reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...

The Flint Hills Policy Group congradulates Representative Peggy Mast for holding the line on spending. The Americans for propersity {formerly the Kansas Taxpayer's network] gave her a 100 rating.

September 18, 2010 at 12:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

“The district has excellent schools that must be maintained without shifting the source of school funding from the state to local property taxes,” Fowler said.

Our schools only teach on the subjects that the state tests on and can't even meet those grades. I had to purchase a spelling textbook from an online source and am now supplementing my kid's public education with home education. This book also covers definitions, punctuation, capitalization and complete sentence structures, none of which is my kid learning at school. They teach it in one unit and only reinforce it in that unit. I am setting the standard for handwriting too.
This is not a district of excellent schools, it is one of academic inferiority and our state funding for low standards doesn't seem to be helping us. Yes, I have high standards, but it's for the children. If Mrs. Fowler is that deceived about our school district, she won't be getting my vote.

September 18, 2010 at 11:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

oh4,
Right you are about the lack of language arts in our schools. I'm so glad you are doing this for your children because no one else is.

The handwriting of kids today is practically illegible. What is more, they haven't the slightest idea about how to take a word apart in order to make an educated guess as to its definition. Consequently, test scores on vocabulary are very low. I've heard it discussed that maybe they need to remove the vocabulary sections. TO DUMB DOWN THE TEST!!! Disgusting. What's next math? Science?

Yes, I too have high standards and I did when I was teaching. More than once, I might add, I had parents call the principal to complain that I expected too much. I never stopped, not once. So fire me for expecting too much.

Unfortunately, few teachers spend much time on grammar anymore and it didn't take me long to realize that they themselves don't understand it. Education courses in college don't cover much with regard to grammar.

I also recently learned that Linguistics is no longer required for graduate degrees in English.

I'm with you. If Mrs. Fowler accepts what is going on with test scores, then she will not be getting my vote either.

September 18, 2010 at 12:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I done learnt good in da Emporea scool thing,

I learnt that books was good and #2 pensils is good to,

It good too has 2 #2 pencls cuz if one brakes the othern keep goin,

September 18, 2010 at 12:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Thanks for belittling a serious subject, seriously.

September 18, 2010 at 6:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

Even though I believe that public education is a total waste of taxpayer money and that nothing teaches a kid more than a hard days work, I'll vote for the democrat because that's what I do during elections. Well...except for that one time my friend ran for office but that's a different story.

September 18, 2010 at 6:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

huuu..rewba tell me this is just a joke and I will laugh, if not I will be shaking my head .

September 20, 2010 at 3:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I agree that the language and spelling skills among our youth (and more than a few of our adults) is terrible. Some of that is attributable to the schools. But let's not forget text messaging and twitter. No matter what they are taught in school...they are encouraged to do it differently every place else. Within two generations nobody will probably remember the time when you wasn't U, are wasn't R, and for wasn't 4. Dumbing down America isn't just happening in the schools.

As to state or local funding of our schools.

It wasn't long ago that the schools in Kansas were funded primarily by local property taxes. It led to tremendous disparities between the schools in rich districts and the schools in poor ones. I know some people see that as a normal part of natural selection (only the strong survive), but I am not going to sign off on that when our children are involved.

Besides that, transferring the financial burden of education back to the local districts may be great way for governors to brag about how they are able to cut spending by the state, but wait and see what it will do to your local property taxes. At least when the state carries the burden people that don't own property also get to help pay. One way or the other....if you want to dance you will have to pay the band.

September 21, 2010 at 6:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Local school funding has little to do with cost any way. It is a buzzword for making it easier to manipulate curriculum by small organized groups with agendas other than educating your child. JMO

September 21, 2010 at 6:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

One of the big culprits in dumbing down test and curriculum stems from No Child Left Behind. Teachers in many instances were forced by that program to teach for test rather than learning. They also had to spend a large amount of time keeping records of each student's progress rather than teaching class.

September 21, 2010 at 9:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Blue_Dog (anonymous) says...

