Install theme

Posts tagged politics

Learn It, Live It, Love it: If I weren't a teacher...?

teachingtoday:

Every now and then my students ask me “What would you do if you weren’t a teacher?” I usually answer with the same joke I’ve been making since college, “All I can be is a teacher. I have no marketable skills besides reading books and talking about them.” Then students say “What’s marketable?”…

You know, I’ve actually been thinking about this question recently, since I haven’t had any ed classes this semester as I’m finishing up my requirements before student teaching.

I finally figured I’d be doing something that involves writing—either creative writing or something involving politics. I’m not sure journalism is cut out for me, but politics makes me tick. That, and I write poetry—I post them all up on my personal tumblr. I’ve written about 76 or so over this past semester. But I’m not exactly sure what you can do in life just as a poet…

Those are both things I like to do/are interested in. But as far as passion goes, it’s definitely teaching music.

See more
This post has 62 notes
Posted at 8:52 PM 05 April 2012
This court, cosseted behind white marble pillars, out of reach of TV, accountable to no one once they give the last word, is well on its way to becoming one of the most divisive in modern American history. It has squandered even the semi-illusion that it is the unbiased, honest guardian of the Constitution. It is run by hacks dressed up in black robes.

Maureen Dowd in a column on the current, sad state of the U.S. Supreme Court: Men in Black - NYTimes.com (via tartantambourine)
 
We shouldn’t be surprised that the Court has become so political. The President’s political party tells him that appointing a Justice is one of his most powerful acts and his nominee must echo the party line. Nominees must endure a Congressional gauntlet where both political parties fight it out, not over the nominee’s Constitutional knowledge, but over the nominee’s political position. Nominees with strong Constitutional beliefs can’t even survive today’s nomination process!
 
Even though their life-long appointment is supposed to remove political influence from the Justices’ opinions, the politics of today’s nomination process has given us a Court of lightweights who interpret the Constitution based on political postions!
(via creative-education)

Not to get political on my education tumblr… but the Constitution has always been about politics. 3/5 compromise? The immediate debate over what the Constitution gave authority for and didn’t—debate among the actual people who wrote the document?

Interpretation of the Constitution has always been about political belief and standing. It’s just more overt and well known today, and even that is a loose argument to make.

(via creative-education-deactivated2)

See more
This post has 24 notes
Posted at 4:16 PM 04 April 2012
It is a parent’s responsibility to educate their children. It is not the government’s job. We have sort of lost focus here a little bit. Of course, the government wants their hands on your children as fast as they can. That is why I opposed all these early starts and pre-early starts, and early-early starts. They want your children from the womb so they can indoctrinate your children as to what they want them to be. I am against that.

Rick Santorum on early childhood education

Yeah! We need to stop the gubmint from indoctrinating our kids!

I mean, they say they’re just teaching pre-schoolers their colors, but they teach kids the color RED! And letters! But did you know that letters are used to spell “communism”?

(via greaterthanlapsed)

The entire article on the GOP candidates’ perspectives on education is pretty stunning.

(via robot-heart-politics)

As a head start teacher, I find this offensive.

(via positivelypersistentteach)

Really? I mean… seriously?

(via kicksandgiggles)

(via kicksandgiggles)

See more
This post has 222 notes
Posted at 9:09 PM 08 March 2012
positivelypersistentteach:

kohenari:

Today is the tenth anniversary of the death of my friend Ronnie Frye. He was poisoned to death in the middle of the night by the government of the State of North Carolina, on behalf of its citizens, in revenge for the 1993 murder of Ralph Childress.
I met Ronnie in the last year of his life; he was in his eighth year on death row when the lawyers who were handling his appeals asked me to meet with him and maybe, depending on how things went, to help them with a campaign to influence the governor’s decision about whether or not to commute his sentence to life imprisonment.
I’d never done anything like this before.
I was in my second year of graduate school and had just begun work as a teaching assistant for a class on human rights that had a service learning component; one of my tasks was to accompany a few students who’d signed up to meet with local death penalty attorneys. Before the end of that first meeting, I found myself agreeing to go along with everyone to the prison in Raleigh and to meet one-on-one with Frye … just to get to know him.
I knew that I was opposed to the death penalty, but only in an academic sort of way. I’d grown up in Michigan, which abolished the death penalty in 1846, and in Canada, which abolished it in 1977. Although I had done a lot of work with Amnesty International by this point in my life, I didn’t really have any first-hand experience with human rights issues. I was just a letter-writer and the organizer of an occasional rally. When I moved to Durham, North Carolina in 1999, I learned that executions took place at a prison in nearby Raleigh and I went to my first late-night protest vigil that Fall where I met a group of amazing people who plugged me into a state- and nation-wide network of human rights activists.
That said, I’d never been inside a prison and I’d never spoken to a prisoner. I had no idea what to expect when I walked into the visitation area and sat down across from a death row inmate. The whole thing couldn’t have seemed more surreal. I’d attended private schools until I was seventeen years old, graduated from college with two bachelor’s degrees, and was actually being paid to work on a PhD in political philosophy at Duke University. And Ronnie was a recovering crack addict from the mountains of North Carolina who admitted to murdering his landlord with a pair of scissors.
I was scared of him before they brought him down to meet me that first time. I’d looked up Frye online and found a picture of him; it must have been his intake picture from back in 1993: he had long, dirty hair and a beard; I told everyone who asked me about my impending prison visit that his eyes looked angry. The guy who sat across from me on that first day in the prison visitation area, though, didn’t look that way at all. He looked the guy in the picture that accompanies this post.
After my first meeting with Ronnie, speaking through a little grate and looking through bars and thick glass, we seemed to have enough interest in one another to agree to meet again the following week. Thereafter, I met with him every week for eight months, sometimes for more than two hours at a time. Before I left, every time, he’d put his hand against the glass and I’d do the same; it was the only way to shake hands. My first act of activism on Ronnie’s behalf was to ask prison officials to take a new picture of him for the Department of Corrections website; without too much prodding, they agreed. I knew that if Ronnie did get an execution date, reporters would go there for his picture and the old one would make people feel about him the way that I had; he’d seem like the monster that people want convicted murderers to be, when in fact he seemed to be a decent man who made a series of terrible choices.
Over the months that we met, we talked about sports, food, movies, music, politics, and religion. He loved auto racing, about which I knew nothing; he spent month trying to convince me that driving around in a circle is a legitimate sport. He loved the food in the prison cafeteria, but he said it had made him fat. Still he always tried to find ways to get seconds, occasionally getting into trouble for sneaking an extra little carton of milk because the one he got was barely enough milk for an elementary school kid’s lunch. He used to ask me read passages from the Bible and then, the following week, we’d discuss them. I didn’t begrudge him these discussions. His faith was hard-earned and I respected him for it. Though I wasn’t particularly religious myself, I knew a lot about the Bible and enjoyed talking with him about questions and problems that we found. He was open-minded and interested in learning about Judaism and thinking through my lack of interest in organized religion. He wanted very much for me to believe as he did because he’d found a great deal of assistance and comfort in his faith; he thought that I would have a difficult time dealing with his death and he didn’t want me to have to deal with it alone.
In this, he treated me the same way that he treated his family members and the lawyers handling his appeals; he sought to protect us and to look after us as much as he possibly could. He’d had only sporadic contact with his family while he was on death row because he knew it was difficult for them to come to Raleigh and difficult for them to visit with him in this situation. But I asked about them (he had a brother, a half-brother, a half-sister, and an aunt), and he eventually told me that his aunt used email. Beyond wanting to get them all back in touch — none of them were letter-writers; I didn’t get a single letter from Ronnie in the eight months of our friendship — his appelate attorneys needed them to explain, likely to the governor, why Ronnie ended up on death row and why his life ought to be spared.
His family hadn’t testified on his behalf at trial — Ronnie said, ”I didn’t want my family involved. I felt like I had shamed them enough already” — and his court-appointed trial attorneys failed to present the mitigating evidence that might have swayed a jury to put him in jail for life rather than sentence him to death. In particular, his attorneys failed to find and present this picture:

