Liberal and Loving It

My lunch with Joe

I had lunch today with Joe Neguse. He's a 2^nd year law student and is running for the 2^nd CD C.U. Regent slot. To break with the "2^nd" theme so far, he's hoping to place 1^st in the election.

Does anyone remember Michael Keaton's character in the movie Night Shift? That's Joe, so much energy he's bouncing off the wall. He's smart, got tons of energy, and has put in the work necessary to effect change. I'm not sure some of the regents are ready for a colleague who will wake them up from their afternoon naps at the board meetings.

Alexander Hamilton, John D. Rockefeller, Joe Neguse. It's the money. Joe spent the first ½ hour discussing the funding crisis C.U. faces. What causes it, what we should try to address it, how to go about doing so. And a lot of that was discussing how up till now the regents haven't done squat (other than the occasional supportive resolution) to bring in more money.

Joe went in to how as a regent he will be out there selling the school, what it does, why it is worthy of support. And in that effort, build up the support of the taxpayers to provide higher ed the funding it needs to keep the state improving.

On the one hand, this is the biggest issue facing C.U. and it is good to see a regent candidate who will actually work to effect change. On the other hand, I'm thinking "oh great, another cheerleader in an oversight position."

And then, without pausing for breath, Joe jumped in to how C.U. is an inefficient bureaucracy and the Regents need to step up and start digging in to how the University is operating and what can be done to improve it.

He sees the need to bring improvement to the school, both to make more effective use of the money the school has and so the taxpayers are more willing to provide additional funds. And as a very active student and ex student body president, he knows where a lot of the bodies are buried. On some questions he will know if Bruce Benson is feeding the regents a load of crap.

On the flip side, he has no experience managing an organization and so he will not be able to bring in the processes by which the Regents can most effectively evaluate the operation of the University. But possibly his initiative and the business experience of 1 or 2 other regents combined may be a powerful combination.

As to academics, research programs, etc., he had very little to say. He speaks of them but his passion clearly is fixing the higher ed funding crisis and improving the operation of the system. That sounds to me like the recipe for a very good regent.

Plus he'll clearly work his ass off.

BVSD - no improvement

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. But I have found that if you use numbers on basic measures, take them over a long enough period of time, and graph them out, they usually do a very good job of showing clear trends.

So I did this for some numbers on BVSD (thank you to the nice people there who answered my info request) taking a base measure of the student body and how it is doing. And from looking at this it looks like, over time, that BVSD is stuck. We can argue about exactly how "good" a job BVSD is doing. But what does seem very clear is it is not improving.

Ok, so lets look at the numbers (spreadsheet here). You can click on the graph to get a larger copy. First a couple of caveats. I think the dropout rate is way low - it may just be for people who drop out their senior year (I have a question in on that).

Second, how things are measured can change from year to year. It can also be impacted by when in the year it is measured, what is included, etc. But as a gross measure, these numbers tend to be measuring the same thing year over year.

So what do we see? Looking at the lines at the bottom, the student body's composition has stayed constant. We have seen no increase or decrease in ELL, Special Needs, or the economic status of the students. The only measure outside of the margin of error is the free lunch and that slight bump is more an indicator of the economy Bush has bequeathed us.

Now up to the CSAP score. This number is an average of all grades across all schools of students proficient and above. In other words, the 70% of our students that are passing. Again, no real change and most of the tiny increase the last 3 years is due to adding the 3rd and 4th grade math test where students have a higher average.

Bottom line - BVSD is doing as competent a job today as they were doing in 1998 (and probably before). So all the programs and initiatives and other efforts tried by the system - bukus, nada, a big fat zero. If they had done nothing new we probably would be at this exact same point. If the BVSD administration is having no effect, then by definition they are failing. Not doing poorly, they are failing.

We are also failing 30% of our students. Lets repeat that, for 3 out of 10 students we are not giving them a proficient education. And in today's economy where a college education is a prerequisite for most well paying jobs, for 30% we're not even getting them to the level of a strong high school education. That 30% is financially fucked in today's economy. Not slightly disadvantaged, they're hosed.

