Senate candidate Carol York and the 65% solution

Thanks to Kari Chisholm for sending along this Hood River News item about Senate District 26  candidate Carol York's questionable  Voter's Pamphlet claim that she's a certified teacher.

Technically, she's not.  She was at one time in New York, but I assume in New York, as in Oregon, you have to renew your license periodically to keep it valid.

York is challenging Rick Metsger.  What interests me about her campaign, however, has nothing to do with whether she misrepresented herself in the Voter's Pamphlet.   What really bothers me about York, and I speak as a former teacher and strong proponent of more money for public schools, is her embrace of First Class Education and the 65% solution for funding education.

Pumping more money into classrooms may sound good, but the 65% solution is simply a conservative ploy to divert attention from the real problem --the chronic underfunding of public education, in Oregon and elsewhere:

" 'This is a political ruse to make it sound as if people are committed to public education when in fact they've done nothing to provide an adequate and equal education for our students,' said Texas state Rep. Garnet Coleman (D), who helped defeat a legislative proposal to institute the 65 percent rule."

First Class Education is bankrolled by Patrick Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com and gadfly conservative activist.  Its spokesman is Republican consultant Tim Mooney, who wrote a memo to Republican lawmakers saying that the 65% solution would:

• "create tremendous tension" within state education unions by pitting administrators against teachers
• boost Republicans' credibility on education issues and make it easier to build support for charter schools and school vouchers

Then there's some confusion about what spending "in the classroom" actually entails.  The definition of classroom spending used by First Class Education (FCE) was "derived" form the National Center for Education Statistics, which, as researcher Gerald Bracey points out, doesn't have a catgory of spending labeled "classroom instruction", just instruction, then suppport. 

FCE's definition does not include transportation --the busing issue again-- or librarians, counselors, curriculum deveopment, teacher training, maintenance, and administration --that means school principals.  It does however define athletics and athletic supplies as classroom instruction.  Bracey sums it up this way:

"Under FCE's interpretation of this classification scheme, expenditures for football uniforms count as instruction, expenditures for librarians' salaries do not."

In short, the 65% solution is a shell game.  What goes into the classroom must be taken from other areas included in the traditional understanding of what constitutes education. 

The outrage is that the conservative proponents of the 65% solution know it.  They count on the word "classroom" to sell their case. 

For those of you in District 26, vote Rick Metsger come November.

Comments

[Marcia Brown]

I want to underscore the problem with Carol York's claim to be a certified teacher. As a retired teacher and school counselor, I still hold a valid Oregon teaching certificate. All of us who have certification in Oregon know that it is not something that comes easily. I do take exception to her claim to be a certified teacher.

However, my biggest concern is that Carol, having listed herself as a certified teacher in the Voter's Pamphlet, seems to be showing her ignorance of what is required to be a certified teacher in Oregon or New York. Is this indicative of her general knowledge about public education in general?

Having listened to her in public forum, I suspect that this is not the only subject on which she is lacking in information and experience.

[Steve Schopp]

Kulongoski wants to spend 61% of the state budget on education.

In short, the 61% solution is a shell game. What goes into education must be taken from other areas included in the State budget.

The outrage is that the liberal proponents of the 61% solution know it. They count on the word "education" sell their case.

[MATT DAMON]

Man, if you read that article in the Hood River News...it says that not only did she mislead people about being a teacher but also flat out lied about Rick Metsger's position in the Voter's Pamphlet.

Does this woman even know how to tell the truth?

And don't you have to sign a statement saying that everything in the Voter's Pamphlet is true? Shouldn’t the Sec of State be investigating her?

[Terry]

My opposition to the 65% solution is in no way an endorsement of Kulongoski's 61% proposal. The 65% solution simply divvies up existing education revenue. Kulongoski's plan dedicates an increased share of the entire state budget to education. But neither ensures adequate funding for K-12 schools without draining money from other programs, or in the case of the 65% solution, arbitrarily transfering funds from one part of the education budget to strengthen another.

I will say this for Kulongoski's plan. At least he sees the need for increased state revenue in the form of higher cigarette and minimum corporate taxes.

