The American Spectator : A Less Perfect Union

Text Size

A Less Perfect Union

By Andrew J. Coulson from the June 2011 issue

How the NEA and AFT play Monopoly with your kids.

Student achievement at the end of high school has stagnated or declined, depending on the subject, since we started keeping track around 1970. Over that period, the cost of sending a child through the K-12 public system tripled, even after adjusting for inflation. Public school employee unions, the National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers, are partly to blame for this, but the attention focused on collective bargaining in particular has been misplaced. The unions’ success in driving up costs and protecting even low-performing teachers stems less from their power at the bargaining table than from the monopoly status of their employer. Taxpayers, and most families, have no place else to go.

In his post-apocalyptic film Sleeper, Woody Allen explained the apocalypse with the line: “a man named Albert Shanker got hold of a nuclear warhead.” This was in 1973, when Shanker headed New York City’s muscle-flexing teachers’ union. In those days, the goals of school employee unions were widely understood: uniformly better compensation, greater job security, and reduced workloads for their members. That’s what labor unions are for. If NEA and AFT leadership failed to pursue those goals, their members would replace them with people who would.

But for a while, during the sustained economic growth of the '80s, '90s, and early '00s, the public ceased to think very much about these unions as unions. The NEA and AFT have often portrayed themselves as selfless champions of children, who sought only to improve the quality of American education. It’s hard to say how widely their PR puffery was believed, but certainly it was the dominant framing in the media and was seldom challenged by more realistic appraisals. (Except, ironically, by Shanker himself, who once declared that he would “start representing schoolchildren” when they “start paying union dues.”)

Since the late fiscal unpleasantness began in 2008, all that has changed. It has changed because the money has run out. Think of public schooling as a game of Monopoly in which one of the players, the unions, owns 90 percent of the properties (9 out of 10 American students attend public schools). The other players, taxpayers, have some cash and a few properties of their own, but they can’t make it around the board without paying ever-increasing union rents-just as, in real life, taxpayers must continue funding public schools no matter how much they cost. They can survive for a while, of course, and while they do the unions reap handsome rewards. Eventually, though, the taxpayers run out of money. Game over.

In the board game, we’d call the unions the “winners.” In reality, their victory is Pyrrhic. They’ve been so successful in protecting their members’ jobs (including those of the mediocre and inept), raising salaries and benefits, and reducing workloads (by inducing more hiring to lower the student/teacher ratio), that they have precipitated budget crises all over the country, derailing their own gravy train.

Where has all that extra money gone, if not toward improving quality? Some has fueled higher salaries and benefits for teachers, who enjoy total compensation 42 percent higher than their private-sector colleagues. More has gone into expanding the public school workforce. Astonishingly, employment in public schools has grown 10 times faster than enrollment over the past four decades (Figure 2).

So while every other service or product has gotten better, more affordable, or both, public school productivity has collapsed. It is now costing us more to teach kids less. If our schools had merely maintained the level of productivity they enjoyed in 1970-not improved as other fields have, just held their ground-American taxpayers would be saving roughly $300 billion a year. In California alone, the $26 billion budget deficit would be instantly wiped out and replaced with a $10 billion surplus.

HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? How did unions grow the public school workforce so much faster than enrollment? For those familiar with the overall trend in unionization, their feat at first seems miraculous. Because while the teachers unions were growing extravagantly, unions nationwide were shriveling up. In the private sector, union membership declined from 31 percent to less than 7 percent of the workforce since 1960. Among public school employees, it doubled from 35 percent to 70 percent over the same period.

Upon reflection, it isn’t hard to explain this divergence. In the private sector, unionization is self-regulating. In the public sector, it is not. When a business makes excessive concessions to a union and is thereby forced to raise prices above those of its competitors, it loses customers. As it loses customers, it lays off workers, eroding the union’s power. If this situation continues, the business fails and the union members who sought above-market compensation lose their jobs. Overly aggressive unions thus price their own workers out of the workforce. Conversely, less aggressive unions have little appeal to workers because they offer costs (in the form of dues) without value (in the form of above-market wages or benefits).

The easier it is for consumers to shop around, the less value unions can add, because consumers can more easily place their orders with competitors. And thanks to advances in technology comparison-shopping has been getting progressively easier for decades. That’s made it increasingly difficult for private sector unions to win above-market wages or benefits.

More than that, the heightened competitiveness of modern markets has meant that the interests of workers and management are more closely aligned than ever. A business that tried to raise profits by paying below-market wages would risk losing its best employees to its competitors or to businesses in related fields, injuring its productivity and ultimately its profitability.

None of this has been lost on the workers themselves. As the usefulness of private sector unions has declined, so has their membership.

But what happens in an industry in which one producer is able to give its product away for “free,” draws its revenues from compulsory taxation, is able to hide the full cost of its operations from the public, and is legally required to remain in business? Obviously the unions representing workers in that industry can win substantially above-market compensation and pad their membership dramatically without fear of putting themselves out of business in the short or even the medium term. That, of course, is what has happened in our nation’s state-run school systems. The self-regulating aspects of union action in competitive markets do not exist in the public sector.

BUT AFTER NEARLY HALF A CENTURY, public school employee unions have finally begun to suffer from their own success. State-run schooling has become so profligate under their ministrations that America can no longer afford it. In an effort to moderate the teachers unions’ voracious consumption of tax dollars, governors and legislators in several states have sought to curtail their collective bargaining powers. So it’s useful to ask: what role have these powers actually played in the unions’ ability to drive up spending?

Page: 1 2 3 >

About the Author

Andrew J. Coulson is Director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom, and author of Market Education: The Unknown History.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (72) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Intelligent Design| 6.17.11 @ 6:42AM

State and local governments should sell the public schools to private education companies. This would ensure free enterprise competition, which invariably leads to more innovation, reduced costs, freedom of choice, and higher quality. State and local taxes would be cut in half, and education companies would be free to hire the best qualified non-union teachers. In addition to selling the K-12 schools, the states should sell their public colleges. Also, the federal Department of Education should be dismantled.