Biscuitboy,
You are exactly right about the need for balanced state funding for education and how transferring it back to local property taxes is wrong. Example: 1 mil. in Blue valley school district raises 2.3 million, 1 mil in Galena district raises $13,000.

September 21, 2010 at 9:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

sail, it wasn't a joke. I do vote democrat. I also hate paying property tax, most of which is used to pay for a public school system for other people's children. We need to start forcing the cost of irresponsibility back onto the irresponsible individuals who create the expense in the first place. Now shake your head till it hurts.

September 21, 2010 at 9:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Lets start at the BOARD OFFICE for cutting irresponsibility.I am impressed a dem who is unhappy with property taxs.

September 21, 2010 at 11:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

"the need for balanced state funding for education"

If the folks from Galena want the benefits of $2.3 million per mill, they should move to Blue Valley to live with all the folks that pay taxes in that area. How is sending tax money collected in one district to another that has fewer students and a lower tax base fair and balanced? I'd love to eat steak every night but my budget only allows for it once in awhile. Tighten your belts and work with what you have school districts, your budgets still have alot of lard in them.

I'm sorry, but the smaller districts thinking they deserve the same money that higher populated districts have due to population just doesnt cut it for me.

I'll be voting for Mast again. Anyone that says that she isn't there to represent your concerns has never been to the Capital nor visited with her in person about issues.

September 21, 2010 at 4:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

It's the same money per pupil, not the same money per district neighbor. And I'm sure if the people in Galena could move into the Blue Valley district they would be glad to be there.

For the benefit of all of our children I will be voting for Fowler.

September 21, 2010 at 5:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

"How is sending tax money collected in one district to another that has fewer students and a lower tax base fair and balanced?"

How is short-shifting the education of a child unlucky enough to have been born to poor parents in a poor district fair and balanced?. Punish the parents for being poor if it makes you feel better but give their kids a shot at a better life.

September 21, 2010 at 5:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I never cease to be amazed at the level of empathy shown by some as it relates to perceived unfairness aimed at the upper levels of society.

Many of those same people, when questioned about life's unfairness to the poor, smugly respond by reminding you that life is not fair. Go figure that one.

September 21, 2010 at 6:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

The Blue Valley school district is located in Johnson County which has the highest per capita income in the state and the forty third highest per capita income in the entire nation. Galena Kansas, located in Cherokee County , has a per capita income of 13-thousand dollars per year. Over thirty percent of its residents are below the federal poverty level. Eighty five percent of its residents are white.

September 21, 2010 at 6:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Okay, so we have their income levels. What kinds of scores do the kids in each district make? That is what matters more than the parents' incomes, how much funding each student gets or where the funding comes from. Let's see some scores.
The fact is that the bigger the urban area, the more of those dollars per student are absorbed by administrations, building costs and non-academic (read: babysitting) costs before it ever makes it into the classroom. As a result, the smaller the area, the fewer dollars it takes to educate each kid correctly.
biscuitboy, take it from me as a parent who is VERY involved and has read the KSDE website to find out what my kid is supposed to be learning, but isn't. Kansas taxpayers living in USD 253 are not getting what they think they are paying for in our children's education. Mrs. Fowler claims that this is a district with excellent schools which means A) she needs to learn word definitions (hint: don't expect to learn them in USD 253), B) she is not really interested in looking at our system for what it is locally. If she was concerned about the inferior learning in this district, she might just be saying that we need local funding so that we can have the authority to fix what the State and the schools have broken.

September 21, 2010 at 7:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Blue_Dog (anonymous) says...

Oh4the, She doesn't name #253 she says schools. Fact is the largest portion of 76th legislative district is in North and South Lyon County school districts. The 76th district only includes 2 prec. in Emporia. Your point about scores is valid though.

September 21, 2010 at 9:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

bisquitboy, we obviously have very different views about fairness and taxation. Galena sounds alot like where my two brother-in-laws live. They too whine about how poor they are, how it'd be nice to live like we do here in the East. Both refuse to move to where they could possibly get better paying jobs or to do anything to improve their situations. They think the State should bring the jobs to them, or make their current employers pay them more.