[Chuck Butcher]

What some of these "idjits" don't get is that there are actually parts of the state where busing isn't some social program, it's a fact of life. Maybe walking in from the mountains in the snow would qualify as instruction...

[Pat Ryan]

And then there's the mailer I got on Friday where she characterized it as "her" 65% solution as if she'd come up with it by herself, when in fact, it was the brainchild of Arizona Republican op Tim Mooney, back in 2003.

I was invited to one of her house parties and even though she identified me to the group as a precinct committee person for the Dems, she still told the group that she had heard that "some candidates" were actually recruited, but she just felt the moral obligation to serve and indeed had a hard time imagining a scenario where recruitment by party leaders had occurred.

Then I went to the SOS website and had a look at her C&Es. She has two donors that are pitching her money weekly in $5000 dollar chunks:

Friends of Feriolli
Republican PAC (something or other)
That's it

She is the ultimate straw woman, but Ted chose well......

[Kari Chisholm]

My opposition to the 65% solution is in no way an endorsement of Kulongoski's 61% proposal.

Let's just be crystal clear here. Those are percentages of two different things. Kulongoski has proposed (I think) spending 61% of the state budget on education. The 65% "solution" is about divvying up the education budget. For most school districts, the 65% solution - if properly calculated on real classroom instructional expenses - would be a cut.

[Ed Bickford]

I got a mailer a couple weeks ago about a campaign event, of course no mention of party affiliation on it. York? I checked her website, again no party affiliation mentioned. She touts her non-partisan experience as county commisioner and advisory boards and shows a letter she sent to Independents commiserating with them about being left out of the primary. I guess she expects them not to know just how strict the Republicans are in enforcing the party line, and how her non-partisan cred is out the window now that the (R) follows her name, even through she fails to print it.

[Stacey Dycus]

My take away here is that Carol York stretches the truth. She stretched the truth when she claimed to be a teacher. She stretched the truth when she claimed credit for the 65% plan (which is also a stretch) and she stretched the truth when she claimed an alliance with independents (that I personally resent).

Her consultant, Elaine Franklin, is the 2002 primary saxton consultant, becuase of that loss she turned independent. She is sent in by the R's when they need a more moderate approach than what Chuck Adams offers. She is former chief of staff for and is married to Bob Packwood. She is also running the campaigns for Patti Smith, Alan Brown and Billy Dalto. And I think Jim Torrey.

[carla]

My take away here is that Carol York stretches the truth. She stretched the truth when she claimed to be a teacher. She stretched the truth when she claimed credit for the 65% plan (which is also a stretch) and she stretched the truth when she claimed an alliance with independents (that I personally resent).

I think Stacey is being generous. York is lying her ass off. Either that, or she's so ignorant as to be incompetent in her knowledge of the Oregon teacher certification process and requirements. Neither demonstrates a shining example of someone who should be holding office.

[Righty]

I don't know how you can say that school's are underfunded when we pay over $11,000 per student. The money is there, it just needs to be spent more wisely. I also don't think that teachers need raises. I think that they need to be paid a living wage, and not more. We lose that sense of service when teachers are making more than regular folks.

I think that it is a good idea to have a policy that encourages more of that $11,000 to go for classroom instruction and less to incidental expenses. I think sports are important for kids, but should not be included in the percentage. Neither should libraries.

I love books, but kids (at least in high school) don't read then that much. The library is a place where they surf the net. In the push for integrating technology, low tech learning (books) was left in the gutter. I remember when the school where I taught (public high school) was purging the library of books to make room for 30 computer stations. I was lucky to be able to add to my collection, but most of the books hadn't been checked out in the last ten years. I don't think that throwing miney at the library will make a difference.

[Hmmm]

"Technically, she's not. She was at one time in New York, but I assume in New York, as in Oregon, you have to renew your license periodically to keep it valid."