Intelligent Design| 6.17.11 @ 2:36PM

Private enterprise has given us the best medical care, the best technology, the best homes, the best clothing, the best food .......all in spite of the efforts of Congress and various presidents to interfere and screw things up. So why not have completely private education? I'd like to see a city, county or state kick it off by putting their public schools up for bid to private education companies.

Ed| 6.18.11 @ 12:18PM

Private, for-profit, K-12 schools have been tried, but they never seem to succeed. Effective teachers, including conservative ones, have an altruistic streak, and they do not like having a corporation making money off of their efforts. If these education corporations have profit sharing plans for teachers, I have not heard of them.

For the same reasons, professional soldiers do not have a very high opinion of for-profit mercenary outfits like Blackwater.

Having said that, the best schools in the country are in the private, non-profit sector. Your typical Catholic high school is a very good value for the money.

rendite| 6.20.11 @ 2:55AM

Ed, please explain more. For example, what is the significant difference when we are talking about a private college/university/graduate school/tech school?

We have those. No, they are not perfect, but parents and students (the older ones) get much more say in how things are run. And I don't see professors or teachers bellyaching over profit issues.

Additionally: I am not sure the Blackwater comparison works. There was a swagger there, an arrogance. A flaunting of rules. Or ignoring them altogether. There is a "danger" issue there in dicey overseas operations, so not a good comparison. There was not good cooperation or harmony at times because of unprofessional behavior.

We do have private for profit schools. And they can also be attractive for teaching faculty.

Any teacher in a union knows that the union bosses in the region or nationally clearly make a profit "on the backs" of the teachers doing the work. So what is the difference if senior managers for a large scale grouping of schools make nice salaries?

I bring this up for good discourse. Not to challege or attack. I like discussion, ideas, solutions. I trust you follow. Thanks.

Purpleguy| 6.19.11 @ 9:21AM

And, you want accountability? To whom? Privatization would simply lead to schools being run to chase the almighty dollar and to line investors pockets. We have plenty of private universities and colleges - uh, and you think we'll save money privatizing? Seriously?
Get rid of poor teachers, fix the management of schools, provide a better education for children, sure. But privatize? No way. We don't need no Blackwater running the schools.

Michael Tomlinson| 6.17.11 @ 7:39AM

The best solution is vouchers for private and parochial schools.

SonOfSam| 6.17.11 @ 8:37AM

Amen Mike! As a public school teacher, I say that such a move would not only benefit students and parents, it would also benefit those of us who are great teachers who are constantly being bounced around by rules and regs that mostly benefit the clock punchers and chair polishers who got their jobs through ass kissing and connections rather than innovation and talent.

Trust me, if the schools operated as part of the real world, I'd be running this place by now

Purpleguy| 6.19.11 @ 9:23AM

Really? You think ass kissers and chair polishers don't exist in private enterprise? Obviously, you haven't been in the private sector. I detect a little jealously in your writing. If you are a good teacher, continue to be ... along with your paycheck, that is all the reward you need - to help young minds develop.

Alan Brooks| 6.17.11 @ 12:32PM

"the best solution is vouchers for private and parochial schools."

No, the cost wouldn't be lowered for private, charter, etc, schools- save for the bad schools. You are stuck in the notion mediocrity can be legislated away.

Only hope is homeschooling.

Alan Brooks| 6.17.11 @ 12:39PM

...word to the wise:
vouchers derive from legislation, and are paid for by someone else's parents; so you are shuffling responsibility from one person to another. It's worth a try of course, nothing to lose in today's overheated, undereducating environment. But you must admit education is extremely expensive aside from homeschooling. And with the cost of a university education in 2011 one can set up a business.

jolizoom| 6.17.11 @ 9:13PM

Did pigs start flying today? I never thought I'd agree with you. I will be the first to admit that the cost benefit I receive for the education of my kids is much more than I pay in taxes. I like the idea of privatizing education, with businesses being able to contribute to the school of their choice to make it affordable for families. Business owners who desire to succeed outside the current entitlement system have a vested interest in making sure a good education is available to their future employees.

Two of my kids would be recruited by good primary schools, while the third.... would probably benefit most from continued home schooling.

Lines of demarcation would form among schools who produced top scholars vs. low scorers, schools who taught foundational skills vs. ideological thinking (which would probably be among the low scorers), and various other focuses. Love music? Go to Music Junior High. Want to be an engineer? STEM High is the school for you.

I'm hoping that within the next 6 years more avenues of higher education will open up that will be more valuable and less costly than the state university system--or any university system that is beholden to the feds, for that matter.

Alan Brooks| 6.17.11 @ 9:45PM

"I'm hoping"

Hoping? hope doesn't cut it; you'd have to do more than hope that within the next six years more avenues of higher education will open up that will be more valuable and less costly than the state university system, you would have to have a clear idea of what your goal was, and then you'd have to go about it. Writing, "I'm hoping that within the next 6 years..."
is too vague.
And BTW, if you were not beholden to the feds, then would you become beholden to the state?

Alan Brooks| 6.17.11 @ 9:48PM

... that is, would you end up replacing fed subsidy with state subsidy?

TaxedTexan| 6.17.11 @ 8:01AM

To add emphasis, the US Department of Education alone has spent over $1 TRILLION of our money since it was raised to a Cabinet level position in around 1980.
As someone without children, tell me why I pay for others to educate their children? While I am sensitive to the social issue of uneducated kids [see Mexico where schooling can be optional] and am willing to allocate some of my funds to that effort, the responsibility should fall to the parents. If we carry the current program forward, then I might as well work harder to have the government take my money for clothes, food, school meets[aka vacations] and next I suppose, college costs.... oh wait...

