Mount Virtus

The election law complaint filed by two Fort Collins parents against the teachers union, a story I have covered off & on here for the past 18 months, recently featured an important appeals court decision - namely, that the Colorado Education Association (CEA) and its local affiliate the Poudre Education Association (PEA) stepped over the legal boundaries by coordinating with the campaign of state senator Bob Bacon in 2004. I wrote it up in an op-ed for the Independence Institute last week.

Personally, my favorite tidbit to share from the op-ed is one of the CEA lawyer’s main arguments in defense of his clients:

[Attorney Mark] Grueskin argued not only that CEA and PEA acted independently but also that their involvement was unreliable. He said that Bacon would have benefited had union officials and volunteers not solicited voters on his behalf.

“I think Bacon would have been better served had he put all that literature in an airplane and just dumped it out over the district someplace,” Grueskin told the three-judge Court of Appeals panel. He suggested that some PEA volunteers might have picked up their assigned literature and thrown it into the trash rather than delivering it to voters’ houses.

Unfortunately, though, the editors of the Rocky Mountain News beat me to the good headline, placing it over Peter Blake’s July 22 column: “Court rules Bacon’s election illegally greased by teachers.” (Though I would be more careful to make the distinction between teachers and the union.)

Primary source material on the court ruling is out there on the Web:

Potentially the most significant result that could occur from this decision is a curtailing of coordinated union-candidate political action in Colorado. Concerned citizens can be the eyes and ears to see whether the teachers union - or any other union - is crossing the line into illicit activity.

Previous coverage of this story at Mount Virtus:
- “Teachers Union Complaint Appeal Hearing Today” (June 28, 2006)
- “Making Common Cause Against Teachers Unions?” (Sept 7, 2005)
- “Update on Teachers Union Complaint” (May 16, 2005)
- “The Time for Truth in Education” (May 13, 2005)
- “First Hearing on Teachers Union Complaint Today” (May 2, 2005)
- “Unveiling Parents for Truth in Education” (April 22, 2005) [Editor's note: The Web site parentsfortruth.com is currently offline]
- “Teachers Union Abuses, Agenda” (March 3, 2005)
- “Trouble for the Teachers Union: The Surface Cracks” (February 23, 2005)

Colorado’s primary elections are upon us. So as Republican candidates in key districts reach the homestretch of throwing slings and arrows at one another, my friend Jessica Corry reminds us in a Sunday column for the Denver Post that the Colorado GOP coalition ain’t what it used to be: the big business community has entrenched itself alongside labor unions, bureaucrats, and other “fatcat” special interest groups to work against the guiding principles of limited government and ordered liberty.

A major problem, she argues, is that many of the party’s insiders simply have not awakened to the fact yet. Should the Republicans wake up to despair then? Not exactly, says Jessica:

Republicans, including Beauprez, should find their own real deal - the National Federation of Independent Business. The NFIB may not have a ton of cash, but its 600,000 members clearly understand that regulation and higher taxes hurt commerce. They loyally turn out to vote. The GOP should also take heart in knowing that there are many moral big business leaders who have bucked the trend of their peers by continuing to support limited government. These leaders often silently donate their resources to the causes they believe in. They will continue to support candidates with integrity.

So be it. This reality only makes our work in the battle of ideas that much more challenging. My question is to see how it will play out in November. Or right around the corner, how will it affect the key primary races in Colorado? Not nearly as much money from the big business & chamber of commerce types is going to the more conservative, anti-tax, limited government Republican candidates. Money isn’t always the deciding factor in political races, but it sure helps to have more to implement your campaign plan rather than less.

Almost two weeks after I first highlighted Kiki Traylor’s contribution from the teachers union - and her clarifying remarks a few days later - the Rocky Mountain News reported on a legal complaint filed via a friend of her opponent Mike Kopp. (HT: ToTheRight.org, Colorado’s newest conservative blogging voice.) The News story indicates that the candidate followed my advice:

Traylor said she didn’t report the $1,000 check because she had torn it up.

Inquiring conservatives want to keep an eye on Traylor’s campaign funding after the primary, but this inquiring conservative prefers not to see her candidacy continue after the primary. So let’s leave it a hypothetical. Any candidate who draws enough favorable interest from CEA to merit the offer of a campaign contribution also merits my skepticism.