Maybe law makers could just take the 60% of the Kansas general fund that is spent on public schools, and divide/split it in exact equal shares between all of the 400+ school districts in the State. That way everyone would get exactly the same amount of money and no one would miss out. Within a few years of such legislation, we'd had 800 school districts, the poor districts wanting more of the bigger one's money.

September 22, 2010 at 2:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

But neighbor nobody is suggesting we split the general fund money equally between school districts. The only one I hear making that argument is you when it is convenient to support your point.
What we want to do is continue splitting the general fund money equally between each pupil in the state. What is not fair and balanced about that?

As to your other point. Theoretically it sounds good. Just pack up mom and the kids and follow the gold rush. Of course it ignores the fact that most of the people that did so went flat broke after mortgaging every thing they owned to look for gold and found none. It also has a couple of other flawed assumption.....

One..... It puts me in mind of another well known suggestion....it assumes these people have the wherewithal to just pack up and move. Does "let them eat cake" sound familiar?

Two..... It assumes these people would find a welcome reception in the Blue Valley District. I have family that live in that district. They have children that attend Blue Valley schools.I can assure you a few buss loads of "poor, huddled , masses" would not be well received. No more so than they usually are here.

I don't want to sound like I am smarting off because I don't mean it that way, but that sounds like an easy sounding solution that has little viable application to the real world. Hell, look at how bent out of shape we get when outsiders come into Emporia taking our jobs.

September 22, 2010 at 3:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

oh4

I'm not sure what scores you are talking about but I will try to research the matter later today. Meanwhile, since the scores seem important to you, you might provide some insight.

I don't understand why the cost per pupil should be significantly higher in larger districts. Sure they need more administrators and buildings but they also have more pupils to provide the funding for them. If there is a big disparity, it would seem to me that would be more a problem of bad administration. Please explain why I am wrong about this.

If USD 253 is not teaching what they are supposed be teaching, or if they are only teaching it ineffectively' that again sounds like a local problem with administration. Why would that require a general step backwards in the way we do school funding statewide.

I really believe your last sentence goes to the heart of the matter. What this is amounts to an attempt to return school curriculum back into the hands of a small group of people so they can have things taught they want taught and ignore those they don't. My fear is that science education would suffer greatly under such a proposal.

As to Ms Fowler saying things are great. She is running for office with opposition from a person who wants to toss the system out. ....what do you expect her to say......."Oh things are terrible". That's Peggy Mast position. Puts me in mind of the Republicans telling us the economy was basically sound when it was going into the tank......and the Democrats telling us its improving when it isn't. That's the way the game is played. Even if the system is terrible like you suggest, that's not Ms Fowler's fault. Peggy Mast has been in office.

September 22, 2010 at 3:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I'm a bit late with this comment, biscuit. Sorry. You say, "They also had to spend a large amount of time keeping records of each student's progress rather than teaching class"

Record keeping is a part of teaching. Teachers have always been required to keep records of student progress, not just since NCLB. Without data, I can't think of any other way a teacher can keep tabs on a student's progress. Thank goodness for computers, but in my early days of teaching, I remember having to do it without computers for the 90-100 kids I saw every day. That's a lot of time spent looking at hand kept data, then making notes on top of that. But then again, we teachers have so much time on our hands, vacations, early releases, yada yada yada.

Good teachers keep good records. Poor teachers complain about all that extra work. Bad teachers fudge records.

For the test records you want, go to the KSDE web site. Look for something called "Building Reports." They are posted according to years tested and are arranged according to district first, then building last time I looked. The tests are divided according to subject areas -- Science, Language Arts, etc. Language Arts is divided into several sub areas -- reading, vocabulary, literature, writing...that sort of thing. I believe Math also has sub areas. Believe me, math and English teachers are overworked to say the least.

September 22, 2010 at 8:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

oh4

As I said this morning I am not sure what scores you have in mind. I did locate some data pertaining to Public School Rankings . This data came from a site called PSK12.com. It is a proprietary site so the latest figures were not available to me as a non-member. These figures are from 2004

The figures I am using are all at the high school level and measure percent of students in the district scoring at the exemplary level in Grade 10 Math and Grade 11 Reading. .