Jeamar37| 6.17.11 @ 6:27PM

Believe me, I am no apologists for the poor level of achievement in public schools, but TaxedTexan although you do not have children, you benefit directly from the $ other people have invested in their children's educations. Perhaps you would be willing to pay an education tax for the services/good you purchase. Say a $20.00 tax for a physician when you have an exam, $50 for the educational benefit of a brain surgeon, $5 for the WalMart clerk, etc. As a retired public school teacher, (I didn't belong to the teachers' union. I bought my own"malpractice" insurance from my private insurer. Most teachers carry insurance for that reason and are totally unaware they can purchase their own insurance.) I think things are even more dismal in education than the author. I just wish we knew the right method for improving the end result with the product (children of all abilities, intelligences, talents, motivation, and parental genes) the teacher must work with.

Purpleguy| 6.19.11 @ 9:27AM

Teaching is not an easy career, and it's about time people stood up for and respected teachers again. If you don't like the school system - look to your mayors, superintendents, governors, legislators - not the teachers themselves. Everyone is too focused on the good guys, not the ones that set the rules. A teacher's union is not to blame, they are protecting the teachers, which they should do. But it's part of the mantra "unions are bad" "corporatists" are good that seems to have gone from propaganda to an "everyone knows" bs.

Occam's Tool| 6.19.11 @ 9:00PM

Purpleguy:

State run enterprises are NEVER more efficient. Sometimes they have other virtues, usually accidental.

By the way, teaching should be respected---but everyone knows where education majors fall in the spectrum of college students.

Kenny| 6.25.11 @ 10:17AM

Respect unionized public school teachers?

Why? To many are parasites and those that are not defend the parasites.

Beside, they're all over compensated -- not due to any skuill or hard work ethic on their part but becasue of union muscle in a monolplized industry.

Red Bubba| 6.17.11 @ 8:10AM

It is national suicide to expect unionized teachers to teach American history and economics.

Mike D.| 6.17.11 @ 8:49AM

Brother, you have hit that on the head. Until the cancer of public sector unions is removed once and for all, nothing can move forward. When this whole union "we are the protectors of the children" line of BS is changed to "the children are our milk cows" reality as it is now, then we will advance forward. Hail to the Wisconsin Supremes for slapping down that leftist schill judge who put her nose where it never belonged in the first place. Privatize all publics schools, public services and instill the concept of competition for contracts and services.

SonOfSam| 6.17.11 @ 8:56AM

As a conservative and as a public school teacher who is licensed to teach both computer science and social science, I don't think it's an accident that I have only been asked to teach computer classes over the past fifteen years. Certainly wouldn't want anyone contradicting the narrative being put out by the Ministry of Truth, err, I mean, the social studies department. How else will our children learn that the country they live in sucks out loud?

W| 6.17.11 @ 8:26AM

The main problem in the schools is not money. It is that too many students come from messed up homes where the parents do not care, or care enough, or there are no parents, or there is only one parent that cannot handle the child. Children from stable families, whether one or two parent families, do well. We seem to have a problem recognizing this basic fact, and instead focus on spending more money, or blaming teachers, whether union or non union. There are incopetent teachers, but not enough to cause the problems we have. It is the family/parents who do not stress education and force their kids to study.

Maddox| 6.17.11 @ 9:06AM

Family origins are definitely one of the problems but the system is hopelessly ruined because of union influence bought by liberals and the legal system's interference with curriculum. Dumbing down has been mandated to avoid expectation of performance by minorities and lazy students. You're correct in you analysis of the home environments of some students but there are many parents who are unhappy with the situation. They are no more able to change legal and political control than you or I and cannot afford private school. This country has become the protector of the few who are unworthy of its opportunities rather than those who strive to learn and earn.

W| 6.17.11 @ 10:46AM

Agree, and I am not defending the union, but the union does not set policy or curriculum, that is done by the administration and school board, and the requirements from state and federal agencies, such as each state dept of education, and the fed Dept of Education. There is a monopoly but it is a state monopoly. Private schools, such as Catholic Schools, have teacher unions, and these schools do not have the problems of the public schools. The administration of the public schools like the criticism of unions because they can blame the union and not themselves. This is not much different than poorly run companies such as General Motors that gave the UAW generous contracts and then blames the union. The employer, whether private or public, is responsible to operate the school or plant, and to negotiate an agreement it can live with. The focus should be on the public school administrations and Dept of Education. The answer is vouchers to provide for competition, and possibly a system of private schools. Now we have a public monopoly where you are forced to attend a government school, unless you pay for private school.

chemman| 6.17.11 @ 6:39PM

While you and Maddox are partially correct you don't have the whole picture. I taught sciences, mainly chemistry, in a school district of low socio-economic students. Funny thing though is that regardless of their background the students in my classes actually succeeded. I used unorthodox methods that I imported from homeschooling my own children as a result my students learned how to learn and did well. I was finally forced out of teaching because they just couldn't stand it that I didn't dumb down my classes and I wouldn't let students get away with less than their best. Many of the students who performed well in my class were real a..holes in other classes. No matter how much I explained my methods to these other teachers they just wouldn't get out of their belief's they needed to be nice and be the student's friends. While I advocate eliminating public schooling teachers can really make a difference.

W| 6.17.11 @ 8:17PM

Good post. congratulations on doing a great job. I did not say or believe that "low socio economic," or poor, students cannot learn. I am referring to lousy parents. Look at the finacially poor jewish and italian students and other children of immigrants, in the early 1900's and how well they did. the parents insisted they learn.

Tina B| 6.17.11 @ 7:22PM

Amen and amen, W, It is the family/parenting, or lack thereof. Combine that with the dwindling motivation of teaching students who don't want to learn the math content they are not skilled enough to master, and then evaluating me based on their success in one test given on one day across the state. This has changed radically lately, as we are required to do so much more with so much less.

W| 6.17.11 @ 8:21PM

It is easy to blame the teachers, it takes the parents and school administration and the government off the hook.

Pelligrino| 6.20.11 @ 3:33AM

W., reading your above posts, I cannot agree more. Having worked with kids of various ages, I know within 6-8 weeks which kids come from good homes and which ones do not. Without asking, I know which kids come from homes with both Mommy and Daddy.