Meanwhile, the other Republican in the mix - Justin Everett (Full disclosure: whom I support) - sent out a press release attacking Kopp’s preferred choice of tactics:

“Mike is at it again, he prefers to drag fellow Republicans to court versus taking on these in a public forum. Unfortunately, Mike skipped the only debate between the 3 candidates after we all earned a spot on the ballot.” said Justin Everett.

“This is an issue and a problem to be solved through public civil discourse, not through the judicial system. Is this a preview of the type of legislator Mike would be if elected? If elected, will Mike be using the courts to constantly harass his fellow Republicans or anyone else solely for short-term political gain?”

Kopp’s earlier legal complaint was filed in January, alleging that a vacancy committee established to pick a successor to retiring Senator Norma Anderson was handled improperly.

The primary election is in 17 days. Or couldn’t you tell it was right around the corner?

The Washington Post strongly suggests that President Bush’s veto of expanded federal funding of embryonic stem cell research is a political loser for Republicans. If so, it may have something to do with the conflation and misinformation with which the story is frequently purveyed on mass media outlets.
Read the rest of this entry »

The answer to the question above: hardly. While the news pages of the New York Times and Wall Street Journal (subscription required) made hay out of a recent government study that allegedly shows private schools really aren’t outperforming public schools, the bigger point has been missed. Some good and thorough responses have come from respected and knowledgeable voices on the free market side of the debate.
Read the rest of this entry »

In his Saturday media review column for the Rocky Mountain News, David Kopel highlights two Denver Post stories that gave skewed presentations of the illegal immigration issue. The first half of the editorial piece was dedicated to giving a more thorough undressing to a Karen Crummy article first exposed here on this site.

(Full disclosure: I work with Dave at the Independence Institute. He was prompted to examine the Crummy story after reading my post. However, he discovered the post on his own as part of his regular blog searches.)

My observations on the CEA contribution to Kiki Traylor have stirred some attention through the grapevine. As a result, I fielded a phone call this afternoon from Senator Traylor with a very clear message: she does indeed support vouchers for low-income students, like the Opportunity Contract Scholarship Program that Senator Spence sponsored, Governor Owens signed, and the Supreme Court narrowly ruled unconstitutional. Furthermore, Senator Traylor said she made that fact clear in her interview with CEA.

Even though she said they don’t like her position on the issue, Senator Traylor surmised that CEA may have contributed to her campaign because of her hard work, her integrity, her independent intellect, or because they just figure she is going to win the contested primary and general election this year. I don’t know: only a union official ultimately can explain the rationale behind the $1,000 contribution.

With the new information, my opinion remains unchanged: she would be better suited to return the contribution - for whatever my advice is worth.

I like to be open. I don’t hide the fact that I am a friend and supporter of Senator Traylor’s primary opponent Justin Everett, but I strive to be fair and accurate in the facts I report and to distinguish the facts from my personal opinions and analyses.

The readers can judge for themselves.

Slapstick Politics has the lowdown on the ineffectual results of the recent state special legislative session. Republicans have a steep climb to face if they are going to turn immigration and/or judicial activism into winning issues.

How about another issue to latch onto: maybe, private property rights vs. eminent domain? Or one of my perpetual favorites … education reform.

What else can I say about the deal Owens made with Democrat legislators to close the immigration session? It’s bad news for the good guys.

Of course, the trouble began when former governor Dick Lamm remembered which party he belongs to and pulled his support from the Defend Colorado Now initiative and cut his own backroom deal with fellow Democrat and erstwhile immigration opponent Federico Pena.

Still, Owens held the high cards and had the authority and clout to limit the special legislative session to the narrow matter of addressing the Colorado Supreme Court’s judicial activism. Instead of keeping the lid on things and making sure that legislators simply voted up-or-down to refer the Defend Colorado Now initiative to the voters in November, he ceded the initiative to the Democrats.