From http://www.nysut.org/research/bulletins/teachercertification.html

"PERMANENT CERTIFICATION

A permanent certificate is valid for life in the area of certification and would be issued upon completion of the following requirements:

* Satisfied the requirements for the provisional certificate;
* Application with fee;
* Master's degree ( The graduate study which will culminate in a graduate degree must be “functionally related” to the subject field or grade level in which certification is being requested. The term “functionally related” means that the graduate degree program is job-related, as determined by the Commissioner.);
* Two years of teaching experience in a public or nonpublic school ( The teaching experience requirement means a minimum of two years of paid full-time elementary and/or secondary service. It is possible to combine different teaching experiences to meet the two-year requirements.);
* If required for the certificate title, New York State Teacher Certification Examinations:
o CST
o Assessment of Teaching Skills-Performance (ATS-P); this is also known as the performance video; and
* United States Permanent Resident status

Please note that certification in career and technical subjects may not include all of the identified requirements."

And later down:

"Please note that there is no professional development requirement for maintaining the validity of a permanent certificate."

[anonymous]

When teachers take their classes to the library computer station for different lessons, that should be considered a classroom expense. Carol York claims in a mail piece that facilities and transportation are "extraneous activities". Extraneous means unrelated, irrelevant, or inapropriate.

Facilities? So maintaining the actual classroom that students sit in to learn is not considered a classroom expense? Not only is it not included in "Ms. York's" plan, but she even has the nerve to call it an unrelated, irrelevant, and inappropriate expense.

Is there any consistency in anything this candidate says/does? As a parent I do not want someone with no regard for my children's learning environment making legislative decisions.

[Terry]

Good clarification, Hmmm, but as I made clear in my post, her teaching status wasn't my chief concern.

Kari, I think I made that very distinction in my comment. Without added
revenue, the 61% plan could hurt other state programs.

Elaine Franklin, Ed? Man, I thought she retired along with her disgraced husband.

[Winston Wolfe]

Hmmmmmm,

You seem to know an awful lot about NY statutes....so maybe you might be able to answer some other questions:

HAS CAROL YORK EVER BEEN A TEACHER IN OREGON?

WHAT IS CAROL YORK CERTIFIED TO TEACH?

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME SHE WAS IN A CLASS ROOM AT A PROFESSIONAL TEACHING LEVEL?

HOW LONG DID SHE TEACH FOR?

So in the interest of time I will answer a few of my own questions:

Q.) HAS CAROL YORK EVER BEEN A TEACHER IN OREGON?

NO!

Q.) WHAT IS CAROL YORK CERTIFIED TO TEACH?

P.E.

Q.)HOW LONG DID SHE TEACH FOR?

Exactly 0 days in a classroom as a teacher.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME SHE WAS IN A CLASS ROOM AT A PROFESSIONAL TEACHING LEVEL?

Never...because she has never taught.

Carol York is "Technically" a certified teacher. But lets get something straight, when she claims to be a "Certified Teacher" that implies that she is a teacher and it gives her augments a gravitas that she has not earned.

Every Oregon Certified Teacher should be mad as hell at Carol York for using a technicality to steal credibility when thousands of Oregon Teachers are forced to earn that credibility in the trenches of Oregon's under funded schools.

Hmmm...So you're right "Technically" she's a certified teacher and if a murderer gets off on a technicality he’s technically not a Murderer.

But the facts are clear. Carol York is trying to convince people that she is a teacher even though she's not...and in my book (regardless of technicalities) that is a lie.

[Anonymous]

That is right Terry, she WAS retired. Elaine Franklin has come out of retirement to take on Brian Clem, Vicki Walker, and Rick Metsger.

[Steve Winkler]

I think ultimately it comes down to the issue of integrity. Someone who falsely passes herself off as a teacher demonstrates an implicit contempt not only for the truth, but for her potential constituents as well. I want someone in Salem whom I can trust. I am sick and tired of candidates who do nothing but channel their handlers.

[Winston Wolfe]

Anonymous,

Don't forget that Elaine Franklin came out of retirement to also take on decency and truth.

(Currently she is winning.)

[Teddy Keizer]

I have never posted before; so, I do not know the usual protocols. I have noticed that most of the posts are very short, but I have a lot to say. I hope you will forgive me if I go on too long. It is just that I feel that anyone that promotes the 65 percent solution is either being made a tool or the fool. There are larger forces here that want to trick the public into voting for something that sounds great on the face of it, but in reality is an effort to do just the opposite, to weaken our public schools so that they can promote private schools and vouchers. It is also an effort to bring to the polls the people that will vote for their candidates. It is a ruse.