Galena sored at 1.4 percent and 2.8 percent respectively for a total ranking of 4.2
Blue Valley scored at 27.5 percent and 23.4 percent respectively for a total ranking of 50.9.

It appears from these figures that at least in these scores Blue Valley already has quite an advantage over Galena. Do we really want to make it worse?

The same site gives Olpe and Northern Heights schools a combined ranking of 38.9 and 34.4 percent respectively....while giving Emporia a combined ranking of 19.8. So again, based on this data, it would appear the schools in the district primarily covered by Fowler/Mast are doing significantly better than Emporia which they do not represent.

I'm have no idea if these are even remotely close to the scores you were referring to....I am sure you will answer that for me. :-)

September 22, 2010 at 8:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

This same site also identifies Baxter Springs High School in Cherokee County with the highest ranking at 44.3.
In Johnson County the highest ranking school was Olathe Northwest High School with a ranking of 62.8.

In Lyon County it was once again Olpe with it's 38.9.

September 22, 2010 at 8:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

create

Thanks for the info. I saw that site earlier but ignored it because it was talking about building reports which I ignorantly presumed to be infrastructure......Duh. I will check it out now.

On another matter, my hypocrite comment the other day was made without thinking in the heat of battle. I apologize.

September 22, 2010 at 9:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"My fear is that science education would suffer greatly under such a proposal."

That's funny. I know what you REALLY mean by saying this. lol
When we first entered our son in public school we were disappointed to find out that for at least the first three years there is little or no science taught. I know what you are thinking the reason for this(science being ignored) is but that isn't it. The reason is that our government is not good with money and they have to cut things to make room for lesser(in my opinion) things.

September 22, 2010 at 9:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Checked out the site create. Thank you.

Things have improved a little bit for Galena in the years between 2004 and 2008, but the same basic trend exist here as on the other site. Interestingly, the racial demographic for both district is nearly identical...about 95 percent white. But Galena list 54 percent of its students as economically disadvantaged where Blue Valley's figure for that demographic is less than 2 percent.
Shifting school funding back to the property tax could only make things worse for Galena

September 22, 2010 at 9:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I am sure you do know exactly what I am talking about there seriously...I never doubted that for a moment....:-) But I also think that is a major part of the push to wrest control of the schools away from the state and put them back under local control, the hidden agenda so to speak. And it's going to be real hard for anybody to convince me I am wrong about this.

To your other point....if the state does such a bad job of handling its limited resources, why does it stand to reason the local governments will do a better job with even fewer resources to work with?

September 22, 2010 at 10:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"if the state does such a bad job of handling its limited resources, why does it stand to reason the local governments will do a better job with even fewer resources to work with?"

I never said the local governments could or would do a better job. I think that they will all screw it up equally bad.

September 22, 2010 at 10:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Well at least we agree on one thing seriously....:-)

September 22, 2010 at 10:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

threecs (anonymous) says...

There are Democrats who are fiscally conservative or socially conservative. Its so easy to put people in categories rather than seeing them across the spectrum of reality - most of us are all shades of gray in our social beliefs - depending on the topic, depending on the life experience, etc. Very few are at the ends of either black or white - yet those are the ones we see and hear most. It would be great if we could openly look for the shades of gray and expect them. The youngest voters "get it", so I remain hopeful.

September 22, 2010 at 10:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Blue_dog:
Thanks for that clarification. When she said, “The district has excellent schools ...." I did automatically jump to school district rather than legislative district. I am wondering how many schools there are in the two Emporia precincts represented in the 76th district. I will look it up when I have time, but I don't know when that will be as this series of posts is going to take up the small bit of time I have throughout this afternoon. At any rate, if she is only referring to the schools in N. and S. LY Co., I would agree with her.

