When It Comes To Education, I'm For Common Core

Was education better or worse before No Child Left Behind?

If you're asking me about Common Core Education Standards, then you will discover why I am still leaning Jeb Bush. For me, nothing matters more than healthy, educated children who grow up to raise healthy and educated children of their own.

Essentially, Jeb Bush is the father of Common Core education which was initially enacted under his brother's presidency via No Child Left Behind legislation, but it was inspired from Jeb and Florida who believed every state had to be expected to set high standards, not just states that cared more.

At the core, Common Core is valuable and necessary.  I like to consider it the reason that I talk about my 5 kids like Donald Trump talks about his Wharton education.  They're really smart.  No really.  Our science and tech school (DSST) was developed by a visionary group of founders that have integrated Common Core learning standards into the every day curriculum.  The problem with this high achieving model is that the state test becomes a big waste of time and energy for kids who do this form of testing almost daily.

My daughter agonizes over the testing much like I did but for different reasons.  She, and most of her classmates finish the dumbed down testing so early but are forced to sit quietly for the duration of the allotted time for each test, for 3 days.  In troubled schools like the one I graduated at, Common Core standards become a big pain in the neck for kids who've worked a little too late to help their parents with bills because they simply have no other choice. While every school has a few kids of this sort, some schools have an unfair share. If every school truly was expected to integrate Common Core standards into everyday curriculum, educational improvement would be clear and clearly measurable through the testing that schools should be tracking without an additional test that seems to measure the teacher more than the student.

Nonetheless, let's be perfectly clear. Bad teachers need to be weeded out.  I'm not talking about good teachers that need some training.  I'm referring to those over abundance of Teach For America teachers that only get into teaching so that they can get their graduate studies paid for, yet have zero passion for education, kids, maintaining the assigned curriculum, or developing a curriculum of their own that can be easily followed by any substitute in the event of absence.

In our effort to support other children who weren't as fortunate as our kids who had a structure of support that surrounded them educationally,  my wife and I have come to discover that curriculum driven education is still inconsistently utilized even within schools that are performing well because Common Core testing often overwhelms Common Core curriculum.  Poor pay in the industry and  the cloud caused by teacher unions have afforded bad teachers the space to remain bad for way too long given the fact that our children don 't get a do-over with their education .  Whatever they miss becomes remediation or eternal ignorance.

The good of Common Core is often times inappropriately connected to the bad of charter schools . which are occasionally just an effort from some to use tax money to segregate themselves from the commoners.  Common Core and charter school supporters are often the same voices, but their causes differ at the core.

I appreciate the value of Common Core education although I think its over emphasis on STEM (Science Technology Engineering Math) learning is at the sacrifice of well rounded children, especially those who aren't inclined towards STEM careers.  Preparing our children for good paying jobs is valuable... unless they are depressed, suicidal and feel too overworked to enjoy their income. Our abundance of stress and depressed kids is often caused by over parenting that blocks a kids growth experiences, but that is another blog for another day.

Quality of life is a balancing act that we must master before imbalance becomes our quality of life.

Common Core doesn't entirely get this concept and isn't focused on generating enough plumbers and electricians for my taste, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good second step from No Child Left Behind which was problematic too but not unfounded in its premise.  Since we now accept that the chain will never be stronger than its weakest link, we had to accept a general dumbing down of education for the sake of moving forward together. The only other alternative is alternative schooling which overly groups troubled students into an environment destined for trouble and doomed relative to achieving state testing standards. Due to funding cuts, tough choices in education would have occurred with the curriculum we have now or the one we develop for tomorrow.

Oddly, some of the biggest opponents of Common Core are teachers of students with learning challenges beyond the norm.  Common Core, in its design, is somewhat of an acceptance that we've failed "the least of these" in education and its time to prioritize for the greater good.  Now that we have anecdotal evidence via Common Core, we can both accelerate and innovate for the former who need more challenges or the latter who need something other than traditional university path learning. Common Core's stringent curriculum and save your job assessments don't necessarily allow for scheduling innovations that might cater to any kid of the margins that simply don't fit the norm.

Though I have listed more objections than protections to Common Core, my objections are actually corrections; the inevitable part of any big change. If the answer to education or health care (or governance) were as easy as we often like to make them, a full proof system for each would already be in use somewhere.

Those who scream against Common Core are mostly screaming against change as though we are really going back to the day of the old lady in the school house with a bunch of kids and her corporal punishment yardstick.  There was an eager appetite for learning in those days that technology and other visual distractions have destroyed forever.

Setting standards and rules via yardstick or otherwise will always disenfranchise someone along the way.  Historically, either the rules get adjusted or the people adjust.  So like Jeb said, change Common Core if you must, so long as you insure high standards everywhere for every kid.

Hillary's Scooby Van Plan Includes Finance Reform

Poking the bear might be one method of training, but I imagine that a few bear trainers have died trying that approach.

Change is hard on all of us, and the reality is that we've asked a lot from conservative white America over these years with a communist black president.  Asking angry white men to put up with 4-8 years of a leftist woman might be the equivalent of poking a political polar  bear when it comes to deepening the polarization that has been exposed by the Obama presidency.

Have I got a plan for you. 

My greatest hesitation for a Hillary Clinton presidency is the fear that she will be forced to absorb the worst parts of Obama hatred while grappling with her own disdain from the public. Though she is playing the media like a fiddle, powerful entities hate getting played.  I've come out in support of Jeb Bush because I know that he is genuinely different than his father and brother and time will reveal this version of the Bush family to everyone in a way that will increase his popularity.  As it stands, my belief is that the most capable white male republican would be the best way to stop poking that angry polar bear, finally snapping Washington gridlock. Jeb seems eager and capable of doing the job of also calming that angry bear and finally coalescing congressional votes into collective change and not obstructionism.

Jeb, however, had better drop a hand on the table as impressive as the one Hillary just laid down with her Scooby Van tour through Iowa.  Not  a hand like the staged burrito bowl talk or wearing the sunglasses as night.  Even Hillary's support of the middle class is rather typical as each of the current candidates have observed the same illness while differing on the route to the cure.  I'm also not terribly impressed with her support of the free college ideal that Obama already offered up because it will only change things for middle class kids whose family didn't save for college but make too much money for our current financial aid system. Only a very small portion of these kids will jump all over the small/free college route. Middle class kids coming out of high school are NOT likely to embrace the value of such an approach since they've fought for 4 years to get into a "good" school- not the cheap community college option that only poor kids have to go to. Poor kids already go to these schools for free, so the plan means nothing to them.

The idea that will make Hillary the game changer is the idea of reforming campaign finance- even if it means modifying the Constitution, she claims.  Hillary is too savvy to not know that she's walking down a dangerous road with such a suggestion because her own campaign finance becomes open season- which means she's ready for a universal healthcare type fight like the one she took on years ago as a first lady.

Barack has cherry picked several important domestic and international agenda's from the left and right, but he hasn't really challenged the money engine that has taken over politics.  In many ways, he morphed it into the beast that its become.  Not that his internet based coalition building comes close to impropriety, but it did force the opposition to up the ante in response.  What happened when republicans up'd the ante? It forced the entire issue of campaign finance reform to be heard in a landmark Supreme Court case between the government and the conservative group Citizen's United. (Citizen's United .v. FEC (Federal Election Commission).  This case involved a District Court block against Citizen's United who wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton close to the time of the 2008 Democratic primaries.  This film was interpreted by the FEC as a violation against the BRCA (Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act) commonly known as the McCain/Feingold agreement, however, the upper and lower level of the judiciary are at odds.

In their ruling, the Supreme Court struck down the lower court, opening the door for free spending by PAC's (Political Action Committee) like Citizen's United.  With a de facto SCOTUS green light, congress passed  an overstuffed Omnibus bill in December (and Obama signed it) that lifted the lid on spending limits of individual donors from 32,400 per year to 324,000.  At this rate, congress will add another zero in a year or two.  Though the Supreme Court verbally agreed with McCain Feingold language that attempts to insure donor disclosure,  they assumed congress would ultimately solidify the language to insur donor disclosure.

They did not!

What they did do was add a zero to the donor limit making the hope for disclosure more dim than ever before. Only a couple of notable voices in congress (Elizabeth Warren  and Bernie Sanders) spoke out against the change. President Obama accepted the change as a necessary evil of the business of campaign finance, and to bring the government away from the edge of another shutdown.