This is a eight-year-old Ronnie in a photo taken by police and later used to train officers about spotting child abuse. The accompanying photo, of his back, has been lost. All you can see are the marks on his torso where the bullwhip with which his foster father routinely beat him came around and stung him in front.[1] Ronnie’s jury never saw the photo because his trial lawyers never found it; they never found it because they never asked about it, even though Ronnie’s foster father went to jail when the abuse was discovered; and they never asked about it because the lawyer responsible for digging into Ronnie’s past was an alcoholic who later admitted to “drinking as many as 12 shots daily before and during Frye’s trial.” At each appeal, judges found that Ronnie’s decision to keep his family out of things — and not his attorney’s drinking — hampered his defense or that the outcome likely would have been the same if both of his court-appointed lawyers had been sober.
Of course, jurors disagreed. If they’d known more, two of Ronnie’s jurors said, they’d have voted differently in the penalty phase of the trial.
As it became more and more apparent that Ronnie’s execution date of August 31 likely would not be changed by any court, the North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers, Amnesty International, the Dean of UNC’s Law School, the President of the North Carolina Bar Association, a former Chief Justice of North Carolina’s Supreme Court, the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, People of Faith Against the Death Penalty, and the ACLU all petitioned Governor Mike Easley to commute the death sentence.
I did too. Ronnie’s family asked me to go along with them to meet with Easley. This was all part of a last-ditch effort when the courts had turned down Ronnie’s appeals. There was a massive media campaign — you can still find a lot of it online if you search — and there were rallies in Hickory and in Raleigh. The last two weeks of it is something of a blur for me as I reflect on it now. I have a vague memory of driving out to Hickory, of talking to a handful of reporters, and of trying to explain to the governor that putting Ronnie to death would be the last in a series of instances where the State of North Carolina had failed him.
But my clearest memories are of my one contact visit with Ronnie and of my phone call with him on the night of his execution.
One of his lawyers called me, in early August, to tell me that we’d need to make a clemency video. He wondered if I knew anyone with a camera or editing equipment. I didn’t, but I managed to enlist a helpful Duke undergrad who had access to these things. Together, we drove out to the prison where the elevator took us to a different floor from the one to which it always automatically took visitors. In a bare room with a few chairs and a folding table, I got to shake hands with Ronnie Frye for the first and only time. We sat in that room for a couple of hours and shot something like thirty minutes of tape, after deciding that it would be better for Ronnie to speak about what he felt rather than to read some prepared speech. What we had, by the end, was an interview: I asked questions and Ronnie answered. Then this undergrad and I went back to his dorm and edited it down to a few minutes of just Ronnie’s answers to send to Governor Easley. I have the cassette tape with both the three minute and the full thirty minute versions; it’s amazing and heart-breaking. Every time I watch it, I can’t believe I’m the kid in the video. Before we shut off the camera and left the prison, Ronnie caught me up in a bear hug, nearly lifting me completely off the ground.
On the day of his death, I was expected to join his family for another contact visit. They would be there much of the day, leave for dinner when Ronnie got his last meal (he’d asked me to find a good place for a cheeseburger; as a vegetarian at the time, I’d asked around for a long time), and then return to spend some time with him in the evening. But when I arrived, early in the afternoon, prison officials told me that the visit was for family members and lawyers only; I might have been part of his legal team, but I would have to wait outside. I was stunned, but Ronnie was quick to adapt; he spent some of his precious time sending messages back and forth with me through his lawyers. I waited outside the prison for hours that day and, after dinner, I waited in a room near the parking lot that was slowly filling up with members of the media who were there to report on the execution. There had been some last-minute wrangling with prison officials and it seemed that I would be allowed to speak to Ronnie on the phone at some point that evening. The call came through late, after 11pm, when Ronnie’s family and attorneys had been escorted into a separate waiting room until it was time for the execution to proceed. He asked if I was alright; he said he was doing ok; he told me that his cheeseburger had been great; he said he hoped I could keep in touch with his family; he asked me to thank the people who were outside the prison gates holding a candlelight vigil; and he told me to keep working to change people’s minds about the death penalty. He said, “I love you, brother.” And then our time was up.
Ronnie Frye’s death was meant to bring some measure of comfort to the victims of his crime, the family of Ralph Childress. Perhaps it did; I know Ronnie sincerely hoped that it would. But it also created another innocent, grieving family: Ronnie’s. As I have written a great many times on this blog over the past couple of years in one way or another, the death penalty is not a solution to the problem violence; it is violence. I know this from first-hand experience; it is not theoretical or abstract to me.[2]
One final note: Amazingly, and totally unbeknownst to me until I started writing this reflection, there’s an interview with Ronnie posted online as a resource for criminal justice students; it was recorded a little over a week before his execution. You can listen to it here.
[1] The term “foster father” is not at all the proper word to use in this situation and I use it only because there isn’t a term in existence to describe Ronnie’s relationship to Steve Ford. What happened is this: “While filling their car at a gas station, Steve and Cleo Ford heard that a Hickory woman was giving her children away. They met Carolyn Frye at a restaurant. She introduced 4-year-old Ronnie and his 5-year-old brother David. Then she handed her boys a bag of candy and announced that the Fords were their new mama and daddy. No papers were signed, no authorities involved. Ronnie Frye became Ronnie Ford.” There is a good deal more about Ronnie’s background here.
[2] An edited version of this blog post appears as the first in a monthly series of columns on the problem of justice in contemporary politics and pop culture that I will be writing for the Daily Nebraskan this semester.

