Tag Archives: Florida

TEACHERS’ UNIONS – OPPRESSOR OF BLACKS AND OTHER PEOPLE OF COLOR

The failure of public schools to properly educate American students, particularly nonwhite minorities, can be attributed largely to the policies and priorities of teachers’ unions. This is according to the website, discoverthenetworks.org.

The largest teachers’ unions in America today include the 3.2 million member National Education Association (NEA) and the 1.5 million member America Federation of Teachers (AFT). Devoted to promoting all manner of left-sing political agendas, these organizations rank among the most powerful political forces in the United States today. Forbes magazine routinely ranks the NEA among the top 15 in its “Washington’s Power 25” list of organizations that wield the greatest political influence in the American legislative system. The Association has earned that rating, for the most part, by making almost $31 million in campaign contributions to political candidates since the early 1990s. The AFT has given more than $28 million to its own favored candidates. Furthermore, these figures do not include expenditures on such politically oriented initiatives as television ads or “get out the vote” efforts.

If the $59 million in combined NEA and AFT campaign donations, more than $56 million has gone to Democrats. This imbalance reflects only the political leanings of the union leaders, not the rank and file school teachers. Surprisingly, just 45% of public school teachers are registered Democrats, and more NEA members identify themselves as conservatives (27%) than liberals (21%).

The NEA derives most of its operating funds from the member dues that, in almost every state, are deducted automatically from teachers’ salaries. Because member dues constitute the very lifeblood of the teachers’ unions, the latter strive mightily to avoid losing any of those members regardless of their professional competence or lack thereof. Even in school districts where students perform far below the academic norm for their grade levels, and where dropout rates are astronomically high, scarcely one in a thousand teachers is ever dismissed in any given year.

In most states, teachers are automatically awarded tenure after only a few years on the job. Once tenured, even the most ineffective and incompetent instructors can have long and relatively lucrative careers in the classroom if they wish to stay in the field of education. For example, between 1995 and 2005, just 112 of the 43,000 tenured teachers in Los Angeles lost their jobs, even though 49% of the students in their school district failed to graduate from high school. The story has been much the same elsewhere.

In addition to aggressively defending the rights of incompetent instructors, the teachers’ unions have likewise objected to merit pay proposals that would reward good teachers and punish bad ones. When Florida legislators in 2009 called for a merit pay system, the head of the state teachers’ union accused the lawmakers of punishing and scapegoating teachers and creating more chaos in Florida public schools. When New Jersey Governor Chris Christie suggested a similar arrangement for his state in 2010, the teachers’ unions asserted that his effort was intentionally designed to demean and defund public education. In Chicago, union officials have argued that merit pay programs can narrow curricula by encouraging teachers to focus on testing.

Teachers’ unions also oppose voucher programs that would enable the parents of children who attend failing inner-city public schools to send their youngsters, instead, to private schools where they would have a better chance to succeed academically.

While progressive democrat politicians, who receive much financial support from teachers’ unions, are opposed to school voucher programs, they continue to send their kids to expensive private schools.  When former Vice President, Al Gore, who was asked why he opposed school vouchers for black children, while sending his own son to a private school, he said, “If I had a child in an inner-city school, I would probably be for vouchers too.”

Everyone reading this article probably has one or more friends who are public school teachers and members of one or more teachers’ unions. Low pay appears to be the major gripe of public school teachers, and here in Alabama, teachers do have a reputations of being only concerned with pay and not concerned with teaching our children. They agree that there are problems in the states’ public schools that need to be fixed, with their solution being just give us raises and we’ll fix the problems. Most of us who work in the private sector have to perform adequately before we are given raises by our employers.

I have observed over the years that public school teachers are very inflexible when it comes to new and innovative ideas for improving the quality of education. As indicated above, they are against a voucher system which would allow students who would, because of residence, have to attend failing schools, be given vouchers to attend private schools. Furthermore, public school teachers are against any type of home schooling, even though home schooling has been proven to be successful.

The only method of teaching they appear to advocate is that which occurs in a school room where there is one teacher and possibly an aid teaching a small group of students. During the technological revolution (1989 to 2005), the teachers I knew were adverse to any kind of modern technology and resisted any kind of change to their methods of operation.

Those of us who have been in the workplace for years know that “ways of doing things” are constantly changing. Think back to that first job you had out of college then fast-forward to today. Wow!

Like Social Security, certain parts of teacher compensation packages are considered “sacred cows.” Don’t you dare even whisper about changing them. If you suggest making changes or that changes might be coming, you’re automatically accused of being against public education and hating school teachers. Sound familiar?

In many states across the nation, including in my state, Alabama, it has been suggested by private financiers that fully funded retirement systems might not be able to sustain themselves. For those currently drawing retirement benefits, those benefits won’t change. But for younger state employees, retirement funding might have to change. Public school teachers, including union leaders, have demonized anyone who suggested that changes might be needed in the future.

Most public school teachers I know vote Democrat and hate Republicans. They vote Democrat because Democrats promise to procure higher salaries and better benefits for them. It’s been this way for decades and nothing for teachers seems to have improved.

