I'm a big fan of Edwards but I'm definitely backing Obama. I know he's not making many friends with teachers because of his ideas about merit-based pay, but I guess as a first-year teacher I haven't yet really adjusted my voting interests to match my interests as a teacher. Either way, as long as Edwards stays involved and has a voice in the next administration I'll be happy.
"should his numbers continue as they are"? come on, after runnig for president nonstop for the better part of 5 years, he's finished last or tied for last among the major three candidates in every contest this year. that's bad enough, but he's also up against one of the biggest political machines of all time and one of the biggest political movements in quite some time. he's got no chance. his best-case scenario - and this is unlikely - is that he can manage to accumulate enough delegates to play kingmaker if clinton and obama essentially tie at the end of all the primaries. and even then, can you really see him going for hillary, after all his talk about rejecting the status quo? he needs to just endorse obama and get it over with.
Ahhh, yes -- the trial lawyers' lobby's wet dream: Attorney General John Edwards.
Maybe he can impose mandatory C-sections. After all, they reduce the incidence of cerebral palsy, don't they? Wait...they don't? And we all pay more due to the greater costs associated with the increased use of C-sections? Not to mention rising malpractice premiums? Oh.
Am I missing something here...C-sections? Did Edwards propose this??
Unfortunately Edwards did not light a fire in this campaign. However, he was brilliant when he debated Cheney and would have made the better candidate.
As for merit-pay, we already see the UFT endorsing it even if they call it something else. And Hilary once in power will do the same thing.
I'm being sarcastic, of course, schoolgal.
The reference to C-sections is a jab at Edwards's (frivolous, in my opinion) lawsuits against obstetricians and hospitals for babies that ended up with cerebral palsy (CP) at birth. The rise in the rate of C-sections in recent decades (I don't have stats handy, but there has been an appreciable rise) is likely related to the resulting lawsuit-avoidance by OBs (to say nothing of rising malpractice insurance premiums). Unfortunately, there is no positive causal relationship between vaginal births and CP (nore is there a negative relationship between C-sections and the incidence of CP). A C-section is major surgery and is more costly (and risky for the mother, mind you)...and, again, is not effective at preventing birth defects such as CP.
It was just a rant.
Hillary sits on the board of Walmart,
Obama represented slum lords, etc., etc. They are what they are...lawyers.
However Edwards has experienced personal tragedy. And I do believe in him more than Obama or the UFT endorsed Hilary.
I think the slumlord accusation against Obama has to do with this story:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/ne...i-newslocal-
hed
I just saw NBC report that there was a vacant lot attached to the home Obama wanted to buy, but apparently could not afford. This guy Rezko, or maybe his wife, conveniently purchased the lot the same day Obama bought the house, and paid 625K for it. NBC said the home could not have been purchased without the sale of the lot, which was part of the original property.
This doesn't really make Obama any worse than a lot of politicians, in my view. But it doesn't make him any better either.
As for Edwards, I'd think you, Math Guy, would appreciate this a little more. CNN/Rasmussen polls show him as the only candidate who beats all GOP prospects, including McCain. So if he gets shoved to the side yet again, it gives you guys a fighting chance in 08.
And while I don't plan to vote for him (surprise), I do think McCain is your best bet. So does CNN/Rasmussen. I thought McCain was your best bet in 200 as well, actually.
Whatever happens, I just love watching this stuff.
NYCE,
I was surprised when I first read your note regarding the CNN poll, but then I thought about it and it seems logical. Hillary has tremendous negatives, and Obama, swell guy that he may be, is not very experienced.
I'm rooting for Hillary.
George Schmidt from Chicago has written an interesting piece on Obama for ICE-mail and ednotes:
http://ednotesonline.blogspot.co...-
education.html
George is a teacher who has covered Chicago ed news for 35 years and was the first to warn us about the impact of mayoral control. He says Obama has supported the entire package of "reforms" that we've seen here in NYC.
Norm,
Will you be attending any of the UFT's meetings on the subject of mayoral control?
I want to go, but after the last 2 contracts I always feel decisions are already made ahead of time and Randi will either support it or some version that still gives the mayor some power.
I think you may be right though there is some value in your going and reporting back to the gang here on what happened.
UFT events like this are basically venting mechanisms.
I missed the one at MLK HS in Manhattan last week which I wanted to attend. They are basically dog and pony shows like the high stakes testing committee was and that the UFT has a commitment to a system based on some form of mayoral control which they will not be moved off no matter what people say. Expect some tweaking of mayoral control. Remember, the UFT will support Bill Thompson for mayor and sell it as a way to have mayoral control with your own mayor.
When you say to Randi you are opposed to mayoral control she often will come back with : We don't want to go back to what we had.
I'm not so sure anymore.
The trick to is to come up with an alternative which we are beginning to struggle with in ICE. ICOPE is doing a bunch of stuff too. And we are going to do forums on this issue with Teachers Unite probably in the fall and we hope to attract teachers and parents. But I'm concerned that might be to late.
What Randi seems to take for granted is that we always won't have a mayor who is pro-teacher.
I liked the "District" program although it could use some tweaking.
We knew who to report to and always had someone to help us. The only reason Klein got rid of it was for budget reasons.
I think the money saving was spin. They wanted to break the political machines at the local level that controlled the districts. Some of those machines are still intact lurking to return. But even with the local corruption and political manipulation - the way principals got their jobs was a joke - there was still a structure there that could work with safeguards. Ironically, the DOE's announced test for principals today - though I'm sure the kinds of questions we would ask would not be the same - is an idea.
Actually, I believe each school - teachers and parents - should chose the principal. They elect principals in places like Spain and other parts of Europe. Why not try it here as an experiment in some schools? the private schools in NYC have a more democratic system though parents who pay a lto of money feel the right to a big say. But no one feels teachers at these schools should be completely out of the picture considering the fact they often remain in the school way longer than the parents involvement.
Just a political comment. McCain cannot win in November. The conservative base are quite willing to allow Billary's election rather than support a candidate they despise. McCain is attacked on issues from immigration, where he's been misrepresented, to his support of McCain Feingold, which I feel is an assault on political speech. There is no give on these points. I am generally well received on Free Republic, but when I say something positive re McCain I get flamed like the Hindenberg.
So welcome back Billy Jeff for a third term.
Norm,
That is why I said a return to "Districts" but with modifications.
The School Board had too much control and that is where most of the corruption took place. Also, many superintendents were not qualified.
My former superintendent had his quirks, but as a District we always showed improvement.
We had the C-30s and school-based teams when hiring teachers.
We lost that under Randi.
The Leadership Academy pool must be pretty slim if Klein wants a principal's test.
Schoolgal,
I also am thinking along the lines of some kind of decentralized system. The issue will always be keeping the politicians out of it. One intriguing idea is to use the Klein idea (bogus of course) of truly empowering the school as the basic unit. Empower SLT's to choose a principal. Each school has one rep (or base it on a ratio of number of students) to create a district. And each district sends a rep to a central level. The central operation would provide services and monitoring to the schools. They could also choose a chancellor to oversee things but that would be fairly powerless. However since money is always at the central level there would be allocation powers.
Now there are elements of what Klein says he tried to do in here but with this plan the power doesn't reside on top but at the place where it is needed.
ICE is going to address this issue at Friday's meeting. I don't see how we will come to a conclusion at that point but the discussion will clarify things. Anyone interested, come on down. 4:30 at Murray Bergtraum HS.
Commenting by HaloScan