I don’t have the right words.

Oh my word. :(
I’ll be looking for those articles - that’s my school newspaper, and I’m good friends with one of the editors. Hopefully they’ll let me know when they’re published.

positivelypersistentteach:

kohenari:

Today is the tenth anniversary of the death of my friend Ronnie Frye. He was poisoned to death in the middle of the night by the government of the State of North Carolina, on behalf of its citizens, in revenge for the 1993 murder of Ralph Childress.

I met Ronnie in the last year of his life; he was in his eighth year on death row when the lawyers who were handling his appeals asked me to meet with him and maybe, depending on how things went, to help them with a campaign to influence the governor’s decision about whether or not to commute his sentence to life imprisonment.

I’d never done anything like this before.

I was in my second year of graduate school and had just begun work as a teaching assistant for a class on human rights that had a service learning component; one of my tasks was to accompany a few students who’d signed up to meet with local death penalty attorneys. Before the end of that first meeting, I found myself agreeing to go along with everyone to the prison in Raleigh and to meet one-on-one with Frye … just to get to know him.

I knew that I was opposed to the death penalty, but only in an academic sort of way. I’d grown up in Michigan, which abolished the death penalty in 1846, and in Canada, which abolished it in 1977. Although I had done a lot of work with Amnesty International by this point in my life, I didn’t really have any first-hand experience with human rights issues. I was just a letter-writer and the organizer of an occasional rally. When I moved to Durham, North Carolina in 1999, I learned that executions took place at a prison in nearby Raleigh and I went to my first late-night protest vigil that Fall where I met a group of amazing people who plugged me into a state- and nation-wide network of human rights activists.

That said, I’d never been inside a prison and I’d never spoken to a prisoner. I had no idea what to expect when I walked into the visitation area and sat down across from a death row inmate. The whole thing couldn’t have seemed more surreal. I’d attended private schools until I was seventeen years old, graduated from college with two bachelor’s degrees, and was actually being paid to work on a PhD in political philosophy at Duke University. And Ronnie was a recovering crack addict from the mountains of North Carolina who admitted to murdering his landlord with a pair of scissors.

I was scared of him before they brought him down to meet me that first time. I’d looked up Frye online and found a picture of him; it must have been his intake picture from back in 1993: he had long, dirty hair and a beard; I told everyone who asked me about my impending prison visit that his eyes looked angry. The guy who sat across from me on that first day in the prison visitation area, though, didn’t look that way at all. He looked the guy in the picture that accompanies this post.

After my first meeting with Ronnie, speaking through a little grate and looking through bars and thick glass, we seemed to have enough interest in one another to agree to meet again the following week. Thereafter, I met with him every week for eight months, sometimes for more than two hours at a time. Before I left, every time, he’d put his hand against the glass and I’d do the same; it was the only way to shake hands. My first act of activism on Ronnie’s behalf was to ask prison officials to take a new picture of him for the Department of Corrections website; without too much prodding, they agreed. I knew that if Ronnie did get an execution date, reporters would go there for his picture and the old one would make people feel about him the way that I had; he’d seem like the monster that people want convicted murderers to be, when in fact he seemed to be a decent man who made a series of terrible choices.

