Eliot Gets It

That's what a headline over at Edwize declared, and since Eliot pointedly failed to enforce the class size demands of CFE, I always wondered what the headline meant. Now I know, and I'm sure we all have to agree that Eliot gets it.

A curious thing, though, is that Eliot pays $4,300 to get it, and a lot of us today wondered what exactly it is you get for that kind of money. No doubt it's something very special that Eliot is getting. Otherwise, why would he need to pay so much for it?

Now a lot of my readers seem to take a dim view of Eliot getting it. In his defense, I have to say that Eliot made sure he got it from New York. Apparently, Eliot even paid the young lady's train fare. Now clearly she'd have poured a good portion of her salary into the local economy, and Eliot has to know this. I mean, a leather thong here, a nurse's outfit there, and pretty soon you have money trickling down to regular people, like teachers.

And for goodness sake, when I watch The Wire, all the drug dealers know to conduct their business on cellphones and throw them away every few weeks. Not Eliot. He uses land lines that can be easily traced, due to his great respect for law enforcement. That's what Eliot does when he gets it.

So, there you have Eliot, pouring money into the local economy and showing great respect for law enforcement. And for all you 55-year-old teachers planning to retire next week, he made it a point to sign that legislation before getting got for getting it (Apologies to you poor newbies who will now pay for 27 years, but that's the way the cookie crumbles).

So let's stop being Gloomy Guses, and look at all the positive things Eliot's got. And while we're at it, let's hope the next governor lowers class sizes, as the CFE lawsuit mandates.

Related: Eduwonk doesn't think the Lt. Governor is a teacher's best friend.

Anything Big Happen Today?

Governor Eliot Spitzer ought to be a text book example of how NOT to run a political career.

After making his bones as a hard-nosed prosecutor who took on Wall Street corruption and malfeasance in the public and private sectors and running as the guy who was going to change politics as usual up in Albany, he has himself become embroiled in not one but two scandals that look like they will all but end his political career.

The first scandal involved Spitzer aides and political dirty tricks. That one, while politically damaging to Spitzer, wasn't as bad as what broke today:

NEW YORK -- Gov. Eliot Spitzer, the crusading politician who built his career on rooting out corruption, apologized Monday after allegations surfaced that he paid thousands of dollars for a high-end call girl. He did not elaborate on the scandal, which drew calls for his resignation.

...

The New York Democrat's involvement in the ring was caught on a federal wiretap as part of an investigation opened in recent months, according to a law enforcement official who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing inquiry.

Four people allegedly connected to the ring, identified in court papers as the Emperors Club VIP, were arrested last week. The ring arranged connections between wealthy men and more than 50 prostitutes in New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Miami, London and Paris, prosecutors said.

According to the law enforcement official, Spitzer is the person identified in legal papers as "Client 9," who paid for a four-hour tryst with a woman identified as "Kristen" at a Washington hotel on Feb. 13.

Gotta love when the governor of New York State is identified in an indictment as "Client 9."

And you gotta love when a politician trying to explain away a sex scandal forces his wife to stand by him while he offers lame excuses.

Can there be much in life more uncomfortable and downright selfish than that?

At any rate, most politicians could survive this kind of thing these days, but I'm not sure about Spitzer. While all kinds of Moral Majority types have gotten caught in public restrooms or madam's books engaging in "immoral" behavior, most do not have the kind of enemies Spitzer has.

Senator David Vitter, for instance, conservative Republican/Family Values Guy/pro-marriage proponent, turned up in the D.C. Madam's little book, yet he managed to survive charges of hypocrisy, immorality and downright creepiness (rumors swirled around the Internets that Vitter liked to wear Huggies when he met with his professional women...) and is still serving his term.

Senator Larry Craig, conservative Republican/Family Values Guy/pro-marriage proponent, got arrested in a Minneapolis bathroom for allegedly soliciting an undercover cop for sex, pleaded guilty to a disorderly conduct charge, then tried to have the guilty plea rescinded when the scandal broke publicly. He even announced he would resign his seat, but reneged on that promise and is still serving in the Senate. His excuse - that he has a "wide stance" when using a public restroom - may be a punchline on The Daily Show and Colbert, but Craig still has his job.

But Spitzer, another "holier-than-thou" guy who set himself up as the public morality police in his job as New York attorney general, has made so many enemies on Wall Street and in the political world that I just think he's going to have a more difficult time surviving this than other politicians.