While towing the liberal line along with having an inflexible attitude toward change by members of teachers’ unions, is most certainly oppressing blacks and people of color, because so many who are falling into these groups do not have the means to send their children to private schools or the time to home school their children.

Have the leaders of teachers’ unions, along with the rank and file members, ever thought about listening to what private enterprise is suggesting for improvements. Maybe if they did, both sides could use their expertise and influence to create a robust public education environment. Sadly, though, I’m not holding my breath.

Note: Much of the information provided for this article was taken from discoverthenetworks.org.

Facebooktwitter

THE CLEAN POWER PLAN, MORE CLIMATE CHANGE FRAUD

According to the Daily Signal in their article entitled, “The Fraud Factor of Obama’s New Climate Agenda,” the current president in his recent visit to Alaska, was seeking to scare up support for his climate agenda. In proving that man-made climate change does exist, the president sought to emphasize a major proponent of climate change: When the weather is warm, ice melts (that’s powerful stuff, y’all).

The current president even had a photo op in front of the retreating Exit Glacier. However, there is one little fact about the Exit Glacier. It started retreating more than 100 years before the start of significant man-made carbon dioxide emissions. Another interesting point to note is that the Climate Research Center at the University of Alaska shows that there has been no warming trend in Alaska since 1977. In fact, the trend is slightly negative.

The president is promoting an agenda whose most prominent part is the Clean Power Plant (CPP). But, the agenda and the CPP are based on three bits of fraud.

The first is the assertion that carbon dioxide is dirty. Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless, and non-toxic gas. The president and his supporters keep referring to it as “carbon pollution.” The also assert that, until the CPP, there were no regulations on the amount of “carbon pollution” power plants could emit.

Carbon pollution does exist, but it is not carbon dioxide. The common name for carbon pollution is “soot,” and there have been regulatory limits on soot for decades. Due to these limits and the general improvement in technology, a modern coal-fired plant cuts soot emissions by more than 99 percent compared to plants without the new technology. In spite of the phenomenal increase in power production since the late 1970s, total air pollution has actually declined significantly.

Second, virtually all current extreme weather is blamed on global warming/climate change, with the inevitable prediction of worse to come. However, data from NOAA and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change contradict this fear-mongering. No trends in hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, or floods show. After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, we were warned by the global warming/climate change alarmists that we would be seeing numerous stronger hurricanes.

According to NPR, yes, NPR, no major hurricanes have hit the U.S. since 2005. Well, what about “Super Storm Sandy that caused major destruction in the northeast in 2012? Sandy was a Category 2 storm when it was hugging the northeastern coast. It was also a large hurricane. It swept through the most densely populated areas in the United States. Of course, since it was in the northeast, it got boatloads of media attention. If Sandy had made landfall in Mississippi, Alabama, or the Florida panhandle, it wouldn’t have received near the media attention it did, nor would it have reeked the devastation that it did.

On April 27, 2011, the state of Alabama witnessed the worst tornado outbreak since a 1930s outbreak. Mississippi, Tennessee, and Georgia were also hard hit. This was also caused by global warming/climate change and it was George Bush’s fault. Prognosticators indicated that outbreaks like the one of 4/27 were a taste of things to come. We’ve had some tornadoes since then in Dixie Alley and in the Midwest. This year, though, in the spring, Dixie Alley was quiet. November is secondary tornado season in Dixie Alley. We’ll have to see what November brings. The tornado outbreaks of 4/27/2011 plus the 1930s outbreak, and the outbreak of 1974, are generational. Again, there appears to be no evidence of increase in tornadoes and their intensity.

The third bit is that the CPP is a climate change policy. Using the EPA’s own climate model, climatologists at the Cato Institute calculated the impact of the CPP on world temperature. Results showed that by the end of this century, the CPPs maximum impact would reduce world temperature by 0.019 degrees, well within the margin of error. The projected impact on sea level rise is equally ridiculous, just 0.01 inches by 2100.

Furthermore, according to the Daily Signal’s article, the CPP’s climate benefit may be negligible and distant, but the CPP’s economic cost will be large and immediate. According to the Energy Information Administration, in the decade of the 2020s, lost GDP will total $1 trillion, and total employment will fall by as much as 500,000 jobs.

This should be so obvious to anyone with a breath of air left in them that the CPP is just another plan to grab power and money, your money. Just like the ACA? Absolutely.

Every time I hint that man-made climate change is a fraud, liberals come out of the woodwork indicating that there are so many more articles by scientists confirming man-made climate change than there are scientists who refute man-made climate change. It appears to me, though, more and more articles are being written refuting it.

If the liberals/progressives are the staunch supporters of middle and low income earners, you would think that they would be searching for facts that would support man-made climate change as not real. Instead, liberals/progressives desire to eliminate fossil fuels in favor of green energy sources. Fossil fuels provide inexpensive and reliable sources of energy which certainly benefits the middle and lower classes. To date, green energy has a long way to go. It’s expensive and not reliable.

The direction that liberals/progressives are taking us doesn’t make sense, unless they have a hidden agenda. And, of course, they do. As I said above, it’s to simply snatch up, from the private sector, as much as possible, and place it under the government umbrella. Thus just another power and money grab.

Facebooktwitter