Over the months that we met, we talked about sports, food, movies, music, politics, and religion. He loved auto racing, about which I knew nothing; he spent month trying to convince me that driving around in a circle is a legitimate sport. He loved the food in the prison cafeteria, but he said it had made him fat. Still he always tried to find ways to get seconds, occasionally getting into trouble for sneaking an extra little carton of milk because the one he got was barely enough milk for an elementary school kid’s lunch. He used to ask me read passages from the Bible and then, the following week, we’d discuss them. I didn’t begrudge him these discussions. His faith was hard-earned and I respected him for it. Though I wasn’t particularly religious myself, I knew a lot about the Bible and enjoyed talking with him about questions and problems that we found. He was open-minded and interested in learning about Judaism and thinking through my lack of interest in organized religion. He wanted very much for me to believe as he did because he’d found a great deal of assistance and comfort in his faith; he thought that I would have a difficult time dealing with his death and he didn’t want me to have to deal with it alone.

In this, he treated me the same way that he treated his family members and the lawyers handling his appeals; he sought to protect us and to look after us as much as he possibly could. He’d had only sporadic contact with his family while he was on death row because he knew it was difficult for them to come to Raleigh and difficult for them to visit with him in this situation. But I asked about them (he had a brother, a half-brother, a half-sister, and an aunt), and he eventually told me that his aunt used email. Beyond wanting to get them all back in touch — none of them were letter-writers; I didn’t get a single letter from Ronnie in the eight months of our friendship — his appelate attorneys needed them to explain, likely to the governor, why Ronnie ended up on death row and why his life ought to be spared.

His family hadn’t testified on his behalf at trial — Ronnie said, ”I didn’t want my family involved. I felt like I had shamed them enough already” — and his court-appointed trial attorneys failed to present the mitigating evidence that might have swayed a jury to put him in jail for life rather than sentence him to death. In particular, his attorneys failed to find and present this picture:

This is a eight-year-old Ronnie in a photo taken by police and later used to train officers about spotting child abuse. The accompanying photo, of his back, has been lost. All you can see are the marks on his torso where the bullwhip with which his foster father routinely beat him came around and stung him in front.[1] Ronnie’s jury never saw the photo because his trial lawyers never found it; they never found it because they never asked about it, even though Ronnie’s foster father went to jail when the abuse was discovered; and they never asked about it because the lawyer responsible for digging into Ronnie’s past was an alcoholic who later admitted to “drinking as many as 12 shots daily before and during Frye’s trial.” At each appeal, judges found that Ronnie’s decision to keep his family out of things — and not his attorney’s drinking — hampered his defense or that the outcome likely would have been the same if both of his court-appointed lawyers had been sober.

Of course, jurors disagreed. If they’d known more, two of Ronnie’s jurors said, they’d have voted differently in the penalty phase of the trial.

As it became more and more apparent that Ronnie’s execution date of August 31 likely would not be changed by any court, the North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers, Amnesty International, the Dean of UNC’s Law School, the President of the North Carolina Bar Association, a former Chief Justice of North Carolina’s Supreme Court, the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, People of Faith Against the Death Penalty, and the ACLU all petitioned Governor Mike Easley to commute the death sentence.

I did too. Ronnie’s family asked me to go along with them to meet with Easley. This was all part of a last-ditch effort when the courts had turned down Ronnie’s appeals. There was a massive media campaign — you can still find a lot of it online if you search — and there were rallies in Hickory and in Raleigh. The last two weeks of it is something of a blur for me as I reflect on it now. I have a vague memory of driving out to Hickory, of talking to a handful of reporters, and of trying to explain to the governor that putting Ronnie to death would be the last in a series of instances where the State of North Carolina had failed him.

But my clearest memories are of my one contact visit with Ronnie and of my phone call with him on the night of his execution.

One of his lawyers called me, in early August, to tell me that we’d need to make a clemency video. He wondered if I knew anyone with a camera or editing equipment. I didn’t, but I managed to enlist a helpful Duke undergrad who had access to these things. Together, we drove out to the prison where the elevator took us to a different floor from the one to which it always automatically took visitors. In a bare room with a few chairs and a folding table, I got to shake hands with Ronnie Frye for the first and only time. We sat in that room for a couple of hours and shot something like thirty minutes of tape, after deciding that it would be better for Ronnie to speak about what he felt rather than to read some prepared speech. What we had, by the end, was an interview: I asked questions and Ronnie answered. Then this undergrad and I went back to his dorm and edited it down to a few minutes of just Ronnie’s answers to send to Governor Easley. I have the cassette tape with both the three minute and the full thirty minute versions; it’s amazing and heart-breaking. Every time I watch it, I can’t believe I’m the kid in the video. Before we shut off the camera and left the prison, Ronnie caught me up in a bear hug, nearly lifting me completely off the ground.