Which kids are the ones much more likely to succeed? We all know the answer. The stable two parent, no divorce homes.

And I use the summer library check out rates/titles test: View what Johnny, Jimmy, Susie, Sally, Max, and Marie are checking out and reading during summer holiday, Christmas break, and other times of the year.

The parents regularly chauffering the children to the library and making sure there are substantive books amongst the fun books, those are the parents who are positively involved, and those are the kids who have a shot at going places.

If one visits a child's home, what one sees on the family's bookshelves (if there are bookshelves) speaks volumes.

McCandles| 6.17.11 @ 8:39AM

This is a great summary of unions gone wild in the American K-12 education system. The college level costs have gone up even more sharply, and studies now show that college does NOTHING to boost the critical thinking and basic skill level of at least half of students. What a joke. Students now have state of the art fitness centers, luxurious accomodations, etc. and basically just fine tune their "social" (beer drinking) skills. In this day and age, whether or not a student can "afford" college education is not considered. The array of government loans and grants will take care of it. Many parents just suck it up and eat away their savings to pay for the college of Junior's choice. Then he waddles of to 4 years of partying and indoctrination into socialism, learning to despise the free markets that allowed his parents to offer him the greatest standard of living in the history of mankind.
At the faculty level, it's all about money. Research grant money. Teachers are evaluated by students. Easy A profs are usually picked as the winners, and advancement to professorship is based primarily on how much government grant money the bowtie wearing pencil necks can wring out of the taxpayers. This whole system angers me more than the K-12 disaster, which is saying alot.

Mike D.| 6.17.11 @ 8:58AM

My wife teaches at a medical college and the stories she can tell about what comes through the door as students is beyond scary. The fact that we will become dependant on what our education system is turning out is beyond scary. We have got to get this system out of the clutches of the leftists or we are doomed. How many students both HS and college can not even speak proper english(insert, Um, like, you know, etc. between every three words they utter)let along write any of it? I went to a parochial school in the 60's and if I got caught using the word AIN'T, I got slapped down by any Nun or Priest who heard it.

McCandles| 6.17.11 @ 12:01PM

Yes, medical education is not much different. Same story-great teaching does not lead to advancement, its all about the grant money for the university. Medical schools and residency programs often lose the best teachers because of this. What gets me is the garbage research the NIH continues to fund, and academic dishonesty is rampant. And the public is led to believe it's all about teaching at these places. Standards for admission to medical school will have to be lowered as the best and brightest are attracted to greater rewards and less hassle in other fields (thanks in part to Obamacare's promised goals). I personally am aware of dozens of medical students who were admitted based on ethnicity, not qualifications/grades/test scores. Our future physicians.

Ed| 6.18.11 @ 12:32PM

I agree with you Mike. I teach Anatomy and Physiology to pre-nursing and pre-allied heath students in Ohio community colleges, and I was let go by one of them because I did not have a high enough pass rate for minority students. Don't get me wrong, there are many minority students who have done very well in my classes, but since Obama has been President, two-year colleges have been flooded with poorly qualified students.

The core problem with college education today is that faculty searches are run by zampolit-style political officers. Conservatives, libertarians, and even mainstream liberals are out of the running these days, you have to be a hard core lefty to get a tenure track job.

Dave | 6.17.11 @ 9:22AM

I know it's on the pessimistic side, but from my vantage point in the cheap seats the NEA and organizations linked to them are little more than watching that Robert De Niro movie "Wag The Dog." Patrick Swayze's "Red Dawn" works, too. The American taxpayer (i.e. suckers), always on a hook and footing the bill for beyond average wages and benefits many of those "you can't fire me, I'm tenured" people receive is way over the border. But then, our current Marxist and Chief, the one currently enjoying taxpayer funded occupancy at 1600 Penn Ave., despises our Constitution and all that stands in his way of getting us aboard the Last Train to Karlville. It seems the guy doesn't like to Monkee around with pesky Constitutional stuff. It tends to show-down the agenda.

Having rinsed that little rant from my graying chest, I thought the amateur analysis I wrote and posted to another column on Spectator yesterday might be approiate here and worth another take. Understand, to the dedicated educators, the ones dog paddling in the pond and simply caught up the swirling sewer of unionized, t-shirted goon squads; forced to "pay-up or hit the road, Jack", it should come as no surprise that a few of us watching the moths fly from our shrinking wallets tend to be a bit on the testy side these days. But then, I'm not the one forced to join a union. I'm just among the flock of sheep who're forced to take the shearing, pay your freight and endure the kind of student stat results your system cranks out year after year, decade after shrinking decade. OK, I'm done from here.

From yesterday ...

Cutting through the pro and con union minutia for a moment, here's some of what's posted in fine print below the bottom line. Looking at student test scores over the past several decades (since the AFT/CTA (and or) other groups affiliated with the NEA put their death grip on the throats of American taxpayers and the politicians who manipulate the purse strings, the numbers clearly indicate that, on the whole, "Johnny, Janine and Jammal might get their degrees but somehow can't manage to correctly spell, define or comprehend basic phrases and their usage."

Examples:

(a) Unfunded Teacher Retirement Pensions.

(b) Unfunded Teacher/Retirement Healthcare Plans.

(d) Mandates to Fund Classroom Space for Children of Illegal Aliens.

(d-2) Mandatory Bi-Lingual Education (Spanish, languages and dialects of Asian immigrants and (soon) various forms of Farsi, Urdu and Ebonics.

Finally ...

(e) Local Requirements to eliminate or alter the changing of historical school mascots and logos that may be viewed and or linked with terms like Indian, Tomahawk and Chief or other images that may be interpreted as depicting Hispanic persons as caricatures adorned with (1) serapes,( 2)sombreros or (3)*huarache sandals.

(*unless mascot in question is an image depicting an anglo California surfer, the requirement is waived and all rights to salute, celebrate and maintain said image/logo will remain as is.

