child to learn, how to discipline individually and in a classroom setting, how to create effective lesson plans, how to write tests and measure learning.
The argument that “substitutes have no other requirement than a high school diploma” is no reason to lower the standards for full time teachers with responsibilities for a class. I will concede that there are many “natural teachers” that could by their personality and dedication effectively teach young people. But brillance in a subject area isn't the same as understanding how to impart the knowledge. A concert pianist may not be a good piano teacher. The skills that motivate love for learning may be natural but I can't see how will it show up on a written application.
Before this door to employment in public schools is opened, I’d like to see provisions of a trial period, mentoring and supervisory structure, and equal requirements for on-going training.
The “shortage of teachers” may be affected by predictions of high unemployment.
But the real question to ask is whether “real world” experience can take the place of training in pedagogy for teachers. For example: would a banker or bookkeeper who has been laid off be prepared to teach math at the local middle school. Should a retired secretary with no other training be hired to teach English, or second grade? Pedagogy includes what motivates a child to learn, how to discipline individually and in a classroom setting, how to create effective lesson plans, how to write tests and measure learning.
The argument that “substitutes have no other requirement than a high school diploma” is no reason to lower the standards for full time teachers with responsibilities for a class. I will concede that there are many “natural teachers” that could by their personality and dedication effectively teach young people. But brillance in a subject area isn't the same as understanding how to impart the knowledge. A concert pianist may not be a good piano teacher. The skills that motivate love for learning may be natural but I can't see how will it show up on a written application.
Before this door to employment in public schools is opened, I’d like to see provisions of a trial period, mentoring and supervisory structure, and equal requirements for on-going training.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The Long Road to Becoming Law
While the budgetary woes and sensational debates about gay marriage garner all the attention, there are still issues that pop up occasionally that merit a look.
In order for a bill to become law, it must pass through the Rules Committee of the legislative body of its sponsor. So a bill sponsored by a state representative would go through the House Rules committee. That committee decides if it is reasonable to consider this bill. If they decide it is a great bill that should definitely be debated by the House, they can send it "by consent" directly to be scheduled for debate and a vote by the House. If they definitely don't like it, they can table it and it doesn't come up at all. If they want it studied, as most bills are, they assign it to a committee by topic.
For example, the Senate bill that asked for a rate increase in the tax on tobacco was sent to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. They studied it and decided that it should not be considered and that ended it.
A similar bill was sponsored by a member of the House of Representatives and is being considered by the House Rules committee. If it is sent to the same committee, it will probably suffer the same fate. Proponents of the bill hope that it will be considered by the Committee of Health and Human Services. This is not an unreasonable assignment since the revenue from tobacco tax goes to fund program to discourage tobacco use and for health services required by smokers.
Another bill that is currently being evaluated by the House Rules Committee is HB189 that would make changes in the instruction of sex education in schools. This bill has a long list of specific instruction on what health teachers are to say. It also removes the directive that health teachers not advocate use of contraceptives. Proponents of the bill point out that STD's are up in the State and that something more should be done. Opponents of the bill hold that while health teacherss can present facts, parents should be the ones to teach their children moral principles. For me a major factor is that the State School Board is qualified and elected to determine curriculum standards and requirements. The legislature should not be micro-managing school curriculum.
If a bill is found worthy of "floor debate" it is sent to the legislative body of the sponsor, House or Senate, and is debated and voted upon. If it passes, it is sent to the rules committee of the other legislative body to begin the process again with a new sponsor. If it passes the rules committee and the committee to which it is assigned, and if it receives a majority vote by the second legislative body, it is on its way to the Governor's desk. The Governor can sign it, veto it, or let it go into law without his direct approval.
Stay tuned for more reports on what may soon become your new laws!