Patrick Byrne and First Class Education

The face and major financial backer of the 65 percent solution is Patrick Byrne, the CEO of Overstock.com, from Salt Lake City. The idea originated with Tim Mooney a partisan political consultant from Arizona. He is also the executive director of First Class Education, the lead group promoting the 65 percent solution. Mooney approached Byrne because he is a strong supporter of school vouchers, as evidenced by Byrne’s donating $50,000 to All Children Matter, a pro charter school PAC, and being a board member of the Friedman Foundation. It is not known how much money Byrne has donated to the 65 percent solution, but it is at least $100,000, some estimates exceed a million dollars. The 65 percent solution is also supported by a heavy hitting list of national anti tax and anti public education advocates, including Grover Norquist of the Americans for Tax Reform, sometimes touted as the leader of the anti tax movement, and David Keene, the head of the American Conservative Union.

Patrick Byrne gained some note in 2005 when he made it on CNNMoney.com’s “10 Dumbest Moments” because of a conference call to investors in which Byrne ranted about “nefarious shortsellers driving the company’s stock into the ground.” The manic billionaire owner of the Dallas Mavericks, Mark Cuban, was on the call and posted on his blog the topics that Byrne covered: “Miscreants; an unnamed Sith Lord he hopes the feds will bury under a prison; gay bathhouses; whether he is gay, does cocaine, both, or neither; phone taps; phone lines misdirected to Mexico; arrested reporters; payoffs; conspiracies; crooks; egomaniacs; fools; paranoia; which newspapers are shills and for who; money laundering; his Irish temper; false identities; threats; intimidation; and private investigators. All in 61 minutes.” If investors were not selling short before the call, they probably did after. Cuban, for his part, immediately after the call, sold short 10,000 stocks. Byrne has since taken on what he calls a “jihad” against the “hedge fund quislings” or “lapdogs” and apparently journalists as well. This feud has caused his father, John Byrne, a previous CEO of GEICO, to recently tell reporters that he is considering resigning as Overstock.com’s chairman. He calls his son “headstrong”.

The Austin American-Statesman printed an article on August 30th, 2005, that broke the story of a memo from First Class Education detailing the motivations behind the 65 percent solution. In the memo, First Class Education states that the group hopes that the issue will create rivalries between teachers and administrators making it easier for them to build support for charter schools and private school vouchers. The memo also list the “political benefits”: create divisions within education unions as dollars flow from administrators to teachers; and, will divert dollars away from other political goals of the “education establishment.” The memo also mentions that the 65 percent solution targets women and goes on to say, “Once additional fixing and funding of public education can be achieved via the First Class Education proposal, targeted segments of voters may be more greatly predisposed to supporting voucher and charter school proposals”. In addition, it states that their will be side benefits if the 65 percent solution is on the ballot. It goes on to say that it galvanizes supporters and provides “a natural litmus test” for or against candidates. It further makes that argument that the initiative allows them to circumvent campaign funding restrictions by “use of unlimited non-personal money for political positioning”. In other words, use moneys for the initiative process that cannot be used for candidates to bring supporters to the polls that will vote for the candidates.

Columnist George Will relays a conversation between Warren Buffet and Patrick Byrne: “Buffett… advised him to ask himself this: If you had a silver bullet, what competitor would you shoot, and why? Byrne says he would shoot the National Education Association – the largest teachers union. Bryne… relishes the prospect of the 65 percent requirement pitting teachers against other union members who are in the education bureaucracy.”