And maybe he shouldn't survive it. You know, if a politician's going to set himself up as a "holier-than-thou" crusader who takes down wrong-doers and such, shouldn't he NOT use a call girl service?

Or at the very least not make the call to the prostitute ring himself so that if the lines were wire-tapped his voice would be on the tape?

You know, if Spitzer was dumb enough to do this once, I bet he did it lots of times before. Given all the guys on Wall Street who hate his guts (just watch CNBC and listen for how they say his name) and given the probability that Spitzer has engaged in this kind of behavior before, I'm surprised it took this long for something to come out.

The bad part about all of this is that we're going to get a plethora of "Bloomberg for Governor" stories now that Spitzer seems mortally wounded after this scandal.

While last week I didn't think there was much to those rumors, after today I can start to see a scenario where Mayor Moneybags becomes Governor Moneybags and brings his Children First education reforms statewide while rezoning most of the state for sports stadiums and luxury buildings.

Eliot Doesn't Get It

After having supported Eliot Spitzer for governor, the UFT proudly declared on Edwize, "Eliot Gets it." I voted for him enthusiastically, as he'd done a lot of talking about class size reduction, which I've always supported. However, when he actually got into office, he started talking about menus---class size reduction or a longer school day or a longer school year. The whole bait and switch approach didn't much appeal to me.

The UFT praised class size legislation as a major victory, though careful reading of its own article indicated there were no real consequences for failure to deliver, or reduction of less than one student per class. Now, months after this dubious accomplishment, the UFT is calling for class size reduction in schools that need improvement. This is a huge step backward, particularly in comparison with the "victory" it loudly declared all those months ago.

What else has our pal "Eliot" got in store for us? Well, the NY Sun reports the following:

The city's schools, which just received their first letter grades from Mayor Bloomberg, next year could receive a whole new set of judgments — this time courtesy of Governor Spitzer.

To be considered to have met federal No Child Left Behind benchmarks, New York schools now must only prove to the state that their students are scoring at a certain level. The new formula being developed in Albany — called a "growth model" — would require they also show improvement from one year to the next.

Now everyone wants improvement, and everyone wants their kids to do better in school. How many of us have not met the parent whose kid got a 99 and who wants to know why the hell she didn't get 100? And therein lies the problem.

In my school, 90% of the kids might pass the English or math Regents exams. But if we fall to 88% the next year, such a system might determine we are failing. In fact, under the first Bloomberg/Klein reorganization, and for just such a 2% drop, we were selected as a school in need of supervision. But other schools with much lower passing ratios were declared to be improving.

We might go up to 92% next year--who knows? But it's normal to have a little ebb and flow. I happen to think there are factors other than grades that speak to a school's quality (or lack thereof), but systems that rely on test scores need to recognize consistent excellence (or consistent mediocrity).

Certainly parents know. That's why my school is at over 250% capacity and growing by leaps and bounds, while some "improving" schools have plenty of space.

But where would you send your kid--the school that's gone from 90 to 88, or the one that's gone from 60 to 64? If you were basing you decision solely on test scores, the answer would be simple.

If you were looking for reasonable class size, you might want to check into a school labeled as failing, because they appear to be the only ones slated for attention right now. And even so, I wouldn't hold my breath while waiting.

Now with More Cheesy Goodness

For working people, the New Democrats may as well be Republicans. They've moved so far to the center you can't tell where left ends and right begins. That's called "triangulation," they tell me.

Colorado Governor Bill Ritter was very much a pro-labor candidate. Yet he vetoed a bill that would have required workers in union shops who fail to join to pay an agency fee. Sure, they can earn the salaries the union negotiates, and enjoy whatever benefits they negotiate as well. They just don't have to pay for it. Oddly, Colorado is not one of those "right to work" states. But now Ritter is a true leader, able to stand up to organized labor, and Republicans there will just have to find someone else to complain about.

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick is talking about extending school days and school years. As a parent, I'm understandably excited about the possibility of my child being tested even closer to death than she is now. He's talking charter schools and merit pay. To his credit, he's also talking of free junior college and lower class size, but I've heard that sort of talk before.