September 22, 2010 at 2:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

biscuitboy:
With all due respect, I am going to have to agree with something open_eyes responded to on a different thread about your fear of the conservatives. In a country that is becoming more and more liberal even in it's "moderatism," I really don't understand why you are so afraid of the conservatives. Do you fear from me the things that you fear from them? I am a conservative by all current standards, but I am certain I would never allow those things to be done to thwart your freedom. As for the science issue, I can confirm what seriouslyfolks says about science in the early grades. From my communications with teachers and observations in the schools, science is not actively taught in the first years. However, I can add to that the testimony that only one kid in my kid's classes to date has believed solely in Creation and he has the most interest in and understanding of science among his peers (three guesses as to which student that is ;-). All the others believe in evolution or a hybrid. If the school isn't teaching this then the parents are either teaching or approving of the teaching of evolution. You have nothing to fear because if the decisions were made locally, I am confident that evolution would still be taught. It might share billing, but the home reinforcement would evidently be for evolution. I also believe that parents would actually voice their opinions about that in this district, despite their apparent apathy about the failing academics here. Just so you know, I have no ambitions of taking the science issue on district-wide. All I want to take on is the fact that handwriting and spelling are being tossed by the wayside and from create's info, vocabulary may be quick to follow.
As for the part about Mast being the one in office this whole time, I do happen to have received information about a group that is trying to get her what she needs to take on some of these school politics that have lead us here, but because of unions and dishonest school boards, the needed info is hard to come by.
Now, I am a little confused myself about who decided and why these subjects aren't being taught here anymore. As I said, I have read on the KSDE website a list of items that are supposed to be assessed in writing but that my kid is only being taught by me. When I consulted the teachers (last year and this year) about it, they both told me, "The state doesn't assess those so 'they' don't have us teach them anymore." I would be forced to suspect that "they" means the board, superintendent and possibly a couple of other high-up administrators.
(cont)

September 22, 2010 at 3:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Now, about that poverty-level/mill-levy thing, I would like to know what other factors may play into that other than the income. Obviously, right now, they get State funding, so that isn't why that school does so poorly. Could it be that, much like Emporia, parental concern about academic education is minimal or non-existent? How much parental involvement is there in that district? I'm not saying that income level has no bearing on scores, but I think we link it the wrong way. I think that most often, low incomes mean unmotivated citizens who are as unlikely to care about their kids' education as they do about providing for them. The reason that I think this is that I have known plenty of poor people who can't seem to rise above a certain income, but they are vigilant in their kids' education. Again, I'm not saying that it has no bearing, but that 9 times out of 10, the statistic is mis-applied. Therefore, these same districts will do just as poorly no matter how much funding they get and how many times they fail to meet state guidelines, so the source of their funding would make no difference either.

September 22, 2010 at 3:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

oh4

My fear of conservatives may be unfounded but I did come by it naturally I believe. As an example lets take the Tea Party. I have no problems with the desire for fiscal accountability and moderation....only a fool would support rampant government waste. But all I know about that party is what I hear and see. And a lot of what I have heard and seen from watching tea party events and coverage has been the in your face demeaning signs and rhetoric, lots of name calling, and people wearing costumes and waving guns around talking about taking the country back. It's one thing to talk about taking the country back....its another to say the same thing while waving a gun at me.

You and I have talked ourselves about some the rhetoric that has been aimed at me personally on these very boards. And yes, my rhetoric gets heated sometimes also, but I have never made a habit of calling other individuals stupid, idiotic, communist, homosexual, God hating, America destroying, welfare bums. I have however been called all of those things and worse buy conservatives upset about my liberal thoughts. Again, I can only know what I am shown. And what I often am shown is a high degree of intolerance aimed at me and those that think like me. I also know that is a two way street. But when it is not being aimed at me...I have less reason to fear it. Much as you don't fear it because it is not aimed at you.

If every conservative I had ever met was like I know you to be, I wouldn't feel that way. Sadly that has not been my experience. You also question my fear at a time when the country appears to you to be moving radically left. But this "Radical Left" move has only been underway for two years (if at all), and if the pundits are correct, it's about to end in November.

I will address your second post shortly but right now I need to stop and eat dinner.