Meanwhile, parents will be advised to heed the sign posted near entrances at their next taxpayer/AFT meeting:

"Check Your Wallets At The Door."

It may sound semi-oppressive but who else do you think is going to fund all those ... Unfunded Mandates?

Meanwhile, long live Poco Vaquero.

cicero| 6.17.11 @ 9:33AM

I love when the teachers and their apologists try to blame the abismal results of their efforts on the children or the parents. If that is so, why are wepaying them so much for what is basically a parr time job? If they are not responsible for anything, they should not be paid for being the guardians and saviors of the kids.
At the college level, the universities should be made to spend down their endowments before they get anymore taxpayer money. In addition, the teaching assistants, who do most of the teaching, and the professors should be paid a nice houly wage, based on actual time spent working in the classroom, and judged on the results of their efforts. It goes without saying that tenure should be abolished. That only made sense when there were few centers of learning, and there was true competition for excellent teachers. Now, there is a college or shcool on every corner, and the government provides money to them regardless of the r esults.

Stan redmond| 6.17.11 @ 9:37AM

People have been voting to increase education funding for decades. Women voters, especially, easily fall for the "think of the children" argument and keep voting to increase taxes and fees to fund the worthless schools. i would love NOT to fund these terrible useless school full of useless stupid teachers because I have no kids, thank God. School don't teach useful skills anymore. Reading and writing? Who needs that when you can learn the best way to minimize your carbon footprint but being unemployable.

THINK OF THE CHILDREN

Dean| 6.17.11 @ 1:22PM

"Think of the children." To borrow from Samuel Johnson, "It's for the children" is the last refuge of the scoundrel.

Occam's Tool| 6.19.11 @ 9:03PM

Why thank G-d that your line will be extinct, Mr. redmond, and that practitioners of sharia will take over your dwelling when you are dead?

Thomas| 6.17.11 @ 9:39AM

Though this piece was rather well written, it still managed to harp on the "evil public unions" line. People still don't get it. Public unions have nothing to do with how public entities are managed. That lies directly upon the shoulders of the elected managers.

Back in the 80s the tune was the "evil corporations" were controlling elected politicians and therefor, they were responsible for all the evils in the generally elected governments of the United States. Now it is the "evil public unions" that are responsible. Well boy and girls, here is the truth. The shortcomings of the governments in the U.S. are the fault of our elected officials. They are the ones who make the decisions and they are the ones who are responsible for those decisions. Since Prohibition, no elected official has had a gun put to his or her head, or the head of a loved one, and been forced to vote a certain way. And, the voters have the power to remove any politician whose actions they do not like and agree with and replace him with one they approve of. Ultimately the responsibility for all the problems in our governments lies with the citizen voters. And, that is something that many can not live with. So bring on the scapegoats.

Red Bubba| 6.17.11 @ 11:28AM

Unions don't influence elections?

Al Adab| 6.17.11 @ 1:13PM

OMg, I always thought...

Pat| 6.17.11 @ 6:29PM

Thomas: You couldn’t be more correct – and most Americans know, deep down, you’re dead on. But the politicians have a well-tuned gimmick which makes it easy to lead the voters down whatever collective bargaining direction their self-serving goals require. What areas of government have found unlimited gold at the end of the tax rainbow? Those areas where our “heroes” reside, naturally enough. Teachers, Justice System employees and firefighters are more respected by the voters than Green Lantern and Batman combined. Does any voter actually demand to know if tax auditors and DMV clerks are “well and fairly” compensated - be honest here. Is it only coincidence that the fair and tranquil dominions of these Public Heroes have expanded and then expanded yet again over the past decades? While other government employees in Hero Support and those anti-heroes like Tax Auditors hide within the shadow world of “unsung public servant”, the Heroes demand and receive the monetary rewards, along with the not insubstantial glory. What American doesn’t appreciate our Public Heroes, or is courageous enough to risk being publicly shouted down in order to point out we’re being thoroughly scammed?

And the scam was simple in operation. Teachers toiling in one room schoolhouses morphed into administrators, principals, education specialists, general teachers, guidance counselors, school psychologists to name a few “public education specialties”. Over in shining Justice Land, honest country lawyers and circuit riding judges added expert witnesses, sentencing specialists, jury consultants, layer upon layer of appeals board justices, bar associations just to name a few “necessary legal system specialties”. Like bacteria, our Public Heroes divide and multiply at a relentless pace. And who would accuse a genuine Public Hero of financial self-interest? Teachers, we are told, enter the field solely because of their “love of children”. Lawyers solely because they “have a respect for the Law and the wheels of justice”. Even garbage collectors can claim an ersatz legitimacy with their obvious penchant for cleanliness and public health.

Is it purely a coincidence our Public Heroes, while fighting the good fight, have also profited financially and spawned more voracious mouths to feed? And in my neck of the California woods, no politician in his or her right mind would oppose additional money for schools simply because the education system is presently too “cash bloated”. With our blind Public Hero worship at full throttle, the public deserves to be fleeced by our many government funded Heroes and their union coat-holders cheering from the sidelines - and our politicians are determined enough and savvy enough to give us, the general public, exactly what we deserve.

C Smith| 6.17.11 @ 10:25AM

The caption "Teachers Unions Gone Wild" screams for attention. Seems some itinerant journalist recently "crashed" a New Jersey Education Association's "leadership" conference and video chronicled the event. Reminds me of an expose I compiled (circa 1992) regarding America's only government funded religion. The intent: to challenge believers to "have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them" (cf. Ephesians 5:11). The elder board did not approve distribution.