In order for a bill to become law, it must pass through the Rules Committee of the legislative body of its sponsor. So a bill sponsored by a state representative would go through the House Rules committee. That committee decides if it is reasonable to consider this bill. If they decide it is a great bill that should definitely be debated by the House, they can send it "by consent" directly to be scheduled for debate and a vote by the House. If they definitely don't like it, they can table it and it doesn't come up at all. If they want it studied, as most bills are, they assign it to a committee by topic.
For example, the Senate bill that asked for a rate increase in the tax on tobacco was sent to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. They studied it and decided that it should not be considered and that ended it.
A similar bill was sponsored by a member of the House of Representatives and is being considered by the House Rules committee. If it is sent to the same committee, it will probably suffer the same fate. Proponents of the bill hope that it will be considered by the Committee of Health and Human Services. This is not an unreasonable assignment since the revenue from tobacco tax goes to fund program to discourage tobacco use and for health services required by smokers.
Another bill that is currently being evaluated by the House Rules Committee is HB189 that would make changes in the instruction of sex education in schools. This bill has a long list of specific instruction on what health teachers are to say. It also removes the directive that health teachers not advocate use of contraceptives. Proponents of the bill point out that STD's are up in the State and that something more should be done. Opponents of the bill hold that while health teacherss can present facts, parents should be the ones to teach their children moral principles. For me a major factor is that the State School Board is qualified and elected to determine curriculum standards and requirements. The legislature should not be micro-managing school curriculum.
If a bill is found worthy of "floor debate" it is sent to the legislative body of the sponsor, House or Senate, and is debated and voted upon. If it passes, it is sent to the rules committee of the other legislative body to begin the process again with a new sponsor. If it passes the rules committee and the committee to which it is assigned, and if it receives a majority vote by the second legislative body, it is on its way to the Governor's desk. The Governor can sign it, veto it, or let it go into law without his direct approval.
Stay tuned for more reports on what may soon become your new laws!
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
What is that SMELL?
I didn't think I'd be blogging this early in the week but I can't sit by and watch the news about the registering of Greg Curtis and Mark Walker as lobbyists without having a say.
The news of Mr. Walker becoming a lobbyist for the Legislature was covered pretty well in the Deseret News and the report concerning Greg Curtis is found in the Tribune.
Legislation that sets up ethical guidelines has been started and stopped and started and stopped over the past decade. The bills don't fail because there is no merit. They fail because the legislators themselves look around at each other and decide that they are all so principled that they don't need the guidelines.
Partly because of the scandals brought to light in the past year, there are several ethics bills being introduce again this year and most include a plank that restricts legislators from being employed as lobbyists for a year from the time they leave office. Federal law prohibits officials elected to the US Congress from lobbying for two years after they leave office. Even President Obama has decreed that members of his administration will not be allowed to lobby anytime during his term of office. Their leverage coming out of office is just too great.
Thank you, Doug Wright at KSL Radio, for highlighting the problems of the former Speaker of the House lobbying for big tobacco, just as the governor is proposing to raise tax on cigarettes. Does Mr. Curtis owe them more than he has been able to provide while in office?
The thought of Mr. Walker lobbying members of the legislature is especially troubling. He bargained a plea of guilty with the understanding that he would cooperate with prosecutors in charges against others in the legislature. How comfortable would you be, as a legislator, knowing that he only needs to say your name to the prosecuting attorney, or a news reporter, to end your career? Now there is a lobbyist with power!
Did I say "end your career"? Wait a minute, we don't have "professional polititians", right? All our legislators are laymen. That means they have regular jobs that they interrupt for public service. Legislators who find they cannot make a living in the real world after leaving office, and opt for lobbying the very folks they have been horse trading with, show the addicting power of political perks at the public trough.
Ethics reform is way over due!
The news of Mr. Walker becoming a lobbyist for the Legislature was covered pretty well in the Deseret News and the report concerning Greg Curtis is found in the Tribune.
Legislation that sets up ethical guidelines has been started and stopped and started and stopped over the past decade. The bills don't fail because there is no merit. They fail because the legislators themselves look around at each other and decide that they are all so principled that they don't need the guidelines.
