Don's Tuesday column

           THE WAY I SEE IT   by Don Polson  Red Bluff Daily News   2/4/2014

 Solidarity Forever—The Union Makes Us Strong

Jim Reed, a Democrat running for the State Assembly for the 3^rd District, appears tonight at the Tea Party Patriots meeting. His last appearance prompted a letter from Reed to the editor attempting to refute a statement by a Patriot: that illegal aliens take space in schools that would otherwise go to children of American citizens.

He is entitled to his opinion but not to his own facts. Facts: there are finite resources and limited seats to educate children from pre-school through college. Money and space claimed by the children of those here illegally constitutes a quantifiable drain on the education budget that is either 1) denied to legal students, as in higher education at colleges with limited admissions, or 2) paid for through tax revenue that would not be required from American taxpayers if those children and their parents were to remain in their countries of origin. All civilized countries already have schools paid for by their citizens’ taxes; those schools are the rightful place to provide education in the students’ native tongues. The taxes paid by illegal immigrants do not, in fact, cover the costs of providing services, such as education, medical care and income support, provided by American taxpayers—they, in fact, send billions of dollars to their home countries that, by definition, contribute nothing to America’s economy.

My first reaction to Mr. Jack Hansen’s letter (“Accusation was uncalled for,” Feb. 1) was the Shakespearean “Thou doth protest too much” upon realizing that I must have gotten pretty close to the mark by using the phrase “corrupt money.” He confirmed what is patently undeniable: Teachers union money (a/k/a “support”) helped elect the three school board members. Would they have won their seats without said union money paying for glossy campaign material? Hard to prove the counter narrative, of course, but they could choose to be transparent about the issue by simply providing the quantities they spent in the races, and the union could itemize their expenditures. Of course, they could deny ever communicating, formally or informally, with teachers or union bigwigs over the Escobar firing. That’s also hard to disprove, as the issue fades and overseeing authorities continue their disinterest. However, last Friday’s Daily News article, “State board to probe RBUHS teachers group,” suggests otherwise. Hmmm.

I never “inferred directly” that the Board members lacked integrity—which Mr. Hansen “inferred,” or twisted, from my words. I never “assassinated” anyone’s character—just plainly stated the obvious: union money helped elect them and they decided for the union. For the record, I consider all union money—forced from their members upon pain of repercussions, derived from taxpayers, including parents of schoolchildren, upon pain of legal repercussions—to be inherently “corrupt money” (def: “infected; tainted”) when spent on political or electoral causes.

Unions (or, “associations”) can, with permission and agreement from members, negotiate over salary, benefits and work rules. However, those members can’t decline to “associate” with the union. Throwing monetary weight around for or against propositions, initiatives, politicians and, yes, local school board elections sure looks like a corrupt process, the way I see it. It’s only removed by degrees from actual bribery. Integrity doesn’t apply to union expenditures of taxpayer-provided, forcibly-deducted members’ dues, on the political process with which teachers and the larger public must comply. These same people insist money from rich conservatives and corporations taints anything it touches, but tens of millions of union dollars, even relatively minor amounts spent on a school board race, have no apparent strings, expectations or compromising influence. “Conflict of interest,” anyone?

How convenient to dismiss and wave away my concerns because I had “limited information” about the firing. What a shame that the coverage of the accusations against Ms. Escobar by the teachers union provided in the Daily News articles was insufficient to allow the average reader an informed opinion. I read a whole lot of gobble-dee-gook that amounted to not liking the way she talked to or looked at people, or whether her changes were well received by the teachers (employees). Oh, the horror of having to teach from “bell to bell” or be credentialed in their field of instruction! I think the teachers owed Ms. Escobar the respect to make every effort to implement her changes and allow the results to stand for the record. Instead, the union spoke, demanded really, and the Board members dutifully complied.

Meanwhile, I’ve read of school districts where teachers are rarely fired for cause, no matter how poorly they perform. I’m sure the vast majority of Tehama County’s teachers are conscientious, more-than-competent and sincerely put their hearts into educating their students. However, tenure after 2 years assures a virtual job-for-life with little or no accountability.

Mr. Hansen, a “former school superintendent,” assured us all that he knows “as a fact that the union had no direct influence in the decisions reached by the board.” So, for 4 months the steady drumbeat and pressure from one of the most powerful unions in Tehama County had “no direct influence.” Of course, there was never going to be a way “to resolve the issues while retaining the superintendent” because the union was never going to yield an inch—so “the concerns and problems were not going to go away and it was unfortunately time to move in a different direction.” I’m certain that the union won’t have to exert any “direct influence” in said direction now that the High School Governing Board and (Interim) Superintendent Joe Harrop have the example of just how a teachers union can both speak loudly and carry a big stick. As NEA President Lily Eskelsen sang in October 2011, “Solidarity Forever—The Union Makes Us Strong!"