Byrne says that the 65 percent solution led from crunching data provided by the National Center for Education Statistics, which showed that the five states with the highest student standardized test scores, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Minnesota, and Connecticut, have an average of 64.1 percent of spending in the classroom. The five with the lowest scores, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, New Mexico, and D.C., on average spent 59.5 percent. Unfortunately, when one looks at the local district level the correlation no longer bares out. This has led the Standard & Poor, after analyzing the national data, to announce that there is no correlation between the 65 percent “classroom” figure and student performance. Byrne’s analysis also does not take into count the many complicated differences between the New England states that dominate the top of the list and the Southern states that dominate the bottom of the list. For example, there are differences in per pupil spending: Massachusetts-$9,856-ranked 4th; New Hampshire-$7,750, ranked 17th; Vermont $9,678, ranked 5th; Minnesota-$7,691, ranked 19th; Connecticut-$10,001, ranked 3th; Louisiana-$6,519, ranked 37th; Alabama-$6,6115, ranked 43rd; Mississippi-$5,382, ranked 49th; and New Mexico-$6,606, ranked 36th.

A grain of salt should be taken when comparing figures on current percent spent on classroom instruction because there are so many different definitions of classroom instruction. First Class Education is promoting a definition that included teacher’s salaries and classroom supplies, such as textbooks and computers. This definition has sometimes proven too restrictive for the public, especially when critics bring up the importance of librarians. In order to stifle this argument that resonates with voters, in Oregon, proposals specifically name librarians as part of the classroom.

Last time I looked, four states had adopted nonbinding versions of the 65 percent solution: Louisiana, Kansas, Texas, and Georgia, with Texas implemented through executive order. Each of these states passed the 65 percent solution in the last year, and it is too early to use them as a test case. First Class Education is currently promoting the 65 percent solution in at least ten more states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Its goal is to have the 65 percent solution in every state and D.C. by 2008.

The current Oregon 65 percent solution initiative did not make the ballot; however, there is definitely money to put it on the ballot for the next cycle. The ballot title “At Least 65% Of School District’s ‘Operational Expenditures’ Shall Be ‘Classroom Instruction Expenditures’ (Defined)” was challenged. A decision from the Oregon Supreme Court took too long for the necessary signature gathering. The initiative was statutory and required 75,630 votes. Paying for signature gathering does not appear to be a difficulty for the proponents.

Why the 65 Percent Solution is Not a Solution at All

The 65 percent solution has been specifically designed to sound good, but be deceptively bad. It is easy to explain and feels right on the face of it. 65 percent of school moneys should go to the classroom. Without looking at the issue any further, I would think this simple statement was good policy. Further, it has been designed to be difficult to refute with an equally simple statement. It takes too long to explain its negatives to reach any productive number of voters. In political terms, this is strategic. It can win with its ballot title alone. Without any explanation, it polls 70-80 percent. It tricks voters into believing it will accomplish something it will not. It hides the true motives of its proponents, motives that are almost opposite to what voters feel the ballot title accomplishes: promote private schools and bust teachers’ unions. The most important aspect of a strategic political proposal is that it has farther reaching repercussions than the policy issues it specifies. It strengths the political power of its proponents by feigning goodwill for a popular cause, while simultaneously decreasing the political strength of its opponents by pitting them against each other. First Class Education is confident it has found a winner.

There are many unintended consequences for a vote in favor of the 65 percent solution. It hurts rural areas more. Generally rural areas pay more for transportation. Hauling children from far away sparsely populated areas costs a lot of money. Also rural areas tend to have smaller schools. It costs more per student to run facility and services for fewer kids. The 65 percent solution puts rural schools at a disadvantage.

Is the 65 percent solution a solution or a distraction? In essence, one size does not fit all. Every district has different needs. Some districts provide for communities with many students with special needs: parents that are unable to provide a stable and healthy environment for children, English learners, immigrants, children with physical and mental disabilities, gangs that compete with schools for influence on our children’s time and moral perspectives. Other districts serve affluent homogeneous communities. Some districts have old inefficient buildings and others have schools with new well designed modern construction. Every district has different needs, both in and out of the classroom. No one budgeting scheme will fit all schools. There has to be enough local control for each community to cater its schools so that they can provide safe and healthy environments for both the minds and bodies of our children.

The 65 percent solution creates the illusion for the voter that schools are currently allocating more than 35 percent to administration. In truth, most school districts are spending 1 to 7 percent on what people think of as administration. Most people do not think of food services, the school nurse, heating, electricity, or security as administration. Yet, all of this costs money. Which would you like to cut? How about security? Or heat? Food? Medical services? How about electricity? Is this really what voters think they are deciding when voting for the 65 percent solution?