The following is a facsimile:

The National Education Association (NEA) with 2.1 million members is the most powerful force in education. Although it purports to represent the interest of teachers, many of its members are not in agreement with its policies, have limited awareness of its politics, and are naive about its power and past. William Bennett, former Secretary of Education, in The Devaluing of America, describes the NEA's policies and politics:

In recent years, the union's Representative Assembly went on record in favor of teacher strikes; school- based clinics dispensing contraceptives; a nuclear freeze; gay rights; the Equal Right Amendment; D.C. statehood; and Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, and Michael Dukakis for president. It has voted against merit pay for teachers; parental choice; voluntary school prayer; state takeovers of bad schools; home schooling; English as the official language; drug, alcohol, and AIDS testing; nuclear power plants; aid to the Nicaraguan resistance; the nomination of Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court; and Ronald Reagan and George Bush for president...Opposes every common-sense reform measure: competency testing for teachers, opening the teaching profession to knowledgeable individuals who have not graduated from 'schools of education,' performance-based pay, holding educators accountable for how much children learn, an end to tenure, a national examination to find out exactly how much our children know, and parental choice of schools....

Thomas Toch, education correspondent for U.S. News and World Report, "In the Name of Excellence" writes:

In 1989 it [the NEA] spent $7.4 million on such things as a computerized system of mass producing letters to Congress from 300,000 NEA members who "pre-authorized" the use of their names; "Congressional Contact Teams" made up of 2 NEA members in each Congressional district who are specially trained as lobbyists and flown back and forth from Washington to promote the NEA's cause from the local level; a computerized file of NEA's entire membership; a satellite link-up between a television studio in the NEA's Washington headquarters and its state affiliates; and a full-time lobbing staff of 15.... The NEA also has been a major backer of Democratic candidates since 1976, when it played a leading role in the Carter campaign. (Carter signaled the size of the NEA's contributions to his election by pushing through Congress the law that established the U.S. Department of Education - a longtime NEA goal).
The NEA's power in Iowa is of special concern. Again quoting Mr. Toch: "The NEA has sought to gain control of teacher licensing by establishing licensing boards with teacher majorities. Only Minnesota and Iowa have granted this board final authority in teacher certification." Particularly disconcerting for those of us in Iowa where an overwhelming majority of teachers are NEA members." With the NEA in charge, the role of the teacher continues to evolve. The NEA's report, Education for the Seventies, states: "Schools will become clinics whose purpose is to provide individualized psycho-social treatment for the students, and teachers must become psychosocial therapists."

The NEA has encountered little resistance because so little is known of its political expediencies, and according to Mr. Toch, that's the plan. "Though the NEA has fought virtually every educational reform, it has poured millions of dollars into a public relations campaign designed to convince the nation that it is committed to the reform of the public schools, and of teaching in particular." The NEA's publication NEA Today spawns a plethora of glossy images of appreciative students and their obliging teachers, but so little content that it prompted author Samuel Blumenfeld to describe it as having been "written at the intellectual level of the National Enquirer."

No expose on the NEA would be complete without investigating its contention with evangelical Christianity. Blumenfeld in his book NEA: Trojan Horse In American Education describes the organizations long association with secular humanism:

...in 1933 John Dewey and 33 other liberal humanists drew up and signed that extraordinary document known as the Humanist Manifesto. It reflected all of the influences of science, evolution, and the new psychology which were reshaping American education... It was thus Dewey who began to fashion a new materialist religion in which humanity was venerated instead of God. This is basically the religion of Secular Humanism, and this is what has become the official religion of the United States, for it is the only religion permitted in its public schools and totally supported by government funds.... The NEA has remained remarkably faithful to the Humanist Manifesto since 1933. For all practical purposes, the public school has become the parochial school for secular humanism. Its doctrines pervade the curriculum from top to bottom.

Dewey, for his contributions to education, was elected honorary president of the NEA in 1932. He was also issued the American Federation of Teachers' first membership card. With the 1973 signing of Humanistic Manifesto II, humanism became even more culturally entrenched:

As in 1933, humanist still believe that traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to love and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven hereafter. Reasonable minds look to other means for survival.... No Deity will save us; we must save ourselves.

Signers of Humanist Manifesto II include Alan F. Guttmacher, president of Planned Parenthood; Betty Friedan, founder of N.O.W; behavioral psychologist B.F. Skinner, a horde of Unitarian ministers, and Lester Mondale, former president of the Fellowship of Religious Humanists. Such is the NEA's consanguine "fellowship.

"The NEA's domination of education affects all teachers. It dictates the rules of professional advancement. It pressures teachers to be politically partisan. Its infusion of humanist curriculum places conscionable teachers in a moral dilemma. And its influence over accreditation and other policies is disconcerting for teachers public and private. In summation, the NEA's monopoly on education places teachers, and our children, at risk!

"And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea" (Mark 9:42, cf. Matthew 8:16 & Luke 17:2).

Petronius| 6.17.11 @ 10:53AM

Education isn't. Students do not get educated. They get indoctrinated. Those in positions of authority anywhere and everywhere do not want critical adults who can think. They want SHEEPle! Managers want a docile work force. Government wants compliant tax payers. Lawyers want human clay in the jury box. And the low rent mobocracy want everybody to be the same, which explains their hatred of individual success and any wealth accumulated engaging in business. No institution this side of prison can persecute an individual better than a school system. All you have to do is expose facts in class that teachers don't want anybody to know.

Al Adab| 6.17.11 @ 1:43PM

I don't know how to post a link but read What Would the Founders Teach over at NRO today. Demonstrates clearly why the situation is as it is.

Oldefarte| 6.17.11 @ 11:45AM

The salvation of public schools [and its dependent children/students] is connected to the survival of this country, and the destruction/elimination of the labor unionization fof same is the one/only answer!!!!!!!

Citizen Jerry| 6.17.11 @ 11:49AM

Of course, NEA and AFT don't consider themselves unions. They're "professional associations." Well, a man can call himself a short-term relationship consultant, but he's still a pimp.

big bob| 6.17.11 @ 4:08PM

Yeah, and main stream media is middle of the road moderates...sure.

Al Adab| 6.17.11 @ 12:05PM

Teachers unions (and tenured professors) are the ultimate expression of elitist control of our institutions. No longer do the institutions serve as instruments of public policy or service, they have become self perpetuating institutions serving only there own power, control and interests.