In fact, I heard it from New York State Governor Elliot Spitzer, who was going to compel the mayor to follow the guidelines of the CFE lawsuit. He was going to demand reduced class sizes in New York City. When he got elected, though, he proposed a "menu" including class size, or longer days, or longer years. The legislation about class size that I've read about includes no real benchmarks, no requirements, and no penalties. Instead of your class of 34 kids, Klein can put you and another teacher in the same room with 67 kids. Now you have 33.5 kids, and class size is reduced.

The expert, of course, is UFT President Randi Weingarten, who's already negotiated a longer school day and year. Not only that, but she's fearlessly sent teachers permanently into the halls, into the lunchrooms, and into the bathrooms. She sent her teachers to teach a 6th class (which she claims is not a class, but which the chancellor calls a small class) Monday to Thursday. She's shredded their seniority rights and earned well-deserved accolades from anti-labor, anti-teacher voices from the New York Post editorial board to ex-US Secretary of Education Rod Paige.

So where are pro-labor people to look? Is it a sin to say you don't want to work days, nights, weekends, and summers (like me)? Is it heresy to say you don't want your kids to do that either?

Who stands up for working people in the good ol' US of A nowadays?

Moving Ahead

Mayor Bloomberg has succeeded in his plan to give away 66% of the public ballfields on Randall's Island to wealthy private schools, via a no-interest 20-year loan (a fact that seemed to escape the NY papers). He's done so with the full blessing of city Controller Bill Thompson, who had previously objected.

A lot of teachers, myself included, had thought that placing Democrats in key positions might be helpful to city schoolchildren, teachers, and working people in general. Given Mr. Thompson's support for this plan, I no longer think it's that simple. Take a look at Governor Spitzer, who'd promised to lower class sizes, but now makes it a menu choice, along with longer school days and years, both of which we already have in NYC, and neither of which has much helped anyone.

Perhaps Governor Spitzer can credit Bloomberg and UFT President Randi Weingarten for already having instituted this plan, what with their having negotiated the longest school year in the area already. Then, Mayor Bloomberg can get the extra cash without frittering it away on those troublesome CFE demands (good teachers, small classes, and decent facilities).

Also, take a look at how Whitney Tilson on the pro-voucher blog Edspresso loves Governor Spitzer's approach. Why on earth do you suppose Randi Weingarten loves it too? Spitzer's running for president, and so is Ms. Weingarten. We'd better line up some real allies, or New York City's kids may soon need to run as well. Where?

Nassau, where I live (because I couldn't afford the area in which I work), looks better every day, and while I'm beginning to wish Suozzi had beaten Spitzer (I voted for Spitzer in the primary and the election, hoping he'd follow CFE's recommendations, rather than "reform"), I'm glad we still have Suozzi here.

My kid's school is excellent. Why? It has good teachers, small classes, and decent facilities. That seems to work, but it's not what I'd call a "reform."

Politicians like "reforms." I don't much like politicians today, though.

Talk Talk Talk

UFT President Randi Weingarten has an op-ed in the Daily News this morning. She repeatedly praises Governor Eliot Spitzer for his emphasis on proven reforms, like smaller class size, but does not make it clear precisely what other choices he offered.

I'd like to believe Ms. Weingarten that Mr. Spitzer's intentions are good. Unfortunately, actions speak louder than words, and even Mr. Spitzer's words, up to this point, have been highly disappointing. Mr. Spitzer ran claiming he'd reduce class size, not that he'd offer the option of reducing class size.

Mayor Bloomberg has always had the option of reducing class size. He has always declined it. Can Mayor Bloomberg find some way to lengthen the school day, or year (his other options, according to the governor) without violating the UFT contract? He doesn't have to lengthen if for teachers if he can somehow make kids stay longer. Will Unity/New Action lengthen the school day and year in the next contract to secure another compensation increase that fails to meet inflation?

They've certainly done it before.

Related: This blog is also quoted in today's Daily News.

Who Killed the CFE Lawsuit?

The CFE lawsuit promised to bring NYC children good teachers, smaller classes, and decent facilities. For years I walked around convinced that substantive change was coming to our system, despite the babbling of various self-serving politicians. But now I think it's nothing but a fond memory.

There are a lot of suspects.

Was it Mayor Michael Bloomberg? Mayor Bloomberg strongly supported the idea of the infusion of capital. However, when the judge said the city might have to pay a portion, he decided decent education was too expensive. His representative said if the city were asked to pay any portion whatsoever, it would say no thank you to the whole deal.