Voters want accountability; yet, accountability measures do not fall within classroom instruction. The 65 percent solution oftentimes pits the voters’ own priorities against each other. Communities support good curriculum development. They expect the district to make the maintenance choices that will keep their large investment in infrastructure from prematurely falling apart. Unfortunately, neither of these are classroom instruction either. Even teacher training and student instructional support are not considered classroom instruction.

One of the most significant disadvantages of the 65 percent solution is that it takes the debate away from the fact that schools are underfunded. It promotes the idea that schools are wasteful, and only if schools could manage their money better, education would be great. This is not to imply that schools are infallible in their budgeting process. However, even if schools were infallible, there is simply no other way to slice it: schools are not able to provide the quality of education that the public wants with the money the public provides them. So focusing on rearranging the scarce resources the schools have available is a ruse and a distraction from the root causes of the problem. Unfortunately, that is all in the plan.

-Teddy

[Can't stand the Lies]

Carol stretches the truth so far to the right when it snaps back is it going to hurt.
Her "Teacher" claim is a stretch, her 65% percent solution is not hers nor is it a solution, and her claims of not recieving special interest money is easily checked and refuted.

Let's talk about her 65% Solution- If it is her idea as she implies then I am curious how she came up with it. Does she have her own research to prove her theory? Did it come to her while she was showering? If this is her idea and hers alone, and she ends up in Salem, how is she going to get this "solution" turned into policy as a freshman Senator?

If this 65% theory is not hers then why is she calling it the York Solution? If is it not hers whose is it and why won't she give them credit?

Carol has become a pawn who will say and do anything to get elected. Bummer for Truth and Decency.

[JTT]

You know, lying in a voter's pamphlet statement reminds me of a certain congressman (Wes Cooley) who was convicted for lying in his statement. Perhaps York deserves the same for the kind of cr** she's pedling on the voters?

Rick Metsger has been steadfast in his service to his constituents and deserves to be re-elected.

It's just icing on the cake that Elaine Franklin is involved with York, knowing she is in bed (literally) with the disgraced and disgusting former Congressman Packwood.

[Beau Braman]

What is most disturbing to me about York's 65% plan is that the definition of the "classroom" does not include funding for librarians or cirriculum development. Most any high school teacher in Oregon will affirm that a massive number of students are, at the very least, "reading below grade level" -- even after graduation. On www.oregonliteracy.org this morning I found many other literacy statistics, as well, including the statement that "43% of adults at the lowest level of literacy were living in poverty, compared to only 4% of those at the highest level."

With this statistic (and many others) in mind, it is clear that being successful in Oregon and in the U.S. requires literacy. However, how can we expect teachers to help our students achieve literacy goals without the help of librarians and effective ciriculum development? Underfunding infrastructures will hurt the public good by continuing to produce graduates who cannot read and who are, therefore, more likely to live in poverty.

And, remember, Senator Metsger WAS actually a classroom teacher in Oregon...

I believe his personal experience as an educator and his past success working across party lines as a senator will help him serve effectively as co-chair of the Senate's Education Commission; he will continue to advocate for our children and improve public education state-wide. Vote Metsger!

[Anne Johnson]

Carol York may or may not be a teacher. Personally I think it's a mute issue to build a campaign on since she is not teaching now. My understanding is that her opponent Rick Metsger is a teacher as well and he too has spent time in the classroom, an Oregon classroom!! In my opinion that gives Metsger a much better knowledge of Oregon schools and the Oregon education system. So what is she hoping to accomplish by bragging about a quaility that she shares with her opponent? I think her "teacher" efforts are misguided and misinforming. In fact they are just plain silly. Vote Metsger!!

[Patton Price]

Elaine Franklin is also running with the "65% Plan" in Alan Brown's campaign. They claim it is "Alan's 65% Plan." I think that he an Carol York ought to sit down and figure out which one really came up with this plan. :)

The problem is that local schools out here already spend at least 71% in the classroom. The Republicans actually have so little regard for the facts in the face of happy soundbites that they have ended up PROMOTING A CUT TO CLASSROOM FUNDING. Wow.

