Republican Party of Sauk County - Wisconsin

Michael Haak of Merrimac, Wisconsin has a problem.  He doesn’t exist.

In the March 3, 2010 edition of the Sauk Prairie Eagle, a letter allegedly penned by Michael Haak of Merrimac, Wisconsin attacked county Republicans by labeling the chair, Tim McCumber, as a bully and paranoid delusional.  The author also warned the treasurer, Candace Dainty, might bring a loaded weapon to a school board meeting.  Dainty is a well respected 2^nd amendment advocate.  The fictitious author also claims to be a life-long Republican.

The rhetoric started over a letter McCumber wrote linking Richard Judge, a political strategist for Governor James Doyle, and Alyssa Ziegler, the wife of a union chief in the teacher’s union, last month.  McCumber claimed the two were working together, outside of the Sauk Prairie School Board (SPSB).  His letter was supporting a position taken by former SPSB president Bill Jaquish.

McCumber later blogged on the Republican Party of Sauk County’s (RPSC) website, that the letter campaign against Jaquish was directly out of the same playbook drafted by community organizer Saul Alinsky; noting the strategy is designed to create the illusion that anyone opposed to the organizer is out of touch and gives the appearance the opposition is isolated in their opinions.

“After I wrote the blog, the campaign to discredit me really ramped up and the letter by Michael Haak really took the prize”, says McCumber, who actually does live in Merrimac.  “Whoever wrote the letter clearly was not speaking with a conservative voice and made the mistake of not understanding I know most of the people in my hometown.”  McCumber searched for Haak everywhere.  “The closest I could find is a voter by the name of Mike Haak who lives over 100 miles away”, McCumber adds.

“Obviously the author is a coward who is hiding behind a fictitious name, ala Ellie Light”, Dainty says.  Dainty is referring to the fictitious author supporting Obama-care in nationwide papers last December.

Glenn Beck has it wrong.  The Republican Party does not have a spending problem.  Our “electeds” do.  Our grassroots Republicans are just as stinking mad as you are.

There is also a big tent, it’s just that our “electeds” do not know how to deal with it - nor do they understand it.  Our grassroots Republicans are playing in the “big tent”.

The grassroots GOP, of which I am proud to be, has taken issue with the spending problems of Congress for as long as I can remember.  When Ronald Reagan cut taxes in the early 80’s, I remember telling my friends that this was going to be bad.  Not the cuts – but the fact that Congress would never cut spending to match the reduction in taxes.  When the tax cuts generated more revenue – did Congress use that money to reduce taxes again?  NO.  They spent it.

Our “electeds” do not understand what the “big tent” is or how to play in it.  They think it is about moving to the center of the political spectrum.  It is actually about moving to the right on fiscally responsible matters and holding to your core principle beliefs – not selling out in the spirit of bipartisanship in an effort to buy votes from the independent voter.

I will never back away from my personal belief that abortion is wrong, for example, but the Libertarians disagree on how to handle abortion.  That is not to say that Libertarians think abortion is acceptable, they just believe it is a personal liberty that is not to be governed by the feds.  I agree with that notion, except for the fact that we have progressive liberals fighting to not just keep abortion legal, but to make it socially acceptable.  Therefore, we must work to protect the unborn and we must engage in the debate.

In many ways, I am probably more Libertarian in my views as I think most conservatives are, but I do not agree with the Libertarians’ end outcomes.  For example, I do not believe the government needs to tell me to wear a seatbelt.  Unfortunately, I see people throw innocent children, who are unable to make their own decisions, into the backseat of a motor vehicle completely unprotected.  Common sense says we need to protect those children because their own parents are not smart enough to protect them.  So we create seatbelt laws that will teach the next generation to protect their own.

I don’t believe the government should tell me what to do with your own dirt.  Unfortunately, I do have the reasonable expectation of knowing that if I invest my life savings into a house with views of the Baraboo range (for example), that a quarry operation won’t be going up next door.  Common sense regulation protects me from losing my personal investment.

The sovereignty of our nation depends entirely on how we “police” the world.  Withdrawing our troops to protect our own borders does not protect our ability to deliver and receive free trade around the globe.   Isolating ourselves through our military actions, or lack thereof, endangers our economy and our ability to engage in the free marketplace.

So how do we “big tent” this group?   We make fiscal responsibility our number one issue.  The conservative movement knows that high taxation hampers economic production and borrowing money to balance our budget is going to be the ultimate ruin of our nation.  This is the Tea Party.