Partly because of the scandals brought to light in the past year, there are several ethics bills being introduce again this year and most include a plank that restricts legislators from being employed as lobbyists for a year from the time they leave office. Federal law prohibits officials elected to the US Congress from lobbying for two years after they leave office. Even President Obama has decreed that members of his administration will not be allowed to lobby anytime during his term of office. Their leverage coming out of office is just too great.
Thank you, Doug Wright at KSL Radio, for highlighting the problems of the former Speaker of the House lobbying for big tobacco, just as the governor is proposing to raise tax on cigarettes. Does Mr. Curtis owe them more than he has been able to provide while in office?
The thought of Mr. Walker lobbying members of the legislature is especially troubling. He bargained a plea of guilty with the understanding that he would cooperate with prosecutors in charges against others in the legislature. How comfortable would you be, as a legislator, knowing that he only needs to say your name to the prosecuting attorney, or a news reporter, to end your career? Now there is a lobbyist with power!
Did I say "end your career"? Wait a minute, we don't have "professional polititians", right? All our legislators are laymen. That means they have regular jobs that they interrupt for public service. Legislators who find they cannot make a living in the real world after leaving office, and opt for lobbying the very folks they have been horse trading with, show the addicting power of political perks at the public trough.
Ethics reform is way over due!
Monday, January 26, 2009
Education in the Crosshairs
There is so much nail biting about budget shortfalls and necessary cuts to funding that everyone seems to be digging in to protect the items of their greatest concern. For me, public education is of very great concern. I will be sending more information about education issues in the legislative session but today I want to specifically address funding and local control.
The benefits of an educated public cross over into just about every area of public policy. Strong public education fosters a versatile and creative workforce, vigilant voters, a social conscience, better health, safety, and economic security. A decision to short change public education would bring about a decline in all these areas.
There are a mountain of education-related bills facing the legislature this year, as in previous years. This year, however, the budget constraints cast a shadow on everything. Drastic cuts have been proposed to both public education and higher education. Superintendent Randy Merrill has reported that any time the legislature talks about one percent of the education budget, it translates to half a million dollars in the Provo School District. The proposal to cut 15% would, says Dr. Merrill, leave us with a school system that you would not recognize. He states that he is trying to avoid increased class-size and maintain adequate employee salaries but calls to operate leaner over the past years have left us with very few areas to cut.
You would think that no one is naive enough to expect increased funding from the legislature at a time such as this but please watch for efforts to fund pet projects and then call it part of an existing budget. For example, last year when computer software for preschool programs was funded, it was called part of the education appropriation. Local school districts had no say as to whether they wanted or needed the preschool computer programs. The allocation was only for this particular product. This year there is a proposal that the legislature mandate implementing the Singapore Math program. There are curriculum offices in the State Office of Education and in each school district, but this legislation would override their authority and the money that comes with it would be earmarked. In essence, the districts are being asked to cut their budgets and then the funding for that budget is coming back with conditions set by the legislators. I do not advocate for or against Singapore Math. I do however feel that if local administrators are asked to cut their own budgets, we should see that they are given control of their funds to address local needs based on their assessments.
The benefits of an educated public cross over into just about every area of public policy. Strong public education fosters a versatile and creative workforce, vigilant voters, a social conscience, better health, safety, and economic security. A decision to short change public education would bring about a decline in all these areas.
There are a mountain of education-related bills facing the legislature this year, as in previous years. This year, however, the budget constraints cast a shadow on everything. Drastic cuts have been proposed to both public education and higher education. Superintendent Randy Merrill has reported that any time the legislature talks about one percent of the education budget, it translates to half a million dollars in the Provo School District. The proposal to cut 15% would, says Dr. Merrill, leave us with a school system that you would not recognize. He states that he is trying to avoid increased class-size and maintain adequate employee salaries but calls to operate leaner over the past years have left us with very few areas to cut.
