A couple weeks ago I quoted an education establishment official who argued that bringing kids into the public school system was bad, because it caused slices of the K-12 funding pie to be thinner.
In a hearing this week on SB767, which is the education establishment's attempt to kill virtual schools in Oregon, Laurie Wimmer, the lobbyist for the Oregon Education Association (Oregon's teachers union) made the same argument.
She said:
"And, in the case of the state school fund, those funds are allocated by Ways and Means based on an assumption about how many students are coming to the brick and mortar public schools and the state school fund is distributed accordingly and what happens when homeschoolers enroll in one of these programs (and most if not all of them are in fact homeschoolers, some of them come out of public programs,) in effect they are taking money that was allocated to a district for one set of students and re-routing that money for other kids and so that’s what I mean by advantaging some at the expense of the many."
First, she is wrong to say "most if not all of them [virtual charter school students] are homeschoolers." At Connections Academy, fewer than half the enrolled students were previously home schooled.
But it doesn't matter anyway. Is it the OEA's position that parents who currently homeschool their children should NOT have the option to put their kids in a public school? I can't read this statement any other way.
This statement was made in testimony to the Senate Education Committee, so it wasn't just a casual conversation. It represents the OEA's argument for a bill that they requested. Therefore the statement reflects the teachers union's official position.
If not, the OEA is free to correct Ms. Wimmer by repudiating her testimony. Until such time, we can spread the word that the OEA wants to deny tens of thousands of Oregon taxpaying families the option of sending their kids to public schools.
I think we need a new slogan for the OEA. From time to time they run TV ads and buy billboards trying to convince the public that they care about kids. Their tag line is:
"Working wonders for public education."
Any thoughts on what might be a more accurate slogan for them? I'll get the contest started. How about:
"Making sure public education works .... for us."
Your submissions are invited!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Children’s futures are our commodity.
They will drive me out of the Public School system and into Home Schooling if this passes. Then what will they do, if that happens then my district will not receive any money for the student. So if they drive ORCA out and thats around 2000 students lets say that half go to Home Schooling then they just lost that funding all together.
Here ya go try this one on for size
"Look what the UNIONS have done to GM and Chrysler"
The OEA arrived on the scene around 1974 in Oregon. Any wonders they have worked have led to the current graduate being the least educated generation since WWII.
Of course the union will claim it is from underpaying teachers. too low of taxes and underfunding education.
The OEA
Working Over Public Education
But on the other prong of the OEA work is their mission to provide
a large revenue stream to Democrat politicans and their liberal causes.
In exchange Democrat politicians, ALL, remain loyal and obedient when the OEA hands down orders.
On task with the case of ORCA and virtual schools not a single Democrat dare speak in support.
The OEA: Closing doors.
Here's some slogan inspiration:
We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our youth for the future. ~Franklin Delano Roosevelt
A machine has value only as it produces more than it consumes - so check your value to the community. ~Martin H. Fischer
The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me. ~Ayn Rand
Respect for the truth is an acquired taste. ~Mark Van Doren, Liberal Education, 1943
I Never let my education get in the way of my learning.
The OEA might adpot a slogan similar to what former national teachers union leader Albert Shanker admitted:
"We'll start looking out for school kids when they start paying union dues."
Rob -
I am an OEA member. I'm also a political liberal. I am PISSED OFF by what the OEA is doing, and I am going to let them know about it.
The OEA's political activity is usually on the up and up. I support almost all of the political candidates they support.
But this issue is opening my eyes. For years, I have considered the Democrats and the Union to be the good guys. How can they do this to kids?
How can they justify just using their influence over Democrat politicians to shut down a public school just because they don't like it?
And why would the Democrat legislators go along with this?
I am extremely disappointed in my union.
OEA: Growing vegetables, one child at a time.
OEA: We're well-educated & we can be Bastards.
OEA:
We're mediocre, overpaid, and damn proud of it! Unions are for members, not school kids. Screw 'em!
Embracing public education with a choke-hold.
OEA: Are you kidding?
OEA: It's all about the money.
Which brings up a question: if I can't send my home-schooled child to public school, how do I apply for a rebate of my property taxes? After all, I paid almost half my taxes (more than a thousand bucks) to schools.
Ken,
Simple send a nice letter to the OEA and they'll take care of that for you.
For Kids
Good question Ken. All home school families are paying their share of taxes, virtual schools provide them an opportunity to benefit from public education, and the Education Associations kick it in the knees.
Laurie Wimmer admitted the OEA doesn't want any more students in the system who would potentially choose a great school which doesn't benefit the OEA.
And who does the OEA claim the victims are?
I'm glad someone is already blogging about this. I was at the Senate Education Committee hearing last Wednesday, and it was all I could do not to jump up from my seat and strangle Ms. Wimmer where she sat. I plan to e-mail the Senators a point by point rebuttal of her statement before the next hearing- this Friday at 3:00.
I also would like to point out to anyone who does not know, particularly to the OEA member that commented, that my husband, who is a teacher for ORCA, had to pay union dues to the OEA for the first three years he worked there. During that time, the legislature (at the urging of the teacher's unions) passed the infamous 50/50 law and proposed additional legislation that would result in the termination of the jobs of OEA members.
Since when are unions in the business of targeting their own members for termination? We know they will fight to the end to secure the job of a tenured teacher, despite a history riddled with incompetence and even criminal behavior. Yet, dues paying members, working at a highly successful school are not deserving of the protection of the unions?
I have been doing a good deal of research regarding the history of teacher's unions and political corruption. We need to let as many people know as possible that the unions are absolutely not interested in what is right for children, their families, or apparently even their own members if it threatens their agenda of total control of public education dollars and the hearts and minds of our children.
I'm an ORCA parent and while this is a VERY serious topic for our family - I really appreciated the opportunity to LOL (would ROFL, but I'm too old and would probably hurt myself). My vote for new OEA motto:
OEA: Growing vegetables, one child at a time.
(doesn't that just say it all about the bulk of public education!)
And an honorable mention to:
Embracing public education with a choke-hold.
Thanks again for the comic relief! Keep up the fight.
I know ORCA won't be the last school hurt by the Education Associations.
If I won the lottery, I would invest in torches and pitch forks and distribute them to Charter supporters around the state.
When the OEA takes their next pass at Charters it'll be open season on the OEA!
Post a Comment