On the Republican Party of Sauk County membership application, our bullet points are this:  fiscal responsibility, smaller government, free markets, lower taxes, national security, and federalism.  If you look at the Libertarian platform – it is exactly the same.  The key difference is how we get deliver on these issues.  So wouldn’t it be wise to have the argument on the Hill rather than in the primaries?  This is how liberalism wins and progressive liberals seize control of a nation and her liberties.

The Tea Party is made up of Republicans, Libertarians, and fiscally conservative Democrats.  It might even be possible to find socially conservative Democrats within this movement.  It is, Mr. Beck, the BIG TENT.  These factions all agree that progressivism is dangerous to American freedoms and taxation and spending have to be reduced. 

Because we have so many factions within the Tea Party movement, each with differing views on a number of issues, social topics particularly, I do not think we will get a third party.  What we are getting, however, is a group of people who are working together to defeat progressive liberalism, lower taxes, and reduce government spending.

So Mr. Beck, you are wrong in the same way you are so right.  We must keep the pressure on those people who hold office, our “electeds”, and hold their feet to the flame of the American dream.  We must play together in the sandbox underneath our “big tent”.

And Mr. Beck – thank you.  Without your voice, and the voice of so many others, you are making the “big tent” work.

Two weeks ago, I wrote in the article Sauk Prairie and attaining the liberal agenda, about the Delphi Technique.  I have to admit I made a mistake in writing that article.  Everywhere you see the word liberal, should replace it with the word progressive.

Less than a week later, we saw it at work as I was isolated and attacked in the Sauk Prairie Eagle (I did, however, find Mr. Johnson’s piece humorous, even if it was off the mark).  In today’s Baraboo News Republic, they attacked Terry Turnquist.

I will let you judge for yourself, but I have seen Tom Kriegl’s crusade against the county jail.  What folks have not seen is an event Mr. Kriegl attended with J. B. Van Hollen at the Sauk County Sheriff’s Headquarters.  At that event, Mr. Kriegl’s line of questioning made it very apparent that he was not concerned about the cost of the jail at all.  Mr. Kriegl dislikes incarcerating criminals.  He is all in favor of using these dollars to “reform” criminals.

Here are the three letters in this week’s MAILBAG that follow the procedures I discussed two weeks ago. (http://www.wiscnews.com/bnr/opinion/471155).  Mr. Kriegl is a progressive who’s not interested in saving money; he’s about the same failed progressive philosophies that have plagued this country for the last 50 years.

Contrary to letters to the editor in the Sauk Prairie Eagle this past week (February 10, 2010), Mr. Bill Jaquish never stated that he opposed listening sessions.  Now, having said that, I will share with you how the liberals are manipulating the Sauk Prairie School Board (SPSB) and the school budget debate.

The liberal agenda has become a very effective machine at manipulating the public agenda.  The process is very simple as it involves playing people against each other.  The end goal is to shut opposition voices out.  The process is being used in the Sauk Prairie School District.

Bev Eakman wrote a book called Educating for the New World Order.  She outlines how the Delphi Technique is a process of “community participation” that is actually being used to eliminate citizens from the debate.  In short, the process uses a trained moderator, seemingly unbiased, to facilitate listening and/or planning sessions.  The goal is to take any one person, or group, who disagrees with the agenda and make them appear ridiculous.  Using the moderator as “devil’s advocate”, they will display objectors as being dogmatic or ignorant.  Eventually, because others are afraid to speak up out of the fear of being ridiculed as well, this segment of dissenters is then outnumbered by the voices that agree and are given unfavorable status.  The outcomes of the group then become the outcomes of the goals pre-established by the organizers.

Saul Alinsky was the father of the community organizer movement here in America.  He mastered the Delphi Technique so well that it is now called the “Alinsky Method” among liberal and socialist organizers.  He provided a process for expanding these tactics outside of the group environment into the general public.

In the Sauk Prairie School District, the top Democrat campaign strategist in Wisconsin (Richard Judge) and the head of the local teacher’s union (through his wife, Alyssa Ziegler), both have seats at the table - one having been elected to the school board and the other appointed.  These two clearly bring political experience to the table of this non-partisan body and are openly practicing these community organizing tactics in full view.

They organized these listening sessions without consulting the board in a public meeting.  These meetings were so urgent they didn’t “have time” to consult with the other board members, or have the question put on the agenda, despite having 7 full months prior to requirement of finalizing the district’s budget. 