On the day of his death, I was expected to join his family for another contact visit. They would be there much of the day, leave for dinner when Ronnie got his last meal (he’d asked me to find a good place for a cheeseburger; as a vegetarian at the time, I’d asked around for a long time), and then return to spend some time with him in the evening. But when I arrived, early in the afternoon, prison officials told me that the visit was for family members and lawyers only; I might have been part of his legal team, but I would have to wait outside. I was stunned, but Ronnie was quick to adapt; he spent some of his precious time sending messages back and forth with me through his lawyers. I waited outside the prison for hours that day and, after dinner, I waited in a room near the parking lot that was slowly filling up with members of the media who were there to report on the execution. There had been some last-minute wrangling with prison officials and it seemed that I would be allowed to speak to Ronnie on the phone at some point that evening. The call came through late, after 11pm, when Ronnie’s family and attorneys had been escorted into a separate waiting room until it was time for the execution to proceed. He asked if I was alright; he said he was doing ok; he told me that his cheeseburger had been great; he said he hoped I could keep in touch with his family; he asked me to thank the people who were outside the prison gates holding a candlelight vigil; and he told me to keep working to change people’s minds about the death penalty. He said, “I love you, brother.” And then our time was up.

Ronnie Frye’s death was meant to bring some measure of comfort to the victims of his crime, the family of Ralph Childress. Perhaps it did; I know Ronnie sincerely hoped that it would. But it also created another innocent, grieving family: Ronnie’s. As I have written a great many times on this blog over the past couple of years in one way or another, the death penalty is not a solution to the problem violence; it is violence. I know this from first-hand experience; it is not theoretical or abstract to me.[2]

One final note: Amazingly, and totally unbeknownst to me until I started writing this reflection, there’s an interview with Ronnie posted online as a resource for criminal justice students; it was recorded a little over a week before his execution. You can listen to it here.


[1] The term “foster father” is not at all the proper word to use in this situation and I use it only because there isn’t a term in existence to describe Ronnie’s relationship to Steve Ford. What happened is this: “While filling their car at a gas station, Steve and Cleo Ford heard that a Hickory woman was giving her children away. They met Carolyn Frye at a restaurant. She introduced 4-year-old Ronnie and his 5-year-old brother David. Then she handed her boys a bag of candy and announced that the Fords were their new mama and daddy. No papers were signed, no authorities involved. Ronnie Frye became Ronnie Ford.” There is a good deal more about Ronnie’s background here.

[2] An edited version of this blog post appears as the first in a monthly series of columns on the problem of justice in contemporary politics and pop culture that I will be writing for the Daily Nebraskan this semester.

I don’t have the right words.

Oh my word. :(

I’ll be looking for those articles - that’s my school newspaper, and I’m good friends with one of the editors. Hopefully they’ll let me know when they’re published.

(via positivelypersistentteach)

See more
This post has 286 notes
Posted at 5:15 PM 31 August 2011
pantslessprogressive:

In 2003, Texas Governor and current GOP presidential hopeful Rick Perry was the driving force behind an insurance scheme to bet on the deaths of retired teachers while Wall Street turned a profit, according to information obtained by The Huffington Post.
According to Zach Carter and Jason Cherkis at HuffPo, Governor Perry and his office tried to convince retired teachers to accept a life insurance plan that would ultimately provide benefits to Wall Street and the state of Texas, rather than family members of the deceased.

According to the notes, which were authenticated by a meeting participant, the Perry administration wanted to help Wall Street investors gamble on how long retired Texas teachers would live. Perry was promising the state big money in exchange for helping Swiss banking giant UBS set up a business of teacher death speculation.
All they had to do was convince retirees to let UBS buy life insurance policies on them. When the retirees died, those policies would pay out benefits to Wall Street speculators, and the state, supposedly, would get paid for arranging the bets. The families of the deceased former teachers would get nothing.
The meeting notes offer the most direct evidence that the Perry administration was not only intimately involved with the insurance scheme, but a leading driver of the plan.
[…] The notes make clear that the governor’s proposal deliberately targeted the elderly. The state was only seeking to take out life insurance on people between the ages of 75 and 90. At a separate meeting five days later, the plan’s proponents discussed the “mental capacity” of these retirees to grant consent as one of three major technical obstacles to the plan, according to notes from that meeting.
At the first meeting, Morrissey said it could take 10 to 12 years for Texas to “earn” money from the scheme, but insisted the deal could be worth up to $700 million for the state if the retirement fund could sign up 40,000 retired teachers.