And our teaching staff? Like any large group it follows the Bell curve where some are fantastic, many are good, and some are awful. So what does the district due to remove the really bad teachers? Nothing. In the last 17 years not a single tenured teacher has been fired (source Veronica Benavidez plus recent info request). Not one. How on earth can BVSD deliver a quality education for all if no matter how horrible a teacher is, they keep their job?

So there you have it, a school administration and school board that are totally ineffective, a teaching staff that cannot be touched, and a system that discards 30% of our children. And with something this awful people are getting upset with the school board - OVER SELLING A SCHOOL BUILDING.

Chances of actual improvement on the issues that matter? About zero under the present system.

Update: vkberlin has commented about the increase in free lunch and tried to tie that to illegal immigration. First off, ELL is basically flat and has dropped since 2002/2003. If the recent increase in poor was due to illegal immigration, then ELL would also be increasing.

The increase in poor (free lunch) students appears to mirror the economy, as the Bush economy tanks, the poor increases slightly. As to the increase from 8.6% to 13.9%, that is an increase of 5.3% of the student body. I put this increase down not to any change in the student body, but to the change in the existing student's family's economic status.

Bill Ritter ROCKS, Bruce Benson SUCKS

From the Boulder Daily Camera (per Rocky Mountain News):

Ritter endorsed a citizens initiative Thursday to eliminate a property tax credit for the oil and gas industry unique to Colorado. Killing the tax credit would bring the state about $200 million more a year.

Under the plan, 60 percent would go toward “Colorado Promise” scholarships to help families pay for college. The other 40 percent would be divided among projects to help communities offset the impacts of the oil and gas industry, set aside wildlife habitat and develop renewable energy sources.

Ok, higher ed funding is in the toilet (flushing the state's future away with it). Governor Ritter is stepping up with a great way to get money in there. And he is doing so from a source that has had a tax-free ride from the state forever and is choking in profits.

Not only that, but Ritter is sending the dollars with the student so the better schools will see more of the money. Imagine that, schools will have to deliver to get the money.

So what is the response from our stewards of higher ed to the fact that they have to earn the bucks by pulling in the students rather than have a guaranteed stream of money regardless?

Even so, some college presidents remained critical of Ritter’s decision to back a ballot initiative to increase state revenues from oil and gas drilling to help families pay for college, instead of using the money to fill depleted campus budgets.

The real winner here is Bruce Benson, ex-oil & gas tycoon who had this to say about where the money is coming from.

“I mean, I said to him, ‘Don’t go out there and try to throw a severance tax (increase) without a quid pro quo,’ ” said Benson, who built a fortune in the oil and gas industry. “If you want oil and gas to become neutral, you have to do something that’s going to help them, and not hurt them.“

Yes, heaven forbid that oil & gas be made to pay their fair share. Benson's day job may be as president of C.U. but his heart is still clearly with his poor suffering fellow millionaires.

So kudos to Bill Ritter both for an initiative that makes a big start on fixing our funding issues for higher ed and makes college more affordable. And does so in a very equitable way.

And a big %#*$@ to Bruce Benson who has made it clear that C.U. comes second to outrageous profits and minimal taxes for his buddies. How long are we stuck with this bozo before we can hire a president at C.U. who puts C.U. first?

My lunch with Katie

I had lunch with Katie Witt today. She's a very brave woman, the first Republican who was willing to sit down with me. And except for the little detail of the [R] after her name, a terrific person.

The biggest impression I took away is she is fresh to what we need out of the legislature. Everyone else I've talked to to date has boatloads of experience. That means they know more on lots of issues, but it also tends to have people locked into the 2 or 3 alternatives that the conventional wisdom comes up with.

What I heard from Katie was a an open intelligent mind that talked through various issues and different possibilities to address them. So will she hit the ground with detailed proposals? No. But will she see that some solutions are inadequate and work to actually fix problems? Yes. So what you get with her is a fresh open set of eyes.

Education is her prime passion. She has 3 kids in public schools and so she sees the problems from the trenches. (I think the difference between those of us that have kids and those that don't is much bigger than that between Democrats and Republicans.) A lot of good observations on what needs improvement in the schools.

In addition to seeing the need for systemic improvement in the schools, she also sees the need to increase funding for the schools. Katie is a Republican who understands the traditional Republican value of investing in our future. It's rare nowadays and oh so nice to hear.