When members of the school board questioned why they would not consult the board before acting on their own (and one past board member publicly scolded them calling them on it), they moved into action.  They stacked the local editorial page with letters to the editor.  They touted that the board meetings were intimidating and scowled how appalled they were that the board would be opposed to hearing from taxpayers.

They then blasted the past board member (former president Bill Jaquish) as being “poorly-reasoned”; part of the “older generation”, and described how the school board is intimidating as a result of his past leadership.  They basically said shame on Bill - and shame on the SPSB - for opposing listening sessions.

Jaquish called them on the carpet for not being team players and for failing to work within the general etiquette rules of the school board.  He accused them of breaching the trust of others on the board by not cooperating with them nor by seeking other members opinions.  Jaquish never opposed listening sessions.  Neither did the board.  In fact, once the topic was on the table, the board readily agreed to hold them.  The other members and Mr. Jaquish questioned why these two would ignore the etiquette established by years of procedure and act on their own.  Why not involve the board if this is such a great idea?

I wrote a letter supporting Jaquish.  For the record, I never stated I opposed the listening sessions, but I did accuse them of conspiring together. 

After submitting my letter to the editor, I had to debate the editor who was playing “devil’s advocate” regarding the merits of my points.  So it must only be coincidental that one of the letters was kind enough to point out, “There is no appearance of a conspiracy”.  Nowhere was the notion of a conspiracy even addressed prior to the time they submitted their letter - which ran right after mine.

This connection of the editor’s involvement is harsh, but I find it hard to believe he would fact check my letter of opinion to protect me from incorrect information while allowing a letter written against me in 2008 that was laced entirely with a fictional account of events.  In fact, he needed to look no further than his own paper to debunk the claim.  It was there, a year earlier that they ran a story with a photograph that entirely debunks the writer’s statements and would have disclaimed the letter author’s story.

The goal of the union and its allies is to use these listening sessions to shape public opinion before the school board can even have the debate regarding the annual budget.  By stacking the deck with people of the same mind, the opinion that will come out of these sessions will be favorable to the local union.  This assessment is based purely on my opinion, of course, but one that I feel is “well-reasoned”.

The opposition will be surrounded and ridiculed.  As they ridiculed Mr. Jaquish, so too will they ridicule others.  After reading all of the letters that opposed Bill’s position by degrading his character, who would dare venture into a listening session where their opinion and self-worth can be attacked and admonished? 

Only those individuals in support of this methodology will come to these sessions and they will all support saving extra-curricular activities and academics - both sides expenditures that have teacher pay behind them.

It was the Advanced Placement classes at SPSD that came under attack during the February 8^th listening session.    Supporters of this notion believe that only the “core-curriculum” be taught.  The “core-curriculum” is a minimum standard of education.

According to the folks who attended these listening sessions we cannot afford, as a society, to educate smart kids.  Are they saying we cannot afford to give smart kids the power of knowledge?  It is widely held that literacy is the greatest obstacle to socialism.  Literacy gives people the power of knowledge.  I think we can afford it.

The school district ran Merrimac Elementary School at nearly $15,000 per child.  One year later, the Merrimac Community Charter School operated the same building at a cost of $8,000 per child.  The test scores of these children exceed state and district averages.  More money does not justify better education.  

The district pays approximately $12,000 a year to educate each child.  Reducing $1 million dollars from the budget is less than $625 per kid - or less than $3.47 per child a day.  This kind of money can be found simply by seeking out redundancies and searching out areas that improve processes that directly impact student achievement.  We currently outsource bussing - is that less expensive than doing it ourselves?  Are there other opportunities that can be outsourced, or done in house, at less cost?  You can lower expenditures without cutting teachers.  

Conservatives cannot sit on their hands any longer.  We need to become familiar this strategy.  We need to address these tactics and call them for what they are.  Liberals are using strategies to manipulate debate toward preset goals.  As demonstrated in this week’s round of local activity - they did not challenge Mr. Jaquish’s assertion that we have two people playing outside the team - they targeted him, labeled him, and defended listening sessions.

These Sauk Prairie liberals’ preset goal is not about listening sessions.  Their preset goal is protecting the local union.  And they are isolating anyone who gets in their way.   

The liberals in your community have preset goals and it is not about democracy or your conservative opinion.  It is about manipulating the process to attain the goals of their liberal agenda.  They are targeting you by ridiculing your opinions and isolating your views from those who are less informed. 

The debate in Sauk Prairie is not about listening sessions.  The debate is how to reduce costs.

