Home > Uncategorized > Reason #5 to vote #oklaed in #OKElections16: The Blob and the Penny

Reason #5 to vote #oklaed in #OKElections16: The Blob and the Penny

June 24, 2016

Two years ago, I made a list of the top 20 reasons to vote for anybody else other than Janet Barresi for state superintendent. At the end of the list, I also had a sizeable honorable mention list. With four days until the primaries this year, I’m writing a top 10 list of reasons to vote for pro-public education candidates. We can’t sit this one out. Too much is riding on our action.

10. One person can’t fix bad education policy alone.
9. The people who hate us still hate us.
8. I’m tired of saying “only.”
7. This matters more than Trump vs. Clinton.
6. What if the Veep thing really happens?
5. We are the Blob. We must protect the Penny.

With reason #5, I mentioned the haters. Yesterday, one group of haters in particular filed a new obstructionist challenge with the Oklahoma Supreme Court in an attempt to block voters from deciding whether or not to pass a penny sales tax increase this fall. That group is OCPA Impact, one of the many tentacles of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.

Their press release spends five paragraphs arguing why voters should reject the initiative. Here’s a sample:

“Oklahomans want a teacher pay raise, not a tax increase, but President Boren’s proposal would impose a major tax increase on families, individuals and small businesses at a time when tens of thousands of Oklahomans have lost work because of the ripple effects of falling oil prices,” said Dave Bond, CEO of OCPA Impact, a nonpartisan advocacy organization in Oklahoma City.

That’s fine. Make your legal case, though. Otherwise we might think that’s only your secondary purpose here.

The gist of Initiative Petition 403 fails to describe key aspects of the proposal, is inaccurate in its description of other elements of the proposal, and contains wording that could potentially be misleading or confusing to voters about the proposal’s effects, according to the challenge filed today.

In January, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled in favor of the constitutionality of Initiative Petition 403, following a separate challenge also filed by Bond and OCPA Impact.

The majority opinion of the court specifically did not reach the question of whether the gist complied with state law. However, the minority opinion stated that the gist was “dead on arrival.” The minority opinion also stated that, “The gist or proposed ballot title deceives potential signatories and potential voters.”

So their objection this time rests on the minority opinion from January?

church lady.gif

There’s a little more to it than that. They also claim:

  • The gist fails to explain that the sales and use taxes imposed by the proposal will be in addition to sales and use taxes already levied.
  • It suggests funds raised by the new tax will be used to improve college affordability, but the proposal in no way requires this.
  • It inaccurately states that funds cannot be used by school districts for administrative salaries, when the measure only prohibits funds from being used to increase superintendent salaries or add new superintendent positions.
  • It fails to notify voters how the new monies will be allocated, though over 40% of funds would go toward areas other than teacher salaries, with nearly 20% to higher education.
  • It does not mention how the proposal would alter the balance of appropriations authority between the state Board of Equalization and the Legislature.
  • It does not notify voters of when salary restrictions and audit requirements related to use of the new monies would and would not apply, including that the proposal contains no audit requirements for funds directed to the State Department of Education, the Department of Career and Technology Education, or the State Regents for Higher Education.

To prove to us that OCPA Impact is for raises for teachers, they remind us of their bonafides:

During Oklahoma’s 2016 legislative session, which ended in May, OCPA Impact was the only group advocating at the state Capitol for a pay raise for classroom teachers in Oklahoma public schools.

To provide a $5,000 pay raise for every classroom teacher statewide would cost about $245 million. OCPA Impact has previously presented over $750 million in options for funding the teacher pay raise without increasing taxes or reducing core services.

Their “plan,” if you will, includes selling off state properties and eliminating tax exemptions on services such as Thunder tickets. These are one-time revenues that can’t sustain raises and tax increases by another name. They have some small cuts to state government, but nothing terribly consequential. They have huge cuts to the state higher education budget.

All this tells me is that  OCPA still has no serious solutions (and that they really can’t stand David Boren). If you need more proof of this, how about this missive from OCPA’s main page this week?

We are the Blob.png

Oklahoma’s education blob—school unions, education schools, and their allies—is becoming unusually shameless in its determination to vote itself another taxpayer bailout. Of course the blob is always on the lookout for another hustle. But in Oklahoma this year, things are getting to a point that might make even Donald Trump blush.

…First it was a ballot initiative, championed by University of Oklahoma President David Boren. If approved, it will hike the state sales tax to fund a slate of goodies for educators, with the bulk of the proceeds going to an across-the-board $5,000 raise for all teachers. That doesn’t make sense for anyone but the blob—even if we think raising salaries is the best way to spend money on education, why do it indiscriminately? Teachers should be treated like professionals, and paid based on performance.

An indiscriminate raise only makes sense if this is a naked grab for money. And what do you know? Boren’s boondoggle would throw $125 million at higher education—i.e., at Boren—“to keep down tuition and fees.” Throwing cash at colleges will help raise tuition and fees, of course, but it will be too late to do anything about that once Boren has his boodle.

Next, in early April, around 30 educators announced they were filing together to run for state offices in the fall. Their platform? To fight for more money for educators. I wonder how I would be greeted if I announced I was running for office to fight for more money for columnists.

 

We’ve been called many things in the time that I’ve been an educator. Governor Keating called teachers slugs. Janet Barresi always complained about being opposed by the education establishment. Now we’re the blob.*

the-blob-1958.jpg

*After I posted this earlier today, Brandon Dutcher with the OCPA pointed out to me that former US Secretary of Education William Bennett actually used the term blob to refer to administrator groups in 1987 and that it is widely used in education reform circles. I was unaware. I guess I learned something today.

Normally, people who don’t like an idea presented in a ballot initiative, they vote against it. Sometimes we don’t get our way. That’s the system of government under which we live. In 2012, the November ballot was lousy with state questions. I voted against most. I still wish others had too.

And how are candidates running for office because they want to do something about the state of public education a threat to the author’s sense of decency? Is that worse than the recipients of ALEC money voting for tax credits to energy companies that pay no (or few) taxes in the first place?

That’s the true purpose of the OCPA legal filing. When they say they want to give teachers raises, it’s a diversionary tactic. They truly want to damage public education. They’ve wanted this for as long as I can remember. Therefore, the penny sales tax is antithetical to their agenda. The legal challenge is a delay tactic. That’s it.

Today, a coalition of education supporters had a brief press conference at the Capitol to push back against OCPA:

 

Supporters wore red shirts reading “Yes for 779.”

Anna King, an Oklahoma City parent, called the proposal a comprehensive solution to low teacher pay and funding woes in common education.

She said she was tired of OCPA fighting public education.

“You know, this group has fought against public education every step of the way,” King said. “We’ve had enough. It’s time to let the people vote to invest more in our schools and our teachers. Obstructing direct democracy, especially at such a critical time for our schools, is shameful.”

“For years, I’ve listened to this OCPA group espouse ways to dismantle our public schools, saying there is no such thing as a teacher shortage and they’ve referred to us as the ‘education blob,’” said Tulsa Public Schools teacher Shawna Mott Wright. “To have them now profess they believe teachers need a pay raise, but only in another manner is so disingenuous. They couldn’t care less about seeing schools funded.”

Oh, and my old boss was there too:

This is why it’s important to vote for real pro-public education candidates. It will frustrate the stuff and nonsense out of the OCPA and their ilk. They influence some conservatives at the Capitol, but not all. More and more of our elected leaders would rather listen to their constituents than think tanks and lobbyists. At least I’d like to think that.


In reason number four, I’ll show an example of a candidate who says he is pro-education but really isn’t. Til then!

 

 

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: