Got Socialism

Got Socialism?

That’s the new bumpersticker Blake Wylie is giving away with the purchase of a copy of one of his works of art.

Thing is, it’s not a joke. Investor’s Business Daily published an interesting piece today, The Sweet Illusion of Socialism, that I suggest you read.

An excerpt:

In April, when Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., was asked if presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama was a Marxist, he replied:

“I must say, that’s a good question . . . I will tell you that during this campaign, I’ve learned some things about him, about the kind of environment from which he came ideologically. And I wouldn’t . . . I’d hesitate to say he’s a Marxist, but he’s got some positions that are far to the left of me and I think mainstream America.”

It was a good question, but there is a broader one: Will America hold to the principles of capitalism and free enterprise or will it embrace elements of socialism, Marxism and communism?

The author, Terry Sater, writes that like we haven’t done that already. The question in this election is whether we’re going to give them a bear hug or not.

Another bit:

In May, two House Democrats called for nationalization of the U.S. oil industry. A June Rasmussen poll reported that 37% of Democrats liked the idea. Webster’s defines “communism” in part as “a theory advocating elimination of private property” or “a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production with the professed aim of establishing a stateless society.”

In 2004, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., said: “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” She could have easily quoted Karl Marx, who said: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

It’s a short piece, so I won’t quote any more, but give it a read.

This is what I was writing about in The George Orwell Daycare Center. This is what 100 years of subtle (and not so subtle) alterations to our education system and media outlets by people who have embraced the beautiful lie despite the record of history has resulted in: a population of which half has pretty much wholly abandoned the spirit, intent, and letter of the Constitution, and the large majority of the other half only vaguely remembers what it was supposed to be for.

Marx and Engels have prevailed, using Antonio Gramsci’s strategy. The next President will either be Barack Hesitate to Say He’s a Marxist Obama, or John Quote “First Amendment Rights” McCain. (Unless Hillary gets lucky while Barack’s on his current World Tour.)

Neither one of these men – Senators both – seems to have much of a grasp of of the Constitution they swore an oath to uphold and defend.

I am reminded of another quote by Robert Anson Heinlein:

The worst thing about living in the declining era of a great civilization, is knowing that you are…

No, They Don’t.

No, They Don’t.

Dr. Helen links to this interesting PJM column by Mike McNally, Teaching Human Rights to Toddlers. Here’s the portion I take exception to:

According to the UK’s Telegraph, the project “will see teachers explaining to children as young as three that people across the world live different lives but everyone has a right to food, water, and shelter.”

No. They don’t. If they did, some other entity would be obligated to provide them. They have the right to seek food, water, and shelter, but no inherent right to have them.

Further down in McNally’s piece comes this gem of observation:

Parents reading about this new obsession with teaching “rights” could be forgiven for thinking that schools should focus on doing a better job of teaching the existing three R’s before adding a fourth to the syllabus. Because, while a decade and more of bar-lowering by Labour has led to more British pupils leaving school with more paper qualifications every year, anecdotal evidence from universities and employers suggests that educational standards are plummeting.

And the rot begins in primary school. A government report last year revealed that forty percent of British children struggle to write their own name, or form simple words such as “dog,” by the age of five, while a quarter fail to reach the expected levels of emotional development for their age.

And with British teenagers leading most of Europe in binge drinking, violence, teenage pregnancy, and abortions, it could also be argued that instead of teaching children about “rights,” or worrying about their tolerance of food from other cultures, schools should be more concerned with teaching them “right,” as distinct from wrong.

Robert Heinlein published Starship Troopers in 1959, and from it came this canny observation:

The basis of all morality is duty, a concept with the same relation to group that self-interest has to individual. Nobody preached duty to these kids in a way they could understand — that is, with a spanking. But the society they were in told them endlessly about their ‘rights.’

Looks like we’re still right on schedule.

UPDATE: Rachel has another example of a society where children are told endlessly about their rights, and nothing about their duties.

‘You can’t touch us, we’re 15, we can do what the f*** we like.

Heinlein would be so proud…

Weaker Ideas

Kim du Toit has an excellent education post up at Geopoliticus, The “Power” Elite, inspired by the piece from which I got last Saturday’s Quote of the Day, and another piece from Pajamas Media by Mary Grabar that I strongly recommend as well. Kim’s pretty insistent that you read both before his essay. I concur. Read ’em all.

I have one quibble. Professor Grabar says (and Kim quotes):

I blame it on women, specifically those women who, instead of working their ways into the club through rules of evidence, common values, and objective scholarship, have pushed in their alternate “ways of knowing.” The feminization of education has led to the idolization of Oprah. In the matriarchal upheaval in the academy, the great works of the canon that draw from our Western tradition, like Milton’s majestic Paradise Lost, are replaced by crudely rendered emotive investigations into oppression, like Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper,” or any of the “multicultural” offerings in the latest anthology.

In addition to eviscerating the canon to add women’s writing, of whatever dubious value (personal letters, diary entries, popular books), the academic feminists’ project was to attack the base of our way of thinking, which they correctly traced back to the notion of a monotheistic God who created a universe with an order based on reason, however indiscernible that at times might be to those he endowed with reason. The matriarchs’ attacks began on linearity, logic, argumentation — the very notion of the individual thinking self. Theorists promoting the “maternal presence in the classroom” accused even the thesis statement of the freshman five-paragraph essay of having embedded within it masculine goal-oriented thinking that in a rapacious manner eliminates weaker ideas.

My only quibble is that it didn’t begin with women in academia.

The denigration of reason began with Kant – a point Ayn Rand made, in her own inimitable way, repeatedly.

Quote of the Day

Visit any elite campus in our great nation and you can thrill to the heartwarming spectacle of the children of white businesspeople and professionals studying and playing alongside the children of black, Asian, and Latino businesspeople and professionals. At the same time, because these schools tend to cultivate liberal attitudes, they leave their students in the paradoxical position of wanting to advocate on behalf of the working class while being unable to hold a simple conversation with anyone in it. – William Deresiewicz, The Disadvantages of an Elite Education, The American Scholar, Summer, 2008

RTWT.

On This Independence Day

On This Independence Day

I thought I’d throw a handful of M-80’s on the fire.

Doing some research for another essay, I found a transcript of a Hannity & Colmes show from 2004 that literally had my mouth hanging open. I thought I’d post the part that did that to me:

ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: A teacher is being banned by his school from showing students historical documents that make any reference to God, including the Declaration of Independence. The teacher is now suing the school for discrimination, claiming he’s been singled out because he is a Christian. The school district released the following statement in response:

“The district believes that well-established constitutional principles relating to the separation of church and state must prevail. The district has not violated the constitutional rights of Mr. Williams or any other person. The district denies the allegations in the complaint and has referred the case to its attorneys.”

Joining us now from California is fifth-grade teacher Steven Williams. And from Phoenix, Arizona, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, Jordan Lorence.

Good to have you both with us.

Let me begin with you. Tell us what happened.

STEVEN WILLIAMS, FIFTH-GRADE TEACHER: Well, basically, it’s just sad to me that the separation of church and state has been just kind of warped to mean that we can’t even include some of our founding documents in the classroom.

COLMES: But what happened to you? Explain to us, explain to our audience what happened to you.

WILLIAMS: Yes. Last year, I hadn’t changed my curriculum much at all. At the beginning of last year, towards about three weeks into it, after studying the Pledge, the student asked, Mr. Williams, why do we have “under God” in the Pledge?

And, at the time, as you know, the Supreme Court was going to be hearing that case, so I thought, wow, current events as well as past events is a very appropriate topic to talk about.

COLMES: Right.

WILLIAMS: So we said, well, let’s discuss this for a little bit. After discussing it for maybe three or four minutes, got to the end of the day. And about 20 minutes after the end of school, my principal came in and said, “What are you doing talking about God in the classroom?”

And I was kind of taken aback. And, as it turns out, a parent complained immediately after that.

About a month later — and again, this doesn’t come up that much in my classroom. I think some people think that I’m trying to put these things in or talk about this all the time. — This has happened a handful of times this whole year, is what precipitated, you know, into this event.

COLMES: But what about the Declaration of Independence? Did you bring that document in?

Does the school have a right — let me go to Mr. Lorence — does the school have a right to determine what documents can or cannot be utilized by a teacher in the classroom?

JORDAN LORENCE, ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND: Well, they can. And here, in this situation, they allow teachers like Mr. Williams to bring in supplemental materials. And there are state governmental teaching guidelines that say what the objectives are that they are supposed to teach. And the Declaration of Independence clearly falls within it. He was doing nothing wrong. There was no particular ban on this.

Now, I graduated from High School in 1980, but every school I attended, to the best of my knowledge, had a copy of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States displayed prominently in or near the main office of the school.

Where else but in California does someone come up with the ludicrous idea that the Declaration of Independence is a religious document? A little further investigation and I determined that Mr. Williams was a teacher in Cupertino, a fundamentalist Christian who liked to draw attention (I believe the term is “witness”) to his faith in class. That’s a no-no. More power to him for having his faith, but he’s there to teach history not comparative religion, and he’s certainly not there to proselytize.

Williams sued the school district, but most of his suit was dismissed:

A federal judge dismissed most of a lawsuit filed against a South Bay school district by a teacher who claimed he was banned from using excerpts from the Declaration of Independence and other historical documents in his classroom because of their references to God and Christianity.

U.S. District Judge James Ware of San Jose on Thursday dismissed three of teacher Steven Williams’ claims that Cupertino Union School District representatives violated his free-speech rights; that the district’s policy on use of supplementary materials was vague; and that his right of religious expression had been violated. But one claim remains.

“In the surviving claim, the teacher alleges that all other teachers are allowed to use similar supplemental materials while he is being restricting from using them because he is an avowed Christian,” Ware wrote in his 17-page ruling. “If he can prove that claim, it would be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.”

The district issued a news release indicating it will file a motion for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of this remaining cause of action; Ware tentatively scheduled this motion to be heard in October.

Williams, a fifth-grade teacher at Stevens Creek Elementary School in the Cupertino Union School District, sued in November, arguing a First Amendment right to teach the history of our country and its founding fathers, which includes religious, and specifically Christian, references.

The lawsuit claims principal Patricia Vidmar required Williams to submit his lesson plans and the supplemental handouts he planned to use in his classroom for review.

She then kept Williams from giving students handouts including excerpts from the Declaration of Independence with references to “God,” “Creator” and “Supreme Judge” and “George Washington’s Prayer Journal.”

(sic)and Samuel Adams’ “The Rights of the Colonists,” which includes passages excluding Roman Catholics from religious tolerance because of their “doctrines subversive of the civil government under which they live.”

In other words, this guy uses his classroom as a pulpit, and the reaction of the brain-dead administration is to prevent him from using historical documents?

Again, only in California.

They settled the lawsuit. (PDF file)

I wonder what Thomas Jefferson would think?

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Happy Independence Day.

Not All the Education News is Bad

Not All the Education News is Bad

Via Kitchen Table Math I found this piece about the Washington Math Science Technology Public Charter High School in Washington, D.C. An excerpt:

Mr. Boykie (director of development and fundraising) calls the school the “best kept secret in DC” because it has never received much publicity, despite its tremendous academic successes with a student population that is 100 percent low-income: a rigorous curriculum, including AP courses; an extraordinarily high graduation rate, with nearly all graduates receiving scholarships to attend college; and the rare achievement of adequate yearly progress. In addition to their success on standardized tests, WMST students have racked up top honors at math, science, and JROTC competitions. Giant trophies, as well as college acceptance letters, pack the display cases in the front lobby.

The general public may not know much about WMST, but parents certainly do. Its reputation among parents is so strong that most of the 400 students commute from far-away neighborhoods, some traveling for as much as two hours each way. Parents are willing to overlook the school’s lack of a gym, a library, and sports teams because they know that their kids will graduate knowing how to read, write, do math, and understand technology.

(My emphasis.) The piece ends with “Here’s hoping that it won’t remain a secret much longer.”

What I fear is that as soon as it gets some good publicity, the Teacher’s Unions and the Department of Education will move swiftly to destroy it.

As the Japanese say, the nail that sticks up gets hammered down.

Balkanization Pushback (or: “Speaking of Ché…)

Apparently the news coverage of the Tucson Unified School District’s “Ethnic Studies” program has resulted in some action. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne released this letter this morning:

I. The TUSD Ethnic Studies Program Should be Terminated.

The citizens of Tucson, of all mainstream political ideologies, would call for the elimination of the Tucson Unified School District’s ethnic studies program if they knew what was happening there. I believe this is true of citizens of all mainstream political ideologies. The purpose of this letter is to bring these facts out into the open. The decision of whether or not to eliminate this program will rest with the citizens of Tucson through their elected school board.

II. Philosophy.

First, let’s spend a minute on underlying philosophy. I believe people are individuals, not exemplars of racial groups. What is important about people is what they know, what they can do, their ability to appreciate beauty, their character, and not what race into which they are born. They are entitled to be treated that way. It is fundamentally wrong to divide students up according to their racial group, and teach them separately.

In the summer of 1963, having recently graduated from high school, I participated in the civil rights march on Washington, in which Martin Luther King stated that he wanted his children to be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. That has been a fundamental principal for me my entire life, and Ethnic Studies teaches the opposite.

III. Personal Observations.

I personally observed this at the Tucson Magnet School. My Deputy, Margaret Garcia Dugan, who is Latina and Republican, came to refute the allegation made earlier to the student body, that “Republicans hate Latinos”. Her speech was non-partisan and professional, urging students to think for themselves, and avoid stereotypes. Yet, a small group of La Raza Studies students treated her rudely, and when the principal asked them to sit down and listen, they defiantly walked out. By contrast, teenage Republicans listened politely when Delores Huerta told the entire student body that “Republicans hate Latinos.”

In hundreds of visits to schools, I’ve never seen students act rudely and in defiance of authority, except in this one unhappy case. I believe the students did not learn this rudeness at home, but from their Raza teachers. The students are being ill served. Success as adults requires the ability to deal with disagreements in a civil manner. Also, they are creating a hostile atmosphere in the school for the other students, who were not born into their “race”.

Hector Ayala was born in Mexico, and is an excellent English teacher at Cholla High School in TUSD. He reports that the Director of Raza Studies accused him of being the “white man’s agent,” and that when this director was a teacher, he taught a separatist political agenda, and his students told Hector that they were taught in Raza Studies to “not fall for the white man’s traps.”

IV. Textbooks.

As I will describe, the evidence is overwhelming that ethnic studies in the Tucson Unified School District teaches a kind of destructive ethnic chauvinism that the citizens of Tucson should no longer tolerate.

The very name “Raza” is translated as “the race.” On the TUSD website, it says the basic text for this program is “the pedagogy of oppression.” Most of these students’ parents and grandparents came to this country, legally, because this is the land of opportunity. They trust the public schools with their children. Those students should be taught that this is the land of opportunity, and that if they work hard they can achieve their goals. They should not be taught that they are oppressed.

One of the textbooks is Occupied America (5th ed.). One of the leaders it talks about is described as follows: “José Angel Gutiérrez was one of the leaders, and he expressed the frustrations of the MAYO generation. His contribution was indispensable; it influenced Chicanos throughout the country.”

One of Gutiérrez’s speeches is described as follows:

We are fed up. We are going to move to do away with the injustices to the Chicano and if the ‘gringo’ doesn’t get out of our way, we will stampede over him.” Gutiérrez attacked the gringo establishment angrily at a press conference and called upon Chicanos to ‘kill the gringo,’ which meant to end white control over Mexicans.

The textbook’s translation of what Gutiérrez meant contradicts his clear language. In describing the atmosphere in Texas where Gutiérrez spoke, the textbook states: “Texans had never come to grips with the fact that Mexicans had won at the Alamo.” (P. 323.) It is certainly strange to find a textbook in an American public school taking the Mexican side of the battle at the Alamo.

Another textbook is The Mexican American Heritage (2nd ed.). One of the chapters is “The Loss of Aztlan.” Aztlan refers to the states taken from Mexico in 1848: Arizona, California, New Mexico and Colorado. This chapter states: “Apparently the U.S. is having as little success in keeping the Mexicans out of Aztlan as Mexico had when they tried to keep the North Americans out of Texas in 1830.” (P. 107.) In other words, books paid for by American taxpayers used in American public schools are gloating over the difficulty we are having in controlling the border. This page goes on to state: “…the Latinos are now realizing that the power to control Aztlan may once again be in their hands.”

V. M.E.Ch.A.

The extracurricular activity at TUSD related to ethnic studies is called M.E.Ch.A. When I was at Tucson high school, the librarian was wearing a M.E.Ch.A. tee shirt. If you Google M.E.Ch.A., you will find its goals and constitution. In the introductory paragraph, M.E.Ch.A. states:

We are Chicanos and Chicanas of Aztlán reclaiming the land of out [sic] birth (Chicano and Chicana Nation); 2) Aztlán belongs to indigenous people, who are sovereign and not subject to a foreign culture…

In section 2 of the M.E.Ch.A. Constitution it states:

Aztlán belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops and not to the foreign Europeans. We do not recognize capricious frontiers on the bronze continent.

VI. Teaching the Wrong Things About Literature.

When I began speaking out publicly against ethnic studies, one of the ethnic studies teachers had his students write me letters. One of these letters states: “All that the English classes teach is mainly about some dead white people.” I believe schools should teach the students to judge literature by its content and not by the race or gender of the author.

VII. MacEachern Investigative Reports.

After my confrontation with TUSD over ethnic studies had begun, Doug MacEachern, a columnist for the Arizona Republic, ran a series of investigative reports on ethnic studies. This is the kind of thing that the Star and the Citizen should do, but thus far only the Republic has done. One of his sources was a former TUSD teacher named John Ward, who despite his name, is Hispanic. Ward reports:

But the whole inference and tone was anger. (They taught students) that the United States was and still is a fundamentally racist country to those of Mexican-American kids.

Individuals in this (Ethnic Studies) department are vehemently anti-Western culture. They are vehemently opposed to the United States and its power. They are telling students they are victims and that they should be angry and rise up.

. . .

By the time I left that class, I saw a change (in the students), he said. An angry tone. They taught them not to trust their teachers, not to trust the system. They taught them the system wasn’t worth trusting.

Because Ward no longer worked at TUSD, he was willing to be quoted. Many current TUSD employees have talked to me about the horrors of what they have witnessed in the Ethnic Studies Program, and the almost totalitarian climate of fear at TUSD which keeps them from being quoted. Here is what MacEachern found:

In the past several weeks, messages have filtered out from teachers and other TUSD employees (some directed to Horne; others who have contacted me, following two previous columns on this subject) about what an officially recognized resentment-based program does to a high school.

In a word, it creates fear.

Teachers and counselors are being called before their school principals and even the district school board and accused of being racists. And with a cadre of self-acknowledged ‘progressive’ political activists in the ethnic-studies department on the hunt, the race transgressors are multiplying.

The director of the TUSD Ethnic Studies Department, who keeps a portrait of Ché Guevara on the wall of his classroom, spoke to MacEachern: “Our teachers are left-leaning. They are progressives. They’re going to have things (in their courses) that conservatives are not going to like, he told me.”

VII. TUSD’s Intimidation of Its Employees.

Ward eventually wrote his own column. He describes how the TUSD administration intimidated him by removing him from his class, and calling him a “racist,” even though he himself is Hispanic. This tactic, he writes:

…is fundamentally anti-intellectual because it immediately stops debate by threatening to destroy the reputation of those who would provide counter arguments.

Unfortunately, I am not the only one to have been intimidated by the Raza studies department in this way.

VIII. The Time for Action Is Now.

TUSD can intimidate its employees. But it cannot intimidate you, the citizens. You are in a comfortable position. You can speak out. If the TUSD board eliminates ethnic studies, it will save $2 million a year of your money, the cost of ethnic studies administrators and consultants alone. That is your money. The school board represents you. I can use my pulpit to bring out the facts, but only you can bring about change.

Sincerely,
Tom Horne

Yup. “Progressives” who like Ché teaching that the white man victimizes everyone else, that Western Civilization is just the history of “dead white people”.

And tax dollars pay for it all.

Marvelous.

And how long has this been going on?

What Did YOU Learn in High School

What Did YOU Learn in High School?

In my last überpost, The George Orwell Daycare Center, I included a link to a Civics quiz that a lot of people took. The results were mixed, but overall the people who read this blog did far better than the average Ivy League college student.

However, here’s a test for you – no graphing calculators, just pencil and paper – and see how much you remember:

The California Standardized Testing and Reporting Program, Algebra I Quiz. (Requires Flash)

In the interests of fair disclosure, I missed three two.

UPDATE: The test displays better in Explorer than in Firefox, apparently.

How in the Hell Did I Miss These

How in the Hell Did I Miss These?

Via Breda:

‘Education’ Misspelled On Suburban School Diplomas

WESTLAKE, Ohio — A Cleveland-area principal says he is embarrassed his students got proof of their “educaiton” on their high school diploma.

Westlake High School officials misspelled “education” on the diplomas distributed this weekend. It’s been the subject of mockery on local radio.

Principal Timothy Freeman said he sent the diplomas back once to correct another error. When the corrected diplomas came back, no one bothered to check the things they thought were right the first time.

Publisher Jostens has reprinted the new diplomas — a third attempt — and sent them to the 330 graduates.

Ohio Grad Admits Plagiarizing Speech

CIRCLEVILLE, Ohio — An Ohio teen has admitted he plagiarized the high school commencement speech he gave last weekend and has given up the title of class valedictorian.

Officials said Melanio Acosta IV sent the principal of Circleville High School in central Ohio an e-mail Wednesday acknowledging that he used part of a speech he found online and saying he didn’t consider the consequences.

His speech Sunday was titled “You Say Goodbye. I Say Hello” and was filled with references to Beatles songs.

Circleville Superintendent Sam Lucas said the district is deeply disappointed but encouraged by the 18-year-old’s confession.

Acosta’s mother, Ofelia, said the family is devastated but also describes the punishment as too harsh. She said her son worked hard to make valedictorian.

I wonder if Mr. Acosta was like Dominique Houston. Or worse, Bridget Green, who got an A in algebra, but failed the math exit exam – five times – even though she was her school’s valedictorian. A test that only requires a score of 35% to pass! I bet she “worked hard” too! Ms. Green scored an 11 on her ACT.

What I really wonder is if Mr. Acosta, like Ms. Green, also aspires to become a teacher.

Tom McClintock for House of Representatives

Continuing the education theme, California State Senator Tom McClintock is running for national office, U.S. Representative for California’s 4th District. He handily defeated the well-financed campaign of former Congressman Doug Ose 54%-39% in last Tuesday’s primary by running against earmarks. Good for him. McClintock also ran for Governor during the recall election that saw Arnold Schwarzenegger attain the office. Too bad he couldn’t have won that one.

But the reason I’m writing this post is to republish something he wrote in 2005:

A Modest Proposal for Saving Our Schools

The multi-million dollar campaign paid by starving teachers’ unions has finally placed our sadly neglected schools at the center of the budget debate.

Across California, children are bringing home notes warning of dire consequences if Gov. Schwarzenegger’s scorched earth budget is approved – a budget that slashes Proposition 98 public school spending from $42.2 billion this year all the way down to $44.7 billion next year. That should be proof enough that our math programs are suffering.

As a public school parent, I have given this crisis a great deal of thought and have a modest suggestion to help weather these dark days.

Maybe – as a temporary measure only – we should spend our school dollars on our schools. I realize that this is a radical departure from current practice, but desperate times require desperate measures.

The Governor proposed spending $10,084 per student from all sources. Devoting all of this money to the classroom would require turning tens of thousands of school bureaucrats, consultants, advisors and specialists onto the streets with no means of support or marketable job skills, something that no enlightened social democracy should allow.

So I will begin by excluding from this discussion the entire budget of the State Department of Education, as well as the pension system, debt service, special education, child care, nutrition programs and adult education. I also propose setting aside $3 billion to pay an additional 30,000 school bureaucrats $100,000-per-year (roughly the population of Monterey) with the proviso that they stay away from the classroom and pay their own hotel bills at conferences.

This leaves a mere $6,937 per student, which, for the duration of the funding crisis, I propose devoting to the classroom.

To illustrate how we might scrape by at this subsistence level, let’s use a hypothetical school of 180 students with only $1.2 million to get through the year.

We have all seen the pictures of filthy bathrooms, leaky roofs, peeling paint and crumbling plaster to which our children have been condemned. I propose that we rescue them from this squalor by leasing out luxury commercial office space. Our school will need 4,800 square feet for five classrooms (the sixth class is gym). At $33 per foot, an annual lease will cost $158,400.

This will provide executive washrooms, around-the-clock janitorial service, wall-to-wall carpeting, utilities and music in the elevators. We’ll also need new desks to preserve the professional ambiance.

Next, we’ll need to hire five teachers – but not just any teachers. I propose hiring only associate professors from the California State University at their level of pay. Since university professors generally assign more reading, we’ll need 12 of the latest edition, hardcover books for each student at an average $75 per book, plus an extra $5 to have the student’s name engraved in gold leaf on the cover.

Since our conventional gym classes haven’t stemmed the childhood obesity epidemic, I propose replacing them with an annual membership at a private health club for $39.95 per month. This would provide our children with a trained and courteous staff of nutrition and fitness counselors, aerobics classes and the latest in cardiovascular training technology.

Finally, we’ll hire an $80,000 administrator with a $40,000 secretary because – well, I don’t know exactly why, but we always have.

Our bare-bones budget comes to this:

5 classrooms $158,400
150 Desks @ $130 $19,500
180 annual health club memberships @ $480 $86,400
2,160 textbooks @ $80 $172,800
5 C.S.U. Associate Professors @ $67,093 $335,465
1 Administrator $80,000
1 Secretary $40,000
24% faculty and staff benefits $109,312
Offices, expenses and insurance $30,000
TOTAL $1,031,877

This budget leaves a razor-thin reserve of just $216,703 or $1,204 per pupil, which can pay for necessities like paper, pencils, personal computers and extra-curricular travel. After all, what’s the point of taking four years of French if you can’t see Paris in the spring?

The school I have just described is the school we’re paying for. Maybe it’s time to ask why it’s not the school we’re getting.

Other, wiser, governors have made the prudent decision not to ask such embarrassing questions of the education-industrial complex because it makes them very angry. Apparently the unions believe that with enough of a beating, Gov. Schwarzenegger will see things the same way.

Perhaps. But there’s an old saying that you can’t fill a broken bucket by pouring more water into it. Maybe it’s time to fix the bucket.

How can you NOT want this guy in Congress? And if you liked that piece, read this one he wrote in 2001.

Still, we’re talking about California, the place that keeps electing Diane Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi. Yes, there are pockets of sanity in the state, but overall?

Think “Berkley.” I wish him all the luck in the world. He’s going to need it.