Skip to main content

Malloy And The Education Reform Tarbaby

 
Somewhere on the route to education reform Governor Dannel Malloy bumped into Connecticut’s fourth branch of government, teachers unions and their affiliates in the General Assembly, among them the powerful Speaker of the state House of Representatives, Chris Donovan.

Mr. Donovan, the most progressive Speaker since Irv Stolberg departed the General Assembly and left this veil of tears, leapt into politics from a stint as a union representative, and the marks of the union negotiator are etched into the fabric of his being.

Some poor ink stained wretches suspect that the evisceration of Mr. Malloy’s education reforms -- the central pillars of which are frequent teacher evaluations tied to continued employment and teacher salaries tied to student performance – are, at least in part, related to Mr. Donovan’s union affections.

On March 27, two intrepid reporters, Christine Stewart of CTNewsJunkie and Brian Lockhart of the Hearst chain of newspapers, set out probe Mr. Donovan, who this year is running for the U.S. House of Representatives in the 5th District, on the question of a legislative committee’s gutting (Mr. Lockharts term) of the Malloy educational reforms.


“I joined CT News Junkie‘s Christine Stuart in approaching state House Speaker Chris Donovan, D-Meriden this morning at the capitol for his reaction to a legislative committee’s decision to gut Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy’s controversial education reform bill.

 “The proposal – particularly changes to tenure (job security) – has been opposed by the very teachers’ unions that have endorsed Donovan’s bid for Congress. So as a key player in Hartford he’s in a sticky spot.

“Here’s what Donovan had to say. To use a school analogy, he was dancing around faster than an elementary student who downed too many juice boxes at snack and desperately wants permission to go to the bathroom.

 “Q: What do you think of the education committee’s vote and the changes to the governor’s reform package?

 A: Everybody wants the best education for our kids. It’s a process. The committee studied it, they had hearings, they put forward a proposal. I know there’s still going to be more discussion going on. So I think we’re moving forward on education reform.

 “Q: Are you generally supportive of the language of the bill? Is there anything you’d like to see changed?

 “A: Right now the committee put out its report, put out its bill. We’re going to take a look at that. It’s going to work its way and other caucus members will have a say in what needs to be done. I know there’s going to be further discussions with the governor’s office. So let’s keep the process going and keep pushing for education.

 “Q: Are changes to collective bargaining a deal breaker for you?

 “A: Right now we have a bill, we’re still talking about it.

“Q: Do you think it’s wise to hold off on the tenure changes and to study them?

 “A: What I want – I want an agreement with the governor, the General Assembly, teachers, kids, school systems. That’s what we want.

 “Q: But you’re not going to get that.

 “A: Hey, that’s what I work for. That’s what I work for every day – to try to get that to happen. And that’s the best solution. Education is so important and so personal to many people that’s the best way to do it – if everybody comes to the table and there’s agreement.

 “Q: But just on that tenure issue and the committee’s decision regarding delaying the tenure changes…

“A: All the various groups are talking about possible changes in tenure. Those discussions will take place. They’re taking place now.

 “Q: But do you think they should be put off until the next session?

 “A: I think there’s going to be – right now that bill, there is currently discussions going on about tenure. I can’t comment yet what’s going to happen at the end but those discussions are happening now.

 “Q: Have you heard Governor Malloy express his disappointment in the bill that came out of committee yesterday?

 “A: I have not.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p