We all must become voices in the debate.  Write that letter to the editor - ask your friends to write one, too.  We need to end the monopoly of the liberal voice when they attack those who disagree.  Stand up and debate them on their own merits.  Remember, we don’t need to be angry; we just need to stay on course and on topic.

Ever get a free puppy?  How free was it?  Governor Doyle, President Obama and the rest of the Democrats want to give you one.

In the 1800’s; long before the automobile, semi-tractor, and airplane; this country was built by the locomotive.  Trains have a long and storied history in the United States of America.  In the name of “progress” the Democrats want to go back in time.

The Governor has taken over $800 million for high-speed rail; Dane County wants to create a commuter line that will be lucky if it has 40 miles of track; and Sauk County is starting the debate to repair or modify the Merrimac Railroad Bridge at a cost of up to $35 million.

Trains helped to build America.  At a time when travel was done primarily by horse and wagon, the massive stream train chugged out of the east and delivered the goods that helped build the western United States.  The First Transcontinental Railroad was considered the greatest technological achievement of the day.  At the time, the railroad led to the decline of traffic on the Oregon and California Trail as it provided much faster, safer and cheaper transport east and west for people and goods across half a continent.

Today’s freight trains move a lot of goods.  In the right conditions, the train can be more energy efficient and less costly.  Unfortunately, it’s not as flexible as other forms of distribution, so the benefits only come into play when a large quantity of goods is being shipped a long distance.  Freight rail runs at a profit.  In fact, air freight and the trucking industries both run a profit.

Moving people, however doesn’t seem to be so profitable.  The government has been bailing out airlines for years and Amtrak gets a regular government paycheck that by some estimates equals $32 a ride.  So before the Wisconsin Legislature lines up to take the free puppy, remember that free puppies are never actually free.

·         High Speed Rail  (HSR) – Amtrak.  Enough said.  If I want to board a train in Madison and get to the Milwaukee airport, it takes nearly 7 hours and costs $49.  I can drive the same route in half the time (by going through Chicago) and for less money in my SUV –without a government subsidy.  Granted, HSR will be a direct route, but with the potential stops along the way, traveling by car will still be faster and won’t be subsidized by the federal or state government. Let’s face it, a train from Milwaukee or Chicago into Madison will never travel 160 mph for more than a minute if that.

·         Madison Commuter Rail (MCR) – The City of Madison kicks in $10 million dollars to subsidize your ride around Madison on a Metro Bus.  Madison actually convinced the governor that they need a train, so they are forming a regional transit authority (RTA).  This is a system that will create new ways to tax people.  I think Madison knows (at least I hope it does) it cannot afford a train and created the RTA so it could tax people outside of its borders to pay for their bus system.  They claim the RTA will support a new commuter rail, the bus system, and roads in Dane County.  Did one of their former Mayor’s leave a peace pipe in the office?

·         Merrimac Railroad Bridge and the Pink Lady Rail Transit Commission (PLRTC)– An estimate 2,500 freight cars a year come in and out of Sauk County – or less than 10 a day on average.  Currently there are 2 routes in and out of the county.  That means each line carries about 5 rail cars a day.  I wish I were exaggerating, but as the Merrimac route runs through my hometown, I have never seen a train (other than the Circus Train –which travels the route twice a year when they can afford it) with more than 5 or 6 cars at a time.

The PLRTC fought for years to rebuild the Sauk City Bridge and after finally being clubbed on the head repeatedly by the local communities that live along the route, they finally realized they had to look elsewhere.  So they are looking at the Merrimac Railroad Bridge.  A recent study shows they can extend the life of the bridge significantly for about $1.5 million.  Or they can upgrade it for $35 million and get heavier loads across.

Someone wake me when we get a train over that bridge that is at least as long as the Circus Train that runs the route at least twice a day.  Until then, repairing the bridge makes sense, upgrading it does not.  Sauk County is decades away from having that amount of rail traffic and upgrading the bridge will not bring the traffic needed to justify this expense.

So beware of the free puppy.  A free puppy needs shots, to be spayed or neutered, and a lifetime of food and attention (not to mention the potential damage of housebreaking one). 

On average these trains will not provide faster, safer and cheaper transport as it did in the 1800’s when they were competing with horse and wagons.  Today’s trains will come at a great long term expense to the taxpayer.  These rail projects are your free puppy.  They will only create temporary jobs and ultimately will have to be subsidized at great expense.