If Hillary wins this election on the strength of campaign finance reform, she will have to lay in bed with the same evil that she is trying to commit to Sheol. Simply hearing this tired suggestion felt like the highest level of pandering until she said two things.  Amending the Constitution away from big money and/or forcing every American to vote, another Obama idea that Hillary could push as president. The first fix she has repeated more often than the mandatory vote idea, which blew up social media when Obama first mentioned it in March.

Achieving a Constitutional amendment would be challenging for sure because the forces that fund elections will not let go of their grip very easily.  Individual donations to Super PAC's were already being protested before the recent bill blew them up exponentially.  A roll back to half of new levels still represents over a 500% increase from last election limits. Fighting the fight to limit the wealth driven grip on American politics must be a TRUE democratic effort.

Written before they added a zero,
raising the limits on donors.

To date, America has never achieved its democratic dreams because we've never advanced beyond the limitations of representative politics.  Even in the socially enraged town of Ferguson, Missouri, where recent elections added two new black Americans to the Ferguson city council, the election turnout was only 30%.  In a town where 67% of the population is black, a 30% election turnout was all it took to achieve the kind of demographic shift that black community members had been begging to see for years.  Ferguson can, and should be functionally governed by more than half black Americans, but less than 30% (some of the turnout was whites) of the black community in Ferguson recognizes their role in change.

To the defense of the new age voters, recent studies say that  polarized older Americans and congressional gridlock have soured them on the belief that the poll booth is the right place to invoke change. Instead, they use social media as their primary political tool.  They could be right, but WE have never tried to assume control of our nation by taking control of the vote. In fact, most of the nationwide efforts to suppress minority votes are aided by the reality that  way too few minorities bother with voting anyway.

In our desperation to deal with healthcare, we've found the value in mandating coverage.  In our desperation to recapture our nation from Big Money,  simplifying and eventually mandating the voting process is probably our best hope. So, if Hillary has plans that will move us closer to that mark, she has my ear.

Don't worry Jeb. I'm only listening.

Cruz Ignores History! Becomes First To Declare Himself For President

Ted Cruz is in.

He was forced to launch the Cruz missile because Scott Walker is winning the Tea Party skirmish while Jeb Bush is waging war for conservative donors, threatening to wipe out the competition before they ever get started.  Once again, the Bush family is engaging in a half-assed war as Jeb Bush soaks up republican money while simultaneously keeping his feet away from the deep waters that come with being a declared candidate.

As with any good military tactician, Bush is doing his best effort to control the republican roads that lead to the presidency, and his potential opponents are reacting.  Bush is dominating the money road because these roads get attacked on all fronts when the Libertarian and Tea Party segmentation of conservative ideology affirm their relevance during election seasons.  As a result of this segmentation, the Paul family (Ron and Rand) get to unofficially launch the republican race to the presidency by voicing Libertarian dissent and then fading into the darkness once republican in-fighters realize that their Civil war is too bloody to put forth a worthy general election candidate. Especially one named Paul.

Cruz is a dangerous weapon  because he will turn the tide of the republican unCivil war by placing the focus on him. What is becoming sadly apparent is that this Cruz is not one of the modern guided missiles that could make republican opponents surrender.  Although most recognize how widespread the appeal for Cruz is, it is also easy to recognize where the border of his appeal ends.

No! That was not a stab at Cruz's Canadian heritage. We will save that line of birtherism for Donald Trump to do since his own run for the presidency (teehee) might require he use it.  Cruz is as worthy to run for this dysfunctional post as anyone in this dysfunctional nation. As a politician, Cruz makes you feel that he's been waiting for this moment every since delivering that winning campaign speech in primary school. For hours- and years now, Cruz has been staring into the mirror, practicing for the day that he would deliver that winning speech to America.  When you watch him today, it's clear that he has spit shined and polished his message so well that he rubbed all humanity out of the delivery.

Convincing Believers

Does that T-shirt say "WE Want Rand"?

Those inclined to already believe in Cruz's message seem unaware that his hair and his delivery are way to smooth and way too deliberate to sincerely impact crowds that don't already believe. Cruz is preaching to a small group within the republican choir that came to hear him preach.  The other choir members, and most parishioners, are now realizing that they don't really care for the message since they lean Libertarian or don't lean much at all.  They all appreciate the passion of his delivery- which is what makes him the dangerous weapon he represents to fellow republicans- but this crop of conservative candidates don't need their strongest voice to be their least electable candidate--again.