Here on the Jean Cowan campaign, we are fighting back aggressively against this attempt to swindle voters. You can't govern with soundbites. And, you know, I think voters all over the country have been waking up to that fact for a while now.

[torridjoe]

This has cropped up in Kevin Cameron's HD 19 re-election campaign against Brian Grisham. You can watch their debate last week, here: http://www.cctvsalem.org/cc_cand_forums_nov06.php#
Cameron tries to play the 65% proposal, and Grisham points out that Salem's number is 72%. That's by far the best way to describe the negatives to people: for most districts, probably yours, your kids will LOSE money.

Cameron has other problems, both as we've described (http://loadedorygun.blogspot.com/2006/10/update-cameron-reverses-self-on-push.html)
and I suspect in the future.

[torridjoe]

Oh, forgot to mention that his campaign is being run by Becca Tweed, on behalf of Adams and Co. So no surprise he's got his orders from the consultants. WTF with all the legislative Republicans being so bereft of their own ideas that party consultants are literally running the campaigns for them?

[Yada Yada]

Dude, Permanent Certification in New York means you don't have to RE-APPLY. But you can see that one of the requirements is to "Satisfy the requirements for the provisional certificate". Part of those requirements is to keep up with your L.A.S.T. and ATS-W testing.

But it's a moot point, because on the top of the page is "Bulletin No. 200407 (Replaces 200112, 200315)". THESE ARE NEW REGULATIONS!!! In the early 1970's, when Carol York got certified in the great state of New York, I beleive that there was no certificate that lasted longer than 15 years... if memory serves. Does anyone know how new the Permanent Certificate is?

But holy moley! There's a neat link over here:
http://eservices.nysed.gov/teach/certhelp/CpPersonSearchExternal.jsp?trgAction=INQUIRY

Search for Carol York and you'll find a Syracusian Carol S. York... and another "Carol York" with no address info. Could this be our Oregonian Carol York? Well she may be in the system, but they don't seem to have any updated data on her.

[J. Payton]

This is the first time I have ever posted on a blog before.

I normally just read but I felt compelled because I believe what people have said about Carol York is just wrong.

Carol York is a kind woman with a great deal integrity. I can assure you she would never intentionally mislead anyone. I have known her for years, as community leaders and small business owner she has done nothing but conduct herself with class and you would be hard pressed to find anyone who says otherwise.

Carol has always thought outside of the partisan box that is why she has supported the 65% solution. Carol is trying to bring up the fact that our schools are under funded because school bureaucracy steals money that should go into the classroom. In the end that is what her 65% solution seeks to stop this practice.

Before you judge Carol York please look into her long record of being an honest hard working member of our community. Once you learn the truth I’m positive you will have no problem supporting Carol York for State Senate.

[Marcia]

RIGHTY: You said: "The money is there, it just needs to be spent more wisely. I also don't think that teachers need raises. I think that they need to be paid a living wage, and not more. We lose that sense of service when teachers are making more than regular folks."
Comments like these just make me see red. Are regular folks required to have a $100,000 education to keep their jobs? Are they required to have a Masters Degree to report to work every day. Teachers in Oregon are. It's a career, not a volunteer service, also. I can volunteer in my spare time, not at my job. I expect to get paid. My sister has no college degree and works in bookkeeping. She makes more than I do. My other sister has a B.A. and works for Columbia Sportswear in human resources and also makes more than I do. Give me a break Righty. Teachers deserve every cent they make, and then some. Maybe you were thinking of the superintendents who make $200,000 to $500,000 a year?

[coach purses]

It is a matter of course that industry will bring us success, wealth and good luck. I am sure that a hard-working person can always succeed in the work which he wants to do. This is unchangeable truth.

[Air Jordan shoes]

Fear not that thy life shall come to an end, but rather fear that it shall never have a beginning.

[moncler jackets outlet]

Beautiful!!! You truly have an eye for colour.

[moncler netherlands]

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

[Vendita Giubotti Belstaff]

I like ANMJ on FB & just subscribed to the email feed! :)