As many have you have most likely heard, Scott Brown captured the people’s seat in Massachusetts last night.  A seat held by Ted Kennedy and the Democrats for 46 years. 

The initial gut reaction of the Democrats is fear for their political careers.  Already Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., said it would “only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Brown is seated.”   Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., a fierce advocate for health care reform, also said it might be time to take a time-out on health care reform and focus on jobs.

Don’t be fooled by this rhetoric.  The White House is already spinning that Coakley was a bad candidate.  The mass-media has jumped on board outlining just how horrible her campaign was and that she was “out-of-touch” with the campaign.  She is no more out of touch than the man in the Oval House.

For those who spread the word and/or made calls into the Commonwealth - thank you.

Now is the time to keep the pressure on - not only to defeat healthcare deform, but to assure we elect Republican candidates right here in Wisconsin.

Governor

Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker – ScottWalker.org

Mark Neuman – MarkforGov.com

Lt. Governor

Mayor Dave Ross – FriendsofDaveRoss.com

Representative Brett Davis –VoteBrettDavis.com

Rebecca Keeflisch – facebook.com/rebecca.kleefisch

Ben Collins - VoteBenCollins.com

State Treasurer

Scott Feldt – ScottFeldt.com

Secretary of State

David King

US Senate

Dave Westlake – DaveWestlake.org

Terrence Wall – TerrenceWall.com

2^nd Congressional District

Peter Theron – TheronforCongress.com

Chad Lee – ChadLeeforCongress.com

3^rd Congressional District

State Senator Dan Kapanke – DanKapanke.com

17^th Senate District

Senator Dale Schulz – VoteDaleSchulz.com

42^nd Assembly District

AJ Salas

47^th Assembly District

Representative Keith Ripp – KeithRipp.com

50^th Assembly District

Representative Ed Brooks

51^st Assembly District

Howard Marklein – HowardMarklein.com

You can’t afford to let another Democrat win.

Scott Brown appears to be on the verge of winning Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in Massachusetts.  This is a seat that has been held by the Democrats since before I was born.  Heck – Ted Kennedy alone held it for 47 years.  This is big – but it will either save the president or doom him.  I think it will save him.

I am reserving my excitement despite Brown’s reported 9% lead in the polls yesterday.  I do this only because you cannot help but be skeptical about cheating – especially when Chris Matthews sits on TV and whines that he misses the good old days when you gave people money and then drove them to the polls (a move he thinks is actually legal).

The first reaction from a Brown upset will be that the President’s agenda is doomed.  Logically, the Dems should run screaming from the President pointing to this devastating loss.  Poll numbers for the Democrats are falling faster than a skydiver just before his parachute opens. 

People are sending a message that the healthcare deform proposals that sit before the House and Senate are not what the American people want.  A lame duck in year 2?  Probably not.

If Martha Coakley wins, they will move fast to pass healthcare.  They want it done as soon as possible because they believe most voters will forget about all of this by November.  They will be wrong.

If she loses – they will point to the Republicans as the people who destroyed DEFORM in America.  All of their problems today are blamed on Bush and next they will blame the GOP.  They will point to the economy and say the failed healthcare deform they proposed is holding us back from economic recovery.  They will claim their failure to create jobs and restore the economy is all the GOP’s fault because they killed healthcare reform.

A lot of folks will say this should signal the end of the liberal agenda.   I argue that this election will save them.

This will become a rallying cry and the Democrats will salvage a portion of the 2010 election season.  All the while, they will move back to the center and draw back voters.

The Democrats need Scott Brown.  It is the only way they can get out of this mess gracefully and save face.

An Open Letter to Democrats

Voters in New Jersey and Virginia made it quite clear last night that education reform is not tops on the agenda.  While the rest of America waits for new jobs to be created, a decision on the Afghanistan war, and health-care reform that doesn’t lead to a government-run system, President Obama is getting education reform done in Wisconsin. 

We will see more of this type of rhetoric today.  We should, however, focus on the issue of the President’s trip to Madison today and use this moment to build momentum to create education reform here in Wisconsin.  If ever there was a bi-partisan opportunity in Wisconsin - the time is now.

President Obama is visiting Wright Middle School - a charter school.  He is here to talk about the charter school movement and other reforms that need to be made in education.  We can use this opportunity to press the Wisconsin Democrats to actually get some kind of reform accomplished while they are still in awe of his visit.

The Democrat legislature needs to pass legislation they have denied in the past - but now there is federal money tied to making these changes so they have introduced two bills to get the cash.  While Wisconsin Democrats will get these changes done because of the money, they are not going far enough.  Perhaps the President’s visit today can help lead to the Democrats taking the next step. 