You would think that no one is naive enough to expect increased funding from the legislature at a time such as this but please watch for efforts to fund pet projects and then call it part of an existing budget. For example, last year when computer software for preschool programs was funded, it was called part of the education appropriation. Local school districts had no say as to whether they wanted or needed the preschool computer programs. The allocation was only for this particular product. This year there is a proposal that the legislature mandate implementing the Singapore Math program. There are curriculum offices in the State Office of Education and in each school district, but this legislation would override their authority and the money that comes with it would be earmarked. In essence, the districts are being asked to cut their budgets and then the funding for that budget is coming back with conditions set by the legislators. I do not advocate for or against Singapore Math. I do however feel that if local administrators are asked to cut their own budgets, we should see that they are given control of their funds to address local needs based on their assessments.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Preparing for a new session: Medicaid Funding
Dear friends,
I expected this site to be dormant and perhaps removed altogether by this time but I decided to use it to post some thoughts on the current state legislature and its work.
The State Legislative session will begin next week but there are many preliminary meetings going on now to address the immediate financial problems that the state faces.
One committee is studying health care and proposals to cut expenditures to Medicaid. Details about the State's commitment to Medicaid can be found at www.healthpolicyproject.org but in a nutshell, you need to know that for every dollar that the state puts in to Medicaid, the federal government sends three more. There isn’t another investment that I know of that brings that kind of return – especially in today’s economy.
In the opposite direction, every dollar that the legislature cuts from Medicaid means four dollars of services must be dropped. And cutting the programs paid for by Medicaid will result in more expensive problems that must be addressed with payments by taxes for some other program or by higher costs to healthcare consumers for doctor and hospital bills. It just doesn’t make sense.
Many families that live and work in Provo and Orem are impacted by access to Medicaid benefits, either because they receive care or are healthcare providers.
If you believe, as I do, that Medicaid is one area that should not be cut, you should send word right away to your legislators, especially those who are right now looking at health care appropriations by the State. Senator Margaret Dayton and Representative Keith Grover, both representing people in Orem and Provo, are on the committee and they want to hear from you. Mr. Grover’s email address is keithgrover@utah.gov and phone number is: 801-319-0170. Mrs. Dayton’s is: mdayton@utahsenate.org and (801) 221-0623, Calling or email is best, since they are in meetings right now!
Please let your voices be heard on this or other issues that are important to you.
I expected this site to be dormant and perhaps removed altogether by this time but I decided to use it to post some thoughts on the current state legislature and its work.
The State Legislative session will begin next week but there are many preliminary meetings going on now to address the immediate financial problems that the state faces.
One committee is studying health care and proposals to cut expenditures to Medicaid. Details about the State's commitment to Medicaid can be found at www.healthpolicyproject.org but in a nutshell, you need to know that for every dollar that the state puts in to Medicaid, the federal government sends three more. There isn’t another investment that I know of that brings that kind of return – especially in today’s economy.
In the opposite direction, every dollar that the legislature cuts from Medicaid means four dollars of services must be dropped. And cutting the programs paid for by Medicaid will result in more expensive problems that must be addressed with payments by taxes for some other program or by higher costs to healthcare consumers for doctor and hospital bills. It just doesn’t make sense.
Many families that live and work in Provo and Orem are impacted by access to Medicaid benefits, either because they receive care or are healthcare providers.
If you believe, as I do, that Medicaid is one area that should not be cut, you should send word right away to your legislators, especially those who are right now looking at health care appropriations by the State. Senator Margaret Dayton and Representative Keith Grover, both representing people in Orem and Provo, are on the committee and they want to hear from you. Mr. Grover’s email address is keithgrover@utah.gov and phone number is: 801-319-0170. Mrs. Dayton’s is: mdayton@utahsenate.org and (801) 221-0623, Calling or email is best, since they are in meetings right now!
Please let your voices be heard on this or other issues that are important to you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