Was it ex-Governor George Pataki? To his credit, Governor Pataki immediately offered to shoulder 60% of the award. He probably could have come up a little, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg refused to pay a dime. As a result, he appealed the decision.

Was it the judges? One of them decided an eighth-grade education was good enough for New York City kids, and that our sole obligation was preparing them for a career in fast food. When the mayor refused to kick in dime one, another decided to cut the award by two-thirds and ensure there was no oversight in how the city spent the money.

Was it UFT President Randi Weingarten? Though Ms. Weingarten speaks about class size frequently, she negotiated two contracts under the spectre of the CFE lawsuit, and made no effort whatsoever to enforce reductions. She continues to push petitions and letter-writing campaigns knowing that any ballot proposal she wins is subject to the mayor's veto. The mayor has singlehandedly killed referendums before, and there's nothing to indicate he won't do so again.

Was it Governor Eliot Spitzer? The new governor promised great things for NYC schools. He promised to force Mayor Bloomberg to kick into any award. Gone is all such talk, and now he's kicking in money, but offering a menu of "improvements." They can reduce class size, but they can also increase the school year or day or offer "other changes in scheduling."

On teacher quality:

In a call for better teacher preparation, Mr. Spitzer said the state should offer expanded alternative certification programs to increase the number of teachers entering the profession without traditional training.

Mr. Spitzer, perhaps, is the only person on earth unfamiliar with the results of New York City's thirty-year program of intergalactic recruitment. While such programs swell the ranks of teachers and artificially depress New York City salaries, I don't see anyone standing up and praising Chancellor Klein for retaining teachers who've failed basic competency tests, often dozens of times. The overwhelming majority of internationally-recruited teachers turned tail and fled when they got a whiff of the cost of living here in fun city.

Mr. Spitzer has also taken a stand supporting Mayor Bloomberg's demand that test scores become part of tenure reviews, despite Randi Weingarten's prominent protestations. So much for the clout of the so-called "powerful teachers' union."

After years of resisting class size reduction, I see no reason why Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein would embrace it if not forced. It's likely their "other changes in scheduling" will be smoke and mirrors, or further privatization of the public schools. What will they do with the money? Hire extra levels of administrators? Construct schools on toxic waste sites? Invest in cutesy programs like Everyday Math? Who knows?

One thing appears certain--there will be no significant reduction in class sizes unless and until it is mandated, one way or another. The last best opportunity to have done so was during contract negotiations with the UFT.

The next best chance will be with a new mayor. And if teachers are really serious about this, they'll elect a new union president who values education even more than the half-century old UFT patronage mill.

Elliot Gets It...

...and he's about to give it to us, too.

So says Maisie over at Edwize--Governor Spitzer says he's for lower class size. I knew that, and that was one of the reasons I voted for him. But Maisie has the whole story, which I must have missed:

He went on to call for a longer school day and year, after-school programs, school Internet libraries and improved teaching. He made univeral pre-K and raising the state charter cap additional major proirities.

Wow! A longer school day and year. Great. Since we already work 190 days, more than any neighboring district, I see this as a huge improvement. I'm tired of spending time with my kid on the nights I don't work and in the summer (on the days I don't work), so I'm really glad I voted for Elliot.

Thanks, UFT, for supporting this guy! Since teaching is such an easy job, involving no stress whatsoever (particularly for those in UFT offices sitting on double pensions), I'm sure they can't wait to help out the governor.

After all, they regularly trade our time for money, label such trades "raises," and thus let us know they value our time not one whit. While we patrol the halls, cafeterias, and bathrooms, while we get 90-day unpaid suspensions, while we can't transfer without permission (and we gave away the right to do so for less than nothing), while we become ATRs, while we teach six classes, while we get letters we cannot grieve, they stay one extra hour in UFT HQ, doing whatever it is they do in there. And for that, they get pay increases equal to ours, and increase our dues.

Raising the charter cap came with a poison pill allowing Klein and Bloomberg to convert existing schools to charters without community approval. Like yours, or your kid's. Who knows where they'll send you (or your kids) after such conversions? This will go a long way to help accomplish their goal of eliminating public schools entirely.

It's great to know we have such good buddies running the state. The UFT's prescience never ceases to amaze me.