During the 2008 election cycle, I argued that Wisconsin’s Charter School law does not give Wisconsin families the tools they need to successfully lead school reform.   Wisconsin risks losing millions in federal dollars for charter schools without making changes to charter school law, so the Democrats will only be making some minor tweaks, but not the tweaks that can lead to real reform.

Charter schools are public schools and are meant to be operated autonomously from the school district - meaning independent of school district rules. Currently, only school districts can authorize charter schools.  When the school district lords over the charter contract - how can they truly be independent schools?  

In the Milwaukee area, however, the city of Milwaukee, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, the University of Wisconsin-Parkside, and Milwaukee Area Technical College) may also authorize charter schools.  This is a provision of the charter law that has lead to some real innovation in the Milwaukee area.  One Milwaukee charter high school was even named a top 20 school in the nation by Forbes magazine last year.

AB-535 will only require school districts to consider the principles and standards for quality charter schools established by the National Association of Charter School Authorizers when establishing or contracting for the establishment of a charter school.  A baby step forward as the law already requires the other authorizing entities to do this.

AB-535 should also grant charter school authority to the other universities and technical colleges in this state.  Some of the most successful charter schools have come out of the Milwaukee area.  Opponents argue that the other universities are not interested in creating charter schools.   That’s a lame argument.  They won’t do it because WEAC (the teachers’ union) disapproves.  

They also argue Milwaukee has had the highest failure rate of charter schools.  That was in the beginning.  This is now.  A lot has been learned as a result of those charter schools that failed - leading to better charter schools.  Because charter schools are meant to be autonomous, they are also held to higher standards.  When those standards are not been, they get closed. 

Representative Tamara Grigsby recently whined about the charter schools that have failed.  When a school fails - that means it is not getting the job done and we shut it down.  That, Representative Grigsby, reflects the success of the charter school program. Try closing a standard public school that fails.  Milwaukee can’t do it. It is time to get this change done.

Another change that is coming to Wisconsin is in AB-538.  This is a change that is long overdue and WEAC can’t stop the train that is delivering it.  The President has offered a huge carrot for tying teacher pay to student performance.  Wisconsin is one of the last to do so because Doyle and Company have been taking from the WEAC coiffures like kids taking candy at Halloween.  And, of course, we all know from experience that Doyle can’t resist “free government money”.

In defense of teachers (not WEAC), these standards should account for individual performance and the improvement of the group as a whole based on individual achievement.  Every kid comes in with a different skill set.  Every child does not start at the same point and not every child will end at the same point.  The union, in defending their teachers, should work with the legislature to help make this an effective model for grading teacher performance - not one that could lead to petty teacher dismissals. A good model for performance based merit pay would strengthen WEAC’s position as they protect good teachers and weed out the bad.

The final move by Doyle and Obama is to have the Mayor of Milwaukee appoint the Superintendent of the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) and to have the Mayor set the school tax levy.  US Education Secretary Arne Duncan loves it when Mayors run schools and MPS has gotten so bad, something desperately is needed.  This move goes too far, however.

Milwaukee has elected school board representatives charged with the task of hiring and firing the Superintendent.  The Superintendent is directly accountable to those people, but under the new rule, the Superintendent will only have to suck up to the Mayor.  I have a hard time being convinced that a political appointee will do any better than one appointed by the elected decision makers of MPS.   I would also challenge you to consider how it will work when the Mayor just grabs a number for their levy and just sticks it to the school district when someone ticks him off or it will win votes for him politically.

The Mayoral takeover idea is only a proposal that has been floated by Mr. Doyle and no one, as of yet, has authored a bill.  I am guessing it will be on the table before the end of the month after the Obama visit to Madison today.

School vouchers are not on the agenda, and now is not the time to bring them up.  Now is the time to capitalize on changes we could not achieve before.  We now have a real shot at getting the changes done that are supported by the White House.  Obama does not support vouchers and most people run from cover from talks of vouchers, so why risk losing the rest of the reform efforts in a over-reach for this one piece.  Only after we can get the charter school and merit-pay reforms accomplished (and prove it works) can we attempt to convince Democrats to make a leap of faith that vouchers will do the same.

Education reform through merit-pay and charter school reforms are the only conservatively embraced positions President Obama holds.  He is bringing this discussion to his liberal base in Madison today. 

After last night, let’s just hope they listen.