Bumr50| 6.17.11 @ 12:11PM

As a resident of a city (Pittsburgh) which was absolutely decimated by private sector union greed, it's both interesting and horrifying to watch the effects of a public sector union that has become completely disassociated from it's original intent and is it's own self-serving entity.

The unions involved in an industry (say, locally, steel) will simply dessicate whatever it can and move on, whereas a public sector union (say, teachers) has nowhere else to go.

I believe that the hard truth here is that, while legislation can certainly help, a little patience will bear out the inevitable self destruction of said union as it has to eat itself.

In a rust belt area such as this, public opinion favoring the union in the erroneous belief that they are advantageous to the "little man" are almost impossible to change. Criticizing the union is fighting words.

Even after witnessing the flight of the priced-out manufacturing sector, the lines remain the same on main street:

"Free trade did us in. Damn Republicans."
and the ever popular,
"The bigwigs in the downtown skyscraper stole all of the money."

People that hold these attitudes hold to them strongly, and resist any short economic lessons just as stubbornly.

While you may be saying "apples and oranges," and technically you are right, it doesn't change the votes of the aforementioned populace. A union is a union and no matter how shifty, corrupt, and inconvenient they become they are better than supporting the "fatcat." There is no connection made when the union in question is public, and they and their neighbors are footing the tab so that their teachers can enjoy a permanent position with an exorbitant salary, tenure, and three months off (plus vacation and sick days) every year.

Starving the beast by providing competitive and equal alternatives can help, but they won't go easily.

I fully expect that even if such schools succeed, Democrats will seek legislation that requires "standardized testing" which will include questions involving information that no self-respecting educator would consider important, but will be entirely public school specific, right down to teachers coaching students.

Anything to discredit the competition.

And, oh, an outright ban on homeschooling. Heaven forbid.

TrueBlue| 6.17.11 @ 5:53PM

The teachers unions have actually been working on getting homeschooling abolished for awhile. Thankfully they haven't succeeded yet.

Walking Horse| 6.17.11 @ 12:26PM

Teacher's unions are a symptom of a system that was designed to fail, if one believes that actual education is the mission of pedagogy. Government schools were never designed to promote education.

Gatto, John Taylor, _The Underground History of American Education_.

"We want one class of persons to have a liberal education, and we want another class of persons, a very much larger class of necessity in every society, to forgo the privilege of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks."
— Woodrow Wilson

Albert| 6.17.11 @ 1:50PM

It does not surprise me that Woodrow Wilson would utter such garbage. That rat b*****d was the epitome of elite snobbery.

Occam's Tool| 6.19.11 @ 9:04PM

Woodrow was a maggot.

cowgirl| 6.17.11 @ 12:30PM

My 17 year old son, who just finished his Junior year in high school, will be starting his Senior year of high school in August. He will also be starting his freshman year in Junior College. He recently took the entrance tests into Junior College and passed them at Freshman College level. His educational goal is to become a Large Animal Vet - ten years of school is in his future. He has been home schooled since sixth grade. During those years he took the Standardized State Tests and passed them two and three grade levels above his present grade at that time.

Home Schooling... I rest my case.

big bob| 6.17.11 @ 4:17PM

We home schooled back in the day when no one knew what it meant. And if that event had been publicized, there are some states who would have attempted to force you to matriculate your son at the behest of the local NEA. My two sons both entered school around the 6th grade, and the teacher could not keep up with them, and they got bored. Bored 6th-7th grade boys is a real problem. But he who laughs last laughs best. Even though the older one has a finance degree, he runs a consulting firm and goes into fix network servers when the internal guys are at a loss. He has NO formal network training, but seems to be very valuable to his boss!!! Good thing the local public school didnt get their hands on him early. The younger one is a tennis pro. He was the first one nominated for a Rhodes Scholarship at his college in 10 years. Another laugh for the homeschool naysayers...

Al Adab| 6.17.11 @ 1:14PM

Way to go. May we call you Kickerette?

Albert| 6.17.11 @ 1:45PM

The NEA and AFT ensure that public education is nothing more than a government jobs program. These organizations do not exist to increase teachers' incomes or improve education. The exist solely to transfer money from tax PAYERS, to tax COLLECTORS, e.g. teachers. Teachers then pay union dues to Democrat Union bosses who fund Democrat elections.

If Americans really want to improve the quality of public schools, then Americans can do the following: 1. Stop electing Democrats to State governments, including "Superintendents of Public Education." 2. Stop electing NEA and AFT approved candidates to local school boards. 3. Get the Federal government completely out of public education. The feds have no constitutional authority whatsoever to run or fund schools. Close down the Dept. of Education. 4. Make teaching a profession, instead of a union job. This means professional salary, professional credentials, and professional performance requirements. Those who do not measure up, do not stay.

The money is already there for quality primary education. California spends upward of $10k per student each year. At 30 students per class (the standard when I went to school) thats $300k per classroom per year. One could pay $100k in teacher compensation and have $200k left over EACH YEAR for buildings (which, once built, tend not to need replacement for a few decades), books, supplies, operating expenses, etc... But this money never reaches the classroom. It is wasted on bureaucrats in Sacramento and a myriad of "special programs." Primary education is NOT rocket science. It is simple to organize and administer and does not require all the billions of dollars that are routinely wasted each year. In the Golden State, a voter enacted law mandates that 40% of the State budget goes directly to Public Primary Education, so there is no shortage of funding. The money is THERE! It is just wasted on government. Stop the waste. Stop the corruption. Stop electing Democrats.

JimmyT| 6.17.11 @ 2:06PM

You just explained why union members in this country hate the free market system.

Naturalborn Texican| 6.17.11 @ 6:52PM

As a public school teacher, I must lay a portion of the blame for our struggling schools squarely at the feet of parents.

If parents would teach their children to value education and then support their words with actions by becoming involved in their child's academic success, I believe things would be much different.