Cruz jumped in to seize this chance to elevate himself above his least electable image by becoming the only one in the race right now. Jumping feet first into the deep waters will allow Cruz to carry the party flag and influence the republican brand.  Chris Christie seems incapable of clearing his traffic jam and getting back on the road to the Hillaryesque coronation that he was receiving prior to BridgeGate. Consequently, Scott Walker and Jeb Bush are the only remaining conservative candidates with general election appeal, and even Walker is proving himself way too appealing to the same passionate Tea drinkers that Cruz hopes to steal away with his announced candidacy. Walker is not as contrived as Cruz, but even Walker won't be electable in a general election if his union busting behaviors mobilize the unions against him. America's unions are clearly declining, but they're not dead yet.

As much as WE pray that the republican party will return to the age of reason and stop disrupting the direction of the party and of American politics in an irreparable way, the reality is that a leader of the republican party must rise up and carry the party message to the public at large instead of constantly convincing those who already believe.  Dismantling the republican party is actually the beginning stages of unraveling the two-party system that limits the voice of too many. Stephen A. Smith was right about the marginalization caused by the two-party system, however, does Smith also believe that having all blacks vote republican for one election will make republicans adjust their recent behaviors towards minority voters? Nationwide voter restriction measures suggests that republicans expect it will take more than Stephen A. Smith and other party faithfuls to win back the white house.

It's The  Stupid Two Party System, Stupid. 

Breaking the two-party system will demand the sacrifice of  upshoot alternative parties who must be willing to lose elections for the sake of party relevancy.  The Tea Party is holding on to relevance, but their Libertarian offspring is on a rapid rise.  Cruz or Walker might get their turn to elevate the Tea Party's role in the republican party, but I doubt it since not enough of America seems ready to lean to these extremes when it comes to selecting a president.  One day they might, but that day hasn't arrived, so Jeb Bush, or some regular dude like him will eventually be asked to win enough regular voters to give republicans a chance to get back into the white house.  Unless this is the election when Rand Paul runs as a Libertarian and Walker or Cruz run under the Tea Party banner, the two-party system continues functionally intact- which will likely mean a democrat in the white house and a republican controlled congress for years to come.

The Sacrifice of Change

Republicans are doing something noble for America even if they didn't originally plan it that way. Liberal leaning Progressives will be forced to follow suit eventually by creating party alternatives that will break the back of gerrymandering. What that requires is candidates and political ideologies that centrist-conservative voters will vote for. Although several Progressive parties have sprouted from democrat roots, democrats seem unwilling to take the pioneer path that the republicans are taking .  When it comes to presidential elections, democrats remain fully afraid of the futility of segmenting their vote and are resisting party alternatives for now.  Right or wrong, coronations remain the method of operation for democrats who will have several years before they must find a centrist progressive to carry the democrat banner. But that day seems inevitable.

Jeb Bush fills this role and is the most reasonable answer to the executive branch challenge for republicans, but his party seems uninterested.  Early feedback has Jeb securely controlling the inside elements of his party(money), yet he's unfamiliar to republicans who didn't follow his political career, and unfamiliar to those mythical independents who vote predictably despite shunning the two party labels. Jeb is also suffering from the strong familiarity that average Americans have of his brother and father.  As a result, he will need every bit of that financial support he's building to convince his own party to carefully consider the electability  of the candidate that they will soon ask America to choose from. By those standards, Bush is it.

Cruz is ignoring that electability issue while also ignoring America's disdain for Tea Party extremism. Most importantly though, Cruz seems to be ignoring the fact that timing your announcement to be a US president is vital to your prospects because getting to know the public while avoiding unnecessary exposure is a tricky balancing act.  The longer you are out there, the potential for bad stuff looms heavily, which is why the first person to announce almost never wins the race. Smart political operatives play this card game masterfully while cardboard stiff politicians easily confuse their partisan appeal with global acceptance.  Ideological statues who can deliver tape recorded speeches, but make you afraid that robots are running America, should never be the first to announce themselves as a candidate for the president of the United States of America, if they really have plans on winning.

Oops. Too late!