September 22, 2010 at 3:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

"I think that most often, low incomes mean unmotivated citizens who are as unlikely to care about their kids' education as they do about providing for them."

Exactly right...but that is still related to poverty......whether or not the poverty is the cause or effect is irrelevant. So the child is still going to suffer from unmotivated parents despite how much money the district gets to educate them. So what do we gain by cutting the amount and making the job even harder. If anything we should be giving that district even more help to deal with the problems created by such a high number of unmotivated poor parents. By cutting the money even further in these districts you are in essence washing your hands of the problem of educating those children. You are writing them off.

I still believe the primary motivation behind this push is curriculum control. Just a few year ago the same thing was attempted through packing the State Board of Education. The next thing we knew we were waking up to reports in the national media that Kansas was not going to demand that students would have to accept the theory of evolution even for testing purposes. I believe this current move is the same chapter--different verse. All other reasons given to justify the change back to local funding are either to vague, or deliver to little benefit to make any sense. JMO

September 22, 2010 at 4:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Blue_Dog (anonymous) says...

Oh4the,
The only school in the 76th district inside Emporia is Sacred Heart Catholic School (private). Children from the rural area surrounding Emporia do attend 253 Schools. But the majority of legislative district is in 252 and 251 and also areas in about 2/3 of Coffey County.

September 22, 2010 at 7:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

No, biscuitboy, I am not writing them off because I am not advocating the changing of funding. I'm saying that not a whole lot would change either way because the people running the districts and the parents in the districts will still be the same and in some districts, those kids have already been written off. I'm saying that the uniformity that the state is supposed to be bringing isn't there. I'm saying that the funding source is not a deal breaker or maker in who I vote for. Unfortunately, I really don't have the energy or time to devote to a good, old-fashioned EG poster brawl. ☺I am too busy educating my kid at home after school because the state funded and regulated public school isn't doing it. That means all other tasks have had to be rearranged into other time slots that used to be more flexible. Besides, you have enough going on with two other posters in that other thread to keep you hopping, right? ;-)

Thank you, Blue_dog. I was able to find a map, but it didn't give specific markers for Emporia. With your info, I was able to line it up roughly. I am retracting my issues with Mrs. Fowler on the grounds that she wasn't talking about UDS 253 and also, I won't vote in that race anyway since it isn't my legislative district.

I do not retract my issues with USD 253!

September 22, 2010 at 9:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

oh4

I totally agree that whatever funding source you have, you will still have children being left behind. And I agree with your reason.....those children will be left behind for reasons that have nothing to do with funding.

Like you, I am also more ambivalent about the funding source than it might at first appear.....though I fail to see how it would improve any thing. But, I am after all retired and living in rental property. The increases in property taxes that are sure to follow this change would only affect me indirectly through increases in my rent.

My biggest problem as I have stated several times is my concern about the hidden agenda.

September 23, 2010 at 3:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I also don't live in that district so all I can offer Ms Fowler is my moral support.

September 23, 2010 at 3:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

oh4

"In science, 'fact' can only mean 'confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent.' I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms."
- Stephen Jay Gould

I just thought this was very good description of the folly in ever expecting prove beyond any doubt. You will never get absolute proof in science because it is an on-going thing'

By the same token, I attended mass yesterday (surprise-surprise). The priest spoke of the futility of trying to proof God's existence to those that don't believe. He said even if God returned to stand 500 feet tall and speak in a booming voice to every person on the planet....there would be those who thought it was a trick.

In the end, it all comes down to believe on both sides.

September 27, 2010 at 3:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Yeah but they teach in schools that science is in fact .... fact. That is why people like 'enry and others get on here and say "Just give me facts! It has to be scientifically proven! Science is proven fact!" and on and on and on. Why do they teach it as fact if, in fact, it can't be proven to be fact? Hmmm? I wonder. Proselytizing?

September 27, 2010 at 7:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I think the point is, you can't prove without a doubt that apples will never rise up and fly. But based on what we know now we can be reasonably certain that they won't. So we say its a fact that apples can't fly until we are faced with new found evidence that they can.

