Separated At Birth
ArchPundit
Title stolen from someone, but I can’t remember who
Inspired by a comment on Capitol Fax
March 2005
The Guy Who Really Did…
Walk Up Hill both ways.
God bless John Lewis.
Confusing Teaching With Dogma
I’m highly critical of high school social science curriculum for a variety of reasons. Part of this is due to the way schools adopt curriculum and part is due to state requirements that make the adoption of a coherent curriculum pretty difficult. Sometimes the teachers are the problem, but in general, knowing studetns at the collegiate level who I also am familiar with their high school teacher, good teachers don’t always end up with bright well informed students.
Every year someone releases a survey on the pitiful level of knowledge the average high school student is aware of and tells us how it used to be better. The problem is there is virtually no evidence it used to be better other than people who insist they walked up hill both ways to school.
Since the 1950s when fairly large scale polling began and people were tested for political knowledge, it’s been pretty well understood that most people are quite content to hold contradictory beliefs and maintain a relatively low level of political knowledge, but everyone keeps talking about the dangerous low level of information of the kids today.
There’s just no strong indication things have changed much–and the most likely reason why has nothing to do with schools, but with parents who don’t talk about politics with their kids. If the parents aren’t interested, the kids won’t be either in most cases. While I’d like everyone to be more invovled in civic discussions, I’m not sure that the current state is all that awful. People in the US are generally happy and the decide what to spend their time on. I can’t say that is always good as Doctor Phil is still on the air, but I’ll live with it.
The challenge of high school history and government texts is to provide a framework to force students to think critically and develop skills that are not just applied to rote knowledge, but can be applied as the world changes around them.
One doesn’t make a good citizen by preaching to a high school student. One does encourage a high school student to think critically and given a reasonable base knowledge, one would expect that the conclusion that the United States, while imperfect, is a country that is an amazing place to live.
My rant here has a point, in that teaching patriotism isn’t about reading a creed and having students memorize it. It’s about making US History and Government relevant to students and allowing them to discover each of those things in the creed through critical thinking.
I often object to saying the Pledge of Allegiance in classes and not because of the religious portion (which a student can opt out of if they so wish–another important lesson on freedomn and liberty). I object because it is divorced too often from teaching the lessons that lead to the conclusions of the Pledge of Allegiance.
I remember saying it in class and I can not think of a worse tribute to freedom than a bunch of sixth graders shooting spitballs and gossipping while pretending to recite the Pledge with meaning.
But what really pisses me off about the column above, is that he doesn’t have the first clue about how many educators do a remarkable job allowing students to explore the meaning of America. I’ve pointed out a project by Stevenson High School students that is a remarkable effort before.
Allison Nichols, Brittany Saltiel, and Sarah Siegel began a school project that turned into a movement for justice in the case of the Civil Rights Workers in killed in the Mississippi Burning case.
Their teacher Barry Bradford didn’t have them recite a creed, he encouraged them to live it. Which is a better way to teach patriotism to you?
And by the way, yesterday was the
Below are Barack Obama’s remarks on the Senate Floor concerning the case
And yesterday was the fourtieth anniversary of Bloody Sunday in Selma.
Read More
Keyes Active in Schiavo Fight
Any chance they could need you permantly in Florida, Alan?
I hear Syverson and Rauschenberger will pay for the U-Haul.
A Very Good Social Security Column
From Lynn Sweet
She lays out the basic issues very well. One that hasn’t gotten a lot of attention is number 4.
4. Retirement ages are not written in stone, though any change would be politically unpopular. At present, limited benefits can start at age 62. Folks born between 1943 and 1954 have to work until age 66 for the full benefit. People born after 1967 have to work until age 67. Should we need to work longer in order to retire with full benefits? No way around it — upping the retirement age is a benefit cut.
And this is a question we need to grapple with that is very difficult. Can we realistically increase the age? I know in the case of both of my parents health would have prohibited reaching 70. My father climbed launch pads for a living and now at 66 he had to have his knee replaced. He retired with full benefits as it is, but what would he have done otherwise? He might have been able to do a desk job, but given the type of hands on work he did, that might not have been possible. He could have gone on disability, but that has societal costs too. One question I’ve never seen answered about this particular problem is that if the retirement age is 70, what about SSI benefits and state disability costs?