The other big topic she brought up was health-care. She sees that it is not working for way too many people, and that tying it to work ties employees to their jobs when they have health issues in the family. She also sees the proposed "fixes" for the state as a lot of money being spent to small effect (which I think is a very good point).

Again, she lives this issue and clearly stated that the free enterprise system by itself cannot provide the best solution. Again, it was refreshing to hear that all too rare nowadays Republican approach of having government get involved in the market where necessary.

That leads to the second big thing you get from Katie. She views government as a key part of society with very important roles to play. She questions where the money is going, is it being wisely spent, and how best to achieve goals. But in all of her conversation government is a part of this.

She is not the Doug Bruce revert to anarchy type. She is not the Bob Schaffer leave everything to the market type. Rather she wants to find the way to have the government most effectively and efficiently do it's part.

My lunch with Cindy

I had lunch today with Cindy Carlisle and first off kudos to her for meeting with me after I tore into her on her handling of the Bruce Benson issue. She was very gracious.

So what drives Cindy? The environment. No matter what we discussed, the topic would lead to the environment or we would then return to an environmental issue. From a mini-EPA for the state to power generation (no more coal) to litigation (an anti-slam bill) to water - very very environmental centric.

She is thoughtful, open-minded, and very knowledgeable on this. And it is clearly her passion. I think most of her efforts in the legislature, both in terms of efforts she initiates and where her knowledge will help her in persuading the others in the Senate.

Second, Cindy is a legislator. Makes sense from her time on the Boulder City Council and the C.U. Board of Regents. She speaks to approaching problems from that mindset. That has it's pluses and minuses but it is mostly a plus for being effective in the Senate.

Her number 2 issue is bringing single payer health-care to Colorado - on a state level. On the plus side, she is familiar with HMSA which is Hawaii's system that has been around forever and works - so she is speaking based on a known working case.

On the negative side, the fact that TABOR would make it impossible to fund from taxes, even if the tax increase was less than the amount people would save in what they pay now, seemed to catch her by surprise. I've seen this gotcha catch virtually everyone who has not served in the legislature - but it sure would be nice to have them realize this as it is one of the biggest constraints they will face in the legislature. And it's not a big secret.

The final surprise was that the Cindy I met today was very different from the Cindy speaking at the County Convention. The Cindy at the convention was a barn burning ultra-liberal feeding the crowd the red meat they so much wanted to hear. The Cindy I met was a thoughtful person with very progressive policies but also a measured approach - that has a much better chance of success.

There were no inconsistencies between what was said the two times, rather a difference in what was covered and how it was presented. What does this mean? It means that like any successful politician, Cindy does a very good job of tailoring her message for her audience.

What will you get with Cindy? First and foremost a strong advocate for the environment. Second, a diverse voice on health-care who, probably won't be successful on single payer (that's a tough fight) but at least might bring us some improvement over the presently proposed band-aids.

My lunch with Betsy

Ok, I do tend to err on the optimistic side - but I was right on Jim Webb and Jon Tester. I think Betsy is going to win CD-4, and win by 3 points or more. She's WOW.

I had lunch with Betsy today and the biggest impression I got from her is she's nice. Yes she's professional, knowledgeable, competent, and thoughtful. Yes she has strong well thought out policy positions. But more than all of that, she's a very nice person.

Nice is a killer advantage for a candidate, especially a legislative one. And compared to Marilyn Musgrave, The Evil One, it is a gigantic difference. This gives her a couple of points easy. It also will make it a lot harder for MM to smear her as people will find any garbage very difficult to believe.

Ok, so what kind of Rep do we get with Betsy? She's a small business owner and that background has a big impact. It starts with a search for solutions and agreement, because you can't be successful in business without both. It also gives her a lot of confidence and credibility because she has, year after year, kept the money rolling in and the employees paid.

With Betsy we get a Rep that understands the small business world from the inside, as well as the high tech industry. Keep in mind that virtually all job growth in this country comes from small businesses and you realize how very valuable this is to have in Congress.

Her hot button is bringing sanity to the federal budget. And she had a lot of spot-on observations of the impact of the deficit spending and how to address it. So she would be a strong contributor on this issue.