And in the end, Owens chose not to fight for the party or the cause. But this has been a pattern of behavior to which Colorado’s conservative Republicans have grown accustomed. In 2000 he opted to stay silent on the spending mandate of Amendment 23, which narrowly won (52-48). In 2005 he threw all his energy and political capital into supporting the tax increase of Referendum C - which won by a similar margin - and the debt burden of Referendum D - which narrowly lost. (The Rocky Mountain News‘ Vince Carroll nailed this right on last November.)

In between he helped to make sure the FasTracks tax increase was a winner. And many Colorado Republican activists cannot forget how Owens treated Bob Schaffer during the U.S. Senate primary campaign of 2004.

Just writing this post makes me look forward a lot more to a Bob Beauprez governorship at the State Capitol. Unfortunately, by cutting the deal he did yesterday and all but taking the immigration issue off the table for debate in the election, Owens has made his fellow Republican’s chances of getting to be his successor a lot more difficult.

Kiki Traylor, a Republican candidate in Senate District 22, may have some explaining to do. While it is clear she has raised much more money recently than her two party rivals - conservative alternatives Justin Everett and Mike Kopp - one source of funding gives cause to raise some eyebrows among political insiders.

On June 19, the small donor committee for the teachers union - the Colorado Education Association (CEA) - contributed $1,000 to Taylor’s campaign. (To see for yourself…
1. Go to the Secretary of State Campaign Finance page
2. Click “Search Committee Reports”
3. Execute a search for Public Education Committee
4. Scroll down to click on “Data-Entered Reports”
5. Click on the most recent report dated 6/28/06
6. Click on Expenditures)

Interestingly, a similar search of contributions under the committee “Citizens for Kiki Traylor” shows no record of the $1,000 in union funds being received.

Why is this significant? Highly credible sources say that Traylor privately pledged her support for school vouchers to some of the movement’s leaders. On the other hand, CEA is adamantly opposed to vouchers and has not been in the habit of financing candidates who support such aggressive education reforms.

So what gives? Either CEA or the voucher supporters appear to have been duped. If the former, then the union has thrown away good money and a bit of credibility. If the latter, then the union has good reason to believe that Traylor - a candidate without any conservative credentials - could easily be swayed into opposing vouchers and other reforms of which the union does not approve.

Traylor’s options therefore seem quite clear: Either she can keep the $1,000 and show the education reformers she cannot be trusted, or she can make a strong statement by returning the $1,000, which would scarcely harm her fundraising advantage in the safe-district Republican primary.

If she gives the money back, Kiki risks the union actively campaigning against her if she beats Everett and Kopp and faces Democrat underdog Paula Noonan in the general election. If she keeps the money, she has handed a powerful issue to her conservative primary opponents.

Which will it be?

Your state legislators listen from time to time - even some of the Democrats. Four Democrat state senators followed Ron Tupa (D - Boulder)’s lead and voted in favor of referring a Defend Colorado Now-type measure to the ballot for November:

But after his vote, four Democrats then switched their “no” votes to “yes.”

They were Betty Boyd, of Lakewood; Ken Gordon, of Denver; Moe Keller, of Wheat Ridge; and Lois Tochtrop, of Thornton.

“It seemed like the right thing to do,” said Boyd.

But Capitol observers noted that Boyd faces probably the toughest Senate contest in November, squaring off against Rep. Matt Knoedler, R-Lakewood.

Several polls show Republicans and Democrats alike are fed up with illegal immigration and want lawmakers to do something about it.

“My constituents truly wanted it to go to the vote,” Tochtrop said, saying her earlier vote was “in error.”

It should also be noted that Ken Gordon is running for Secretary of State in a tough battle against Mike Coffman, and Moe Keller has a serious re-election challenge on her hands from Golden’s Dick Sargent.

But just when you think it might be okay to leave the Democrats in charge, you are quickly reminded why they can’t be trusted with majority status:

In other action, the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote killed a Republican bill that would have required proof of citizenship for those registering to vote.

Slow down, read that again, and ponder it for a minute. Democrats in the State Senate voted against even having a debate on the question of whether valid proof of citizenship should be given by someone who wants to register to vote.

Could they be afraid such a simple requirement might dwindle the ranks of their constituent support? If you can’t bus illegal immigrants to the polls to cast a ballot for you, do you have to resort to resurrecting deceased Democrats onto the voting rolls?