Perry and team even used a financial incentive to pitch this scheme, according to a meeting attendee:

The governor’s office was even prepared to put down a little cash up front. If retirees balked at the notion of the state profiting from their deaths, Perry’s budget men suggested they could be persuaded for the cost of a pair of shoes, according to the meeting notes. If a retiree signed a contract allowing the state’s teacher pension fund to buy life insurance on them, the governor was prepared to give them between $50 and $100.

The life insurance plan never happened and Perry’s office has since attempted to distance itself from the idea. However, as the article points out, the governor’s office “had not only endorsed the concept, but had already formulated a plan to implement it,” according to the meeting notes.
Read the full story at HuffPo.

Ummm… what???

pantslessprogressive:

In 2003, Texas Governor and current GOP presidential hopeful Rick Perry was the driving force behind an insurance scheme to bet on the deaths of retired teachers while Wall Street turned a profit, according to information obtained by The Huffington Post.

According to Zach Carter and Jason Cherkis at HuffPo, Governor Perry and his office tried to convince retired teachers to accept a life insurance plan that would ultimately provide benefits to Wall Street and the state of Texas, rather than family members of the deceased.

According to the notes, which were authenticated by a meeting participant, the Perry administration wanted to help Wall Street investors gamble on how long retired Texas teachers would live. Perry was promising the state big money in exchange for helping Swiss banking giant UBS set up a business of teacher death speculation.

All they had to do was convince retirees to let UBS buy life insurance policies on them. When the retirees died, those policies would pay out benefits to Wall Street speculators, and the state, supposedly, would get paid for arranging the bets. The families of the deceased former teachers would get nothing.

The meeting notes offer the most direct evidence that the Perry administration was not only intimately involved with the insurance scheme, but a leading driver of the plan.

[…] The notes make clear that the governor’s proposal deliberately targeted the elderly. The state was only seeking to take out life insurance on people between the ages of 75 and 90. At a separate meeting five days later, the plan’s proponents discussed the “mental capacity” of these retirees to grant consent as one of three major technical obstacles to the plan, according to notes from that meeting.

At the first meeting, Morrissey said it could take 10 to 12 years for Texas to “earn” money from the scheme, but insisted the deal could be worth up to $700 million for the state if the retirement fund could sign up 40,000 retired teachers.

Perry and team even used a financial incentive to pitch this scheme, according to a meeting attendee:

The governor’s office was even prepared to put down a little cash up front. If retirees balked at the notion of the state profiting from their deaths, Perry’s budget men suggested they could be persuaded for the cost of a pair of shoes, according to the meeting notes. If a retiree signed a contract allowing the state’s teacher pension fund to buy life insurance on them, the governor was prepared to give them between $50 and $100.

The life insurance plan never happened and Perry’s office has since attempted to distance itself from the idea. However, as the article points out, the governor’s office “had not only endorsed the concept, but had already formulated a plan to implement it,” according to the meeting notes.

Read the full story at HuffPo.

Ummm… what???

(via pantslessprogressive)

See more
This post has 100 notes
Posted at 7:35 PM 25 August 2011

be informed: Rick Perry America: A nightmare for families and education

informate:

In 2006, Perry convinced the state legislature to make school districts cut local school taxes, promising that money would be recouped by a state business tax. The revenues from that tax never materialized, and the schools were left with a $5 billion shortfall. This January the governor…

(Source: communities.washingtontimes.com, via informate-deactivated20130802)

See more
This post has 3 notes
Tagged with politics, Rick Perry, education,
Posted at 7:12 AM 17 August 2011

Mitt Romney signs antigay pledge

girlwithalessonplan:

gaywrites:

Mitt Romney has joined Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum in signing a pledge basically promising never to support LGBT rights again. 