With that said, she suffers from the common Democratic error of diving in to the core problem and how to resolve it and that doesn't sell that well. If instead she can concentrate on the impact the irresponsible Republican spending has on people, lost jobs, destroyed pensions, high unemployment, inflation outracing salaries - then this becomes a very powerful issue for her. She touched on these items too but she needs to make the impact the issue - people will trust her to know how to fix it.

I prompted her on Iraq and health-care. Very sensible answers on both. On Iraq it's bring them home a brigade at a time because there is no end game in sight. It's hard to argue with and her point of there being no end in sight should sell well in her district.

On health-care I heard one of the best answers to date - that we need to have full coverage with larger risk pools. As to what/how/when, work with others in Congress to find the best way to do it be it single payer, mandated coverage, etc. But we do need to find a solution that gets everyone covered and brings our spending down to levels found in the rest of the industrialized world. This is that business background in action - see the key parts, and for the rest figure out what meets those requirements best.

Granted, CD-4 has been heartbreaking for us Dems. We've lost time after time by close numbers. And to rub salt in the wound, we've lost to one of the most corrupt, bigoted, and ineffective members of Congress. But what is key is that each year we get closer. Each year the district is a bit more liberal. And we have a very strong candidate this year.

So your job? 1) Anyone you know in her district - make sure they are registered. 2) This is the competitive race in Colorado (Sweatshop Schaffer is toast). So everyone needs to click here and donate today. I don't care if it's just $25.00 - show Betsy some love today.

Update: I did not do a good job above of describing what I think we will get with Betsy. One of the most critical jobs in Congress, that is almost invisible to most, is the money people. No money, no programs. Alexander Hamilton, John Rockefeller, Warren Buffet, all of them were/are creatures of the spreadsheet (Hamilton used Quill 123).

Betsy will end up on appropriations, not to deliver earmarks for her contributors (as MM would use it) but as one of the people that figures out how to make the federal budget work. This may be invisible to most, but it is one of the most critical jobs in Congress. And it is essential that it be held by competent honest representatives, like Betsy.

Political events of the week

It struck me that a couple of noteworthy things happend this week. So I figured that it's worth listing them out. These are not so much the largest events of the week so much as they are the must unexpected.

Bob Schaffer is the biggest one, but not in the way you are probably expecting.

Ok, there is no way I would ever vote for Schaffer - his politics is way to the right. Neither did I expect him to be crystal clean, he's a human being.

But I have to say, I am very surprised and saddened by two things from the CNMI story. First the base corruption and the indifference to the truly horrible suffering of other human beings. And second, the rank incompetence of bringing up the story himself.

Bob Schaffer is a lot less of a person than I thought he was, both morally and competence-wise. Very surprising.

Second big surprise is a very positive one. The one about Ritter's campaign spending being improper.

Ritter stepped up, immediately covered it by taking out a loan on his house (the banks are still loaning money???), taking full responsibility, and getting an independent audit.

We don't expect perfection and his response to this shows incredible integrity on his part. I may not always agree with Ritter but I am very proud of him.

Third pleasant surprise is Betsy Markey's fundraising numbers. She clearly is raising the money needed to have a change against MM (do not spell out her full name if small children might see it).

CD-4 is the one house seat we have a real chance at. Betsy looks like a contender. Really good news.

Fourth is Michelle Obama on the Colbert Report. As we ramp up to the general election I think she is going to be a powerful advantage for Barack. She exudes class from every pore of her being while also coming across as very grounded and real.

There is amazing power in a presidental candidate's wife who can go on the Colbert Report and handle it perfectly. She may very well be the next Jackie-O and a lot of the Republican women in America will find that very compelling.

Fifth is the CD-2 fundraising numbers. Jared's donation numbers are worrisomely low - much lower than I expected. At the same time Will's numbers are in 1st place and much higher than expected.

This race is very weird. Money tends to chase the winner but Will's name recognition is so low that he can't be viewed as the front runner.

Joan's spending money almost as fast as Jared, yet we don't see anything. As they say in Hollywood, you don't see the budget on the screen.

And Jared has dropped Wanda (which I think was necessary) but no new campaign manager yet - which is not good. But Jared's approach to campaigning is very different from the normal so he remains a very strong wildcard.

In other words, anyone who tells you what the vote will be for CD-2 is full of it.

Ok Guys, You're on

I recently tore in to people about putting more effort into saving two school buildings than into improving BVSD so that it no longer is failing many of our children.