This is a serious question, has anyone estimated the costs of raising the age to 70? Because the gap matters between the extra disability and what is saved/added to the system. Certainly there would be a net pickup, but is that net pickup adequate?
Hale’s Communication to Parents Cut-Off
“I was just so stunned that I didn’t think to ask why,” he said. “It’s especially hard because we need him now and he needs us.”
Your son has been found guilty of trying to have a federal judge killed. His close associate went on a shooting spree of minorities. He ran the organization out of your house.
I’m thinking there might be some concern that, just maybe, you might be helping him run his organization from prison and even trying to send signals through you whether you know it or not.
Call me crazy.
Madigan Blagojevich Analysis
IlPundit covers the gamesmanship between the two and offers a couple possibilities of what Madigan might be maneuvering to do based on Operation Cobra. It’s a great story and good analysis.
$17,000 Later, I don’t Owe Them
While the Belleville paper didn’t specify, I’m assuming Centreville Township Candidate Curtis McCall said that with a straight face.
The documents show that as of Dec. 31, McCall had received $12,000 from Mike Ocello, national director of the PT’s chain of topless clubs, and $5,000 from Katrina Sanders, longtime companion of topless club operator and convicted felon Robert Romanik. PT’s, one of Ocello’s clubs, is located in Centreville and Sanders is the licensee for the Crystal Palace strip club in Centreville.
Sigh.
Funny, Why Didn’t St. Clair County’s Prosecutor Go After Corruption in East Saint Louis?
Oh, wait, those people are black and they deliver votes for him. Those following the East Saint Louis voting scandal should remember that everything the Feds have found out could have been investigated by the local St. Clair County Prosecutor.
That the Central Committee was corrupt isn’t news to anyone. Even Carl Officer can tell you that. The question is why did the white Democratic machine in St. Clair County tolerate it for so long.
If a community ever needed help and a clean system it is East Saint Louis, a town that has little hope. Democratic principles are based upon the belief that those of us who are most vulnerable must be protected and empowered to provide for themselves. In St. Clair County that has been perverted to protecting the benefits of a corrupt white power structure that uses tiny black towns as a way to get votes in return for overlooking petty corruption. The weakest are sold out and forced to live in towns where vice is a way of life and what few resources are available are syphoned off for the connected.
It took the FBI to come in and help a honest cop uncover that corruption.
What’s the First Thing You Do to Reduce Emissions?
In a month-long trial in June of 2003, Illinois Power’s lawyers tried to convince U.S. District Judge Michael J. Reagan that the Baldwin plant’s upgrades didn’t trigger the more stringent air quality standards. They also argued that the company had significantly reduced emissions at the Baldwin plant since the case was filed in 1999 by switching to low-sulfur coal.
I added the bold.
The administration tries to sell Clear Skies as a way to avoid expensive command and control mandates, but then says the same expensive technology will be incorporated. There’s a problem there.
The other thing the administration is trying to sell is that a tradeable permit system will allow older plants to be free to not introduce new technology, but stay in operation reducing overall energy costs.
The notion is that old plants can’t be regulated under current law so just give them an incentive. The other option is to hold them accountable for current standards by removing the grandfather clause from the 1970s and simply insisting that all plants meet current levels. One can avoid the ‘costly litigation’ by simply making that law which would be far easier than introducing an entire new regulatory scheme.
The issue in intertwined with the system suggested by the Administration for tradeable permits. Under the SO2 permit system in 1990, plants not only had to fit in under the cap, but their local effects were monitored by local authorities who are accountable for ambient air quality. So even if a plant could stay under the large cap, if local air quality is deemed substandard, local and state governments could require stricter rules.
This would not be true under Clear Skies which removes the ability of local and state governments to interfere with the permit market. The perverse nature of the initiative is you could reach the goals in Clear Skies (already less restrictive than other potential initiatives) and yet local areas’ air quality could be decreased.
This Dynegy plant is a perfect example of if Dynegy had enough permits and its other plants were relatively low emitting, then the local air quality could still suffer and the state would not be able to interfere with the market.
UPDATE: Spelling fix