One more reason to vote for Bob Beauprez, Mike Coffman, and a Republican state legislature.

One too-cute Associated Press reporter, writing about the American Illiteracy Council’s advocacy of “simplified spelling” or “moron-o-speak,” thinks the balanced approach to the story requires writing every other paragraph in the absurd and improper style.

Take this brief section, for example:

Those in favor of simplified spelling say children would learn faster and illiteracy rates would drop. Opponents say a new system would make spelling even more confusing.

Eether [sic] wae [sic], the consept [sic] has yet to capcher [sic] th [sic] publix [sic] imajinaeshun [sic].

Shucks, I wonder why. My imagination tends not to be captured by people who have lost the capacity to communicate clearly and to spell simple words.

Buried halfway into the story is the most important point in this silly non-debate:

But education professor Donald Bear said to simplify spelling would probably make it more difficult because words get meaning from their prefixes, suffixes and roots.

“Students come to understand how meaning is preserved in the way words are spelled,” said Bear, director of the E.L. Cord Foundation Center for Learning and Literacy at the University of Nevada, Reno.

Get it, American Illiteracy Council? Maybe you need to slow down, read it again, and find some help sounding out the longer words - like understand and Foundation.

I rarely agree with the teachers union, but we both happen to be on the same (and sane) side of the issue:

Michael Marks, a member of the National Education Association’s executive committee, said learning would be disrupted if children had to switch to a different spelling system. “It may be more trouble than it’s worth,” said Marks, a debate and theater teacher at Hattiesburg High School in Mississippi.

While the NEA’s justification is weak and happens to amount to the lazy, “it would be too hard to change” approach, I welcome their unfavorable opinion of one of the weirdest ideas to float inanely into the public sphere in recent decades.

One final clear and simple admonition for the American Illiteracy Council:

Learn. To. Spell. (Or get a dictionary.) Good grief.

James L. Garlow. The Da Vinci Codebreaker. Bloomington, MN: Bethany House, 2006.

“In one sense, The Da Vinci Code has done Christianity and the Bible a great favor, sparking questions believers should have been asking and answering long before reading about ‘the code.’ If people will seriously examine the historical data, they will know what they believe and why they believe it.”

So writes Dr. James Garlow in the preface of his concise and easy-to-use new reference tool, The Da Vinci Codebreaker.

As American evangelical Christianity continues to broaden and stretch, the need for solid depth in a biblical foundation becomes more apparent. That some Christian believers would shrink in doubt and embarrassment before the dubious conspiratorial rantings of a best-selling novel is the latest and clearest example.
Read the rest of this entry »

As a lifelong Detroit Tigers fan who has lived through many years of painful mediocrity and worse, I am really enjoying this season’s developments. At about the midway point of the 2006 campaign, it seemed like another good time to pause and reflect on a few pertinent facts:

1. The Detroit Tigers not only lead the American League Central division, they have the best record in the American League and all of Major League Baseball - and have been in that position for many weeks now.
2. Detroit (56-26) is 2.5 games ahead of the world champion Chicago White Sox, 4.5 games ahead of the Boston Red Sox, 7.5 games ahead of the National League’s best New York Mets, 8.5 games ahead of the New York Yankees, 10 games ahead of the very hot Minnesota Twins, 13.5 games ahead of the AL West-leading Oakland Athletics, and 18 games ahead of the Cleveland Indians.
3. The Tigers are tied with the 82-game pace of the 1984 “Bless You Boys” world championship team and two games behind the franchise-record pace of Ty Cobb’s 1911 squad.
4. The Tigers not only lead the majors in team Earned Run Average (3.52), they lead it by a mile. The next closest is the San Diego Padres (3.92), and the second-place American League squad is the Oakland Athletics (4.17). Don’t get me started why there is only one Tiger pitcher on the All-Star team (maybe two, if you select Justin Verlander in Final Vote).
5. The Tigers have been improving month-by-month, with a 16-9 record in April, 19-9 record in May, and 20-7 record in June.

Aaahhh. It sure feels good. But there’s a lot of baseball left to play, and here’s to the Old English D’s chances in fighting hard to the finish to make the playoffs for the first time since 1987 and head to the World Series for the first time since 1984.

Go get ‘em, Tigers!