John Gless wrote a long comment where he spelled out how BVSD's actions on Washington School hurt a lot of school kids and that their actions on Washington School have become more about helping the children and less about the building.

Ok. Everyone who comes to find how bad our school system is has their own path that led to this realization. John's came from Washington School being shut down. That's every bit as legit as anyone else's path to knowledge.

So here's my challange. Let's harness that power John has to put together a slate of candidates for the BVSD that will effect change. People who can improve the system, yet who can work with the vast majority of BVSD employees who do want a better school district. This is not trivial, but it is doable.

And then let's recall the existing board on the grounds of incompetence. After all, they all ran on a platform of improving the district and yet there has been no measurable improvement in performance. (Note, scores will bounce up and down 1 or 2 points year by year so up slightly is not a trend.)

But the key is a quality slate for the board that will truly significantly improve the school, and that can get elected. That first, recall second. You guys up for it?

Ok Bob, lets look at it your way

Alright, Bob Schaffer says there is nothing nefarious in his trip to the Marianas Islands. Ok, so lets take him at his word. Lets take schaffervudall at their word about all of this. So guys, can you clear this whole thing up by answering 3 simple questions:

1. This trip was paid for by the Traditional Values Coalition. Why did they care about the Marianas Islands? There is nothing on their website about the islands. So why did they want Bob to go there?
2. Why did Bob go to the Marianas Islands? At that time there were numerous problems that were much more serious elsewhere in the world (although granted many of the other places did not offer para-sailing). This question is key because several representatives have been found to have accepted free trips there in return for votes and his committee assignments don't touch on the Marianas.
3. When Bob returned he said nothing about the Marianas Islands. No press release, no interview, nothing. So if this was an "investigative" trip - why no follow-up? The Marianas story was public by this time so even a finding that everything there is fine would have been newsworthy. No follow-up makes it appear that this was, in essence, a vacation.

So there you go Bob, three pretty basic questions. If you can answer those then you've got a reasonable argument that this was all legit. But if you don't have good answers for the above, well it sure smells bad...

Talk about screwed up priorities

I get email from people most every day discussing political issues in the City. After certain events, like the recent FAR proposal I get boatloads every day. (Note Suzy Ageton is very popular with a lot of people - all of whom don't want anyone to know they support her.)

Based on a number of recent emails, a group of people are banding together to recall the BVSD board members - because they want to preserve the buildings at Louisville, Mapleton, Washington, & Casey.

Ok, we have awful drop out rates, over 10% for Latinos (and 2% for Whites) in 12th grade alone (rates so bad that BVSD does not list any other grades on their website). We have horrible passing rates on the CSAP where in many cases over 50% test below proficient. Look at Fairview - 32% (essentially 1/3) of the students are not proficient in math.

Now all of the above is ok? But you're going to recall board members over maximizing money to help students rather than to preserve every box the district ever built? How fucked up are your priorities? Seriously how far is your head up your ass? Recalling board members over this shows a self-centered elitist mindset focused on your own aesthetic gratification.

We just had a school board election and virtually no one gave a rip that once again we were electing the usual suspects, blessed by the BVEA, who could not bring improvement to BVSD if you held a gun to their head.  Not one. And that was fine because all it did was fuck over the students, mostly the poor ones. And who cares about them.

But a building, oh my no. We can't change a building. People, try to care about others. Try to show more concern for children who will be stuck in minimum wage jobs for the rest of their life than for a building.

As to the buildings, well Casey is butt ugly so good riddance. Washington is being preserved unless the neighbors there continue to road block it enough that it gets bulldozed and Wonderland just builds 4 mansions there. Mapleton is a nice building, but it's not unique and it's not efficient. You want to save it - buy it.

In the case of Louisville I think there is a legit argument there. It is one of the major buildings that are Louisville. And so the city should look at paying BVSD the difference to save the facade. But that is the city's responsibility. BVSD's is to make the best use of the money they have to educate the students.

Finally, what about in the next BVSD election, people actually pay attention and cast votes for people that would effect significant change? Because the real tragedy here is the children we are failing year over year. How we presently run BVSD is selfish, shortsighted, and morally wrong.

And if you want to recall the present board for being incompetent and incapable of improving our schools - sign me up.