Too often, parents aren't around very much, too busy pursuing their social lives or their gym membership, or anywhere where but having to spent time with their children. Attitudes of some parents are glaringly reflected in the attitudes of their children concerning school. It just isn't one of their top priorities for their children.

Standing in line at the post office early in June, I over heard a conversation between a woman and the postal employee at the desk:

(employee) "Guess you are ready for school to be out."
(parent)"Oh yes! To tell you the truth, school is just in the way right now."

Yes there are "bad" teachers, but by and large most teachers are dedicated, hardworking, caring people, who work their tails off to get the job done.

We just need parents to talk t and encourage their children about the importance of getting a good, solid education, and to expect a more of their children than to just show up at school on Monday mornings.

Occam's Tool| 6.19.11 @ 9:05PM

That's why both my kids are homeschooled, NaturalBorn.

Pelligrino| 6.20.11 @ 4:10AM

NaturalBorn, I agree. See my post above regarding parents, visiting libraries, checking out books, reading together....

We are presently in the season of "Summer Camps!" Oh yeah!

I presetnly have opportunity to observe a fairly upscale tennis camp for kids from 10 - 18. Sessions are one week long and pricey. A few tennis pro instructors but mostly staffed by competent college level players. Most kids are enrolled for multiple weeks.

The problem is the kids' situation. This is a camp away from home; the kids bunk in mostly empty dorms. Based on what I am told, some kids are now "parked" in this camp for 4-5 weeks. Thereafter they go to Horseriding Camp, Soccer Camp, Sailing School, or something similar. Sure, these are fun activities. Also expensive! But I think that the message is clear to the kids: Just stay busy. Do something. But don't be around or underfoot. And "we'll see you again when school starts up in early September."

Yes, these are mostly children of well-to-do parents.

All the kids I witnessed today had no contact whatsoever with their fathers -- today was Father's Day. Okay, maybe a text message or long distance phone call. Is that all the relationship is? And that is, of course, assuming there are fathers in these kids' lives.

Naturalborn Texican| 6.17.11 @ 6:55PM

P.S. I do not belong to or advocate teachers unions.

Tina B| 6.17.11 @ 8:42PM

Right you are Naturalborn Tex. I am a non union member and most of my colleagues in teaching are all that you say. I am about to turn 62 and ready to retire after only 21 years, as much as I want to stay until I have nothing left to offer kids. I love both the students and the math I teach, but they want my love and not my math. They love me but they hate to work hard. They enjoy coming to my class, even on a time out from another teacher. I don't speak to them if they're being consequenced and continue teaching. They listen at the back of my room as I teach another class just what I taught them.

But hard work, homework and sweat, they have no desire for. Too many toys from the adults for doing absolutely nothing. Technology toys and great sneakers. Everyone has 'em and no one has to work for them. Some life, huh? Great lesson for their future, too.

Bob Grant| 6.17.11 @ 9:24PM

Wouldn't you agree that the availability of inexpensive broadband internet access, centralized testing centers, groups of like-minded parents, and best practices to emulate, home schooling could surpass traditional public school for those looking for an alternative?

Ed| 6.18.11 @ 1:54PM

Maybe -- but if a kid wanted to go into math, science, doctoral-level health professions, or engineering, he or she would need some high powered courses from teachers who know these subjects. Labs, in particular, need to be done with real lab equipment and a qualified lab teacher. Most parents do not have a background in these subjects.

Occam's Tool| 6.19.11 @ 9:06PM

Fortunately, I do.

Tina B| 6.18.11 @ 7:33PM

Yes to both of you fellows. As to the science in a lab issue, that seems surmountable within the "home schooling with a science teacher" format. Sim-software for following along with the dissection of a frog are already getting rave reviews from some colleagues.

POST American| 6.20.11 @ 12:15AM

---The long, long Freemason controlled and dominated
(or should we say 'owned')
NEA combined with the radicaized, certainly
Rockefeller EUGENICS subverted AFT---

AS WITH our utterly corrupted and worthless
'Christian' estabishment ----what else can we
expect?

Marc Jeric| 6.20.11 @ 2:10PM

There are two unbreakable laws regarding the umions:
1) Given time all unions will fall into the hands of communists (some will pass certain time under the hands of the Mafia first);
2) Then the unions will proceed to the destruction of the industry in which they "work". For example: steel, automobile, electronics, apparel, textile, even agriculture, Post Office, Amtrak, education...
Teacher unions have brought American education to the level of Zimbabwe in the last 40 years. We have now acquired 3 generations of illiterate nincompoops full of self-esteem, inspired by multiculturalism, affirmative action, inclusion, social justice pap, etc. These also voe for Mullah Obama and hic communist/eco-nazi policies.
All government employees unions are by definition criminal conspiracies against the people, and therefore should be routinely prosecuted under the RICO Act laws.

Christian Louboutin | 6.23.11 @ 6:18AM

n his post-apocalyptic film Sleeper, Woody Allen explained the apocalypse with the line: "a man named Albert Shanker got hold of a nuclear warhead."

Latest Headlines

From the Obama Ministry of Truth

Ben Stein|51 comments

Despite the WaPost, Benghazi Is a Major Scandal

Quin Hillyer|45 comments

IRS Union Chief Stonewalls

Jeffrey Lord|56 comments

McCain-Feingold Gave Us the IRS Scandal

Ross Kaminsky|105 comments

Anyone Still Believe Me?

Aaron Goldstein|33 comments

The Book We Still Can’t Spare

Lars Walker|48 comments

Delivering Serbs to the Wolves

Doug Bandow|20 comments

Wincing at Cumberbatch

James Bowman|9 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Carney Goes Birther on Major Garrett

Aaron Goldstein | 12:10AM

UPDATED: More on Lerner Pleading the Fifth

Kaylin Bugos | 5.21.13

Did Virginia Republicans Just Elect Terry McAuliffe?

Ross Kaminsky | 5.21.13

Lois Lerner Will Take the Fifth