Sponsored by the extremely antigay National Organization for Marriage, the pledge says candidates who sign will support a U.S. constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, nominate judges who believe the Constitution doesn’t guarantee same-sex marriage, put gay marriage up to a vote in D.C. where it’s already legal, investigate “harassment” of traditional marriage supporters and defend DOMA in court. 

The icing on the poisonous conservative cake:

In the most cryptic of the promises, the candidates for the GOP nomination say that if they are elected, they will create a “presidential commission on religious liberty.” The commission would “investigate and document reports of Americans who have been harassed or threatened” for supporting gay marriage bans in speech or in donations. The commission might even “propose new protections” for those who are against same-sex marriage. 

At this point, there’s no leading contender for the GOP nomination who’s in any way supportive of LGBT rights. Not long ago, Romney publicly called a similar, more controversial pledge from the Iowa Family Leader “undignified and inappropriate” and refused to sign it, though Bachmann and Santorum signed quickly (surprised?). Why sign this one? Why vow to take away rights?

I’m outraged. I actually trusted him. Many of my followers are LGBT/allied and also Republicans - I urge you to reconsider your loyalties for the 2012 election. This is dangerous. 

THIS IS IMPORTANT.

See more
This post has 422 notes
Tagged with politics, Mitt Romney,
Posted at 8:27 PM 04 August 2011

World-Shaker: How the Debt "Compromise" Works:

world-shaker:

What the Democrats got:

Sensible tax increases on the millionaires and billionaires who have seen their share of equity skyrocket over the past three decades (and who pay a lower tax rate than folks in the middle class).

Draw downs in the obscenely large defense budget.

Closed tax loopholes…

I should know better than to wade into political swamps. But I’ll just drop my 2 cents off.

Obama and Boehner were backed into a corner. Many of these Tea Partiers saw no need to increase the debt ceiling - they would not vote for it.

The President had to sell out his own party. There was no staring the Tea Party down - they would have gladly sunk with the ship in a fit of misplaced patriotism. 

So in the end, he did the only thing he could do - he made a deal with the devil. The alternative was far worse - default.

I don’t envy Boehner’s job either - caught between the Tea Party and the President, knowing he had to make a deal or risk him and his fellow GOPers getting trounced in the next election, but having nothing that he could put on the table to appease both his caucus and the Democrats… so in the end, he apparently valued his Speakership of the House more, and tried repeatedly to appease them in the hopes that he could hold out and stare down the President and the Democrats who had even more to lose, hoping they would be forced to adopt his deal. Talk about a Hail Mary.

The whole blatantly over-politicized process we’ve been dragged through makes me sick. But those, unfortunately, are the realities…

(via world-shaker-deactivated2013092)

See more
This post has 25 notes
Tagged with politics,
Posted at 5:40 PM 01 August 2011

World-Shaker: How Education Works In America (an editorial)

world-shaker:

Politicians who are unhappy with the political leanings of those who work in education (and those who happen to have a lot of it) find some way to cut funding for public schools and require more tests. This is done under the guise of “accountability.”

It’s at this point that local prisons start…

I wouldn’t call this the best thing I’ve read all day (that goes to this interesting Einstein information), but it is definitely something people need to be more aware of.

I like following politics, but sometimes it just feeds my cynicism… 

(via world-shaker-deactivated2013092)

See more
This post has 240 notes
Tagged with education, politics, sad,
Posted at 9:41 AM 20 July 2011

Cantor: Taxing The Rich Off The Table, But Making Students Pay More Immediately Is Fine | ThinkProgress

….the Daily Beast’s Howard Kurtz reports, one group that Cantor is apparently fine with making pay more is American college students. Cantor, at the White House for budget negotiations, apparently proposed that students who take out student loans should immediately start paying interest, rather than getting to make payments after graduation

That hurts. Good thing I wasn’t planning on voting Republican.

We really need a Republican party that’s centered on workable ideas and not just spaced out ideology… it used to be a party of intellectuals (whether you agreed with them or not… I for one, do not), not pandering rabble rousers. Now both sides have turned their ideology into a quasi-religion, and are trying to purge the non-believers from their ranks.

Is it too much to ask for a government that actually works to get things done that benefit everyone instead of whatever select constituency they feel like pandering to today?

(Source: sarahlee310)

See more
This post has 126 notes
Posted at 8:41 PM 17 July 2011