Any science that is honest will never totally rule out the possibility of new discoveries that will change everything.....but you can't base a curriculum in school, or scientific theory for that matter, on every possibility. You can only take those things that you feel are the most probable and wait for more data.

Of course where you draw the line between what to save and what to cull is what the debate is all about. I will leave that to people smarter than I to work out. But as the priest said yesterday...no amount of proof will ever be enough to convince someone who doesn't want to believe. And that's true whether it be in the field of creation or evolution.

September 27, 2010 at 8:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZsND1...

September 27, 2010 at 9:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

seriouslyfolks,

What-up with your pick for governor?

Found this on wibw web site

A judge has ruled that a Reform Party candidate for Kansas governor will stand trial for allegedly threatening to kill a man.

Saline County Judge Rene Young ruled Friday there was enough evidence to bind Ken Cannon over for trial on one felony count of making a criminal threat. Cannon also faces misdemeanor charges of battery and disorderly conduct.

His trial is scheduled for Jan. 11.

Cannon is accused of making the comments at an April 15 tea party rally in Salina. Cannon told The Salina Journal he thinks the charges are politically motivated.

Cannon is also scheduled for trial in Salina on Wednesday for impersonating a law enforcement officer and is charged in Cloud
County with making a false report of a domestic disturbance

September 27, 2010 at 10:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

I just thought we could get back to politics?

September 27, 2010 at 10:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

If your piece is telling me that the theory of evolution requires some leaps of faith, I would agree one hundred percent. If it is suggesting that because of those leaps the theory of creation is somehow more sound scientific theory, I would disagree just as vigorously.

I'm not going to set here and rehash all the arguments pro and con primarily because it would change neither of our minds. In fact we are proving the validity of the original post. There will never be sufficient proof offered to get a creationist to accept evolution.

Conversely, short of the second coming, there is no way that people that accept evolution are going to reject it for the biblical story of creation. And even with the second coming many of them will still be trying to find the smoke and mirrors.

So whomever it is we choose to make these decisions for us, has at least at present decided to go with the theory of evolution. Because I agree with it, I have decided to accept their decision as correct. Because you disagree with it you have decided differently.Both sides will continue to try to gather more evidence and both sides will continue to reject the evidence the other side gathers.

We're right back where we started....:-)..:-(

Probably the happiest people are the ones like my brother that have a deep abiding faith and love of God....and can accept the difference and validity of both theories by just attributing it to "things both seen and unseen." To him, the way we live our lives today is infinitely more important than worrying about how we all got here in the first place. And I agree.

September 27, 2010 at 10:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Steve

I read that too. It doesn't matter because he won't win anyway. I'm voting for the party not the person. As I've said before, if the party doesn't get support it will go away and if we want any kind of change or "reform" we need more than the two current parties we have now. We have tried the current two parties over and over and over. My vote will go to someone who I know won't win but hopefully it will put a little breeze in the sails of that party. Who are you voting for? A Democrat? Remind me again what party has been Governor of Kansas for the last 8 years. Oh yeah the Democrat party. I'm not voting for the big box parties anymore. The reform party could put up Roy Rogers' dead stuffed horse Trigger and I would enthusiastically vote for the stuffed dead horse and I would encourage others to do the same that "say" they are tired of the current two parties. My feelings about this are not motivated by "the tea party". I have never been to a tea party meeting. I don't watch cable TV so I have never seen coverage of their get togethers. I believe the tea party started sometime after the current head of the democrats took the office of potus. I was advocating voting for 3rd parties before the last presidential election if you remember correctly. I stand alone.

September 27, 2010 at 10:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

all in the science discussion:
I have tried to compile the comments to date from both threads at:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/discuss...

September 27, 2010 at 11:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

That doesn't sound much like reform to me. In fact that sounds like more of the same on steroids. Sounds like Cannon might have some anger management issues. I understand the point you are trying to make seriously, but I think charges like these are certainly something voters need to know about before casting their vote.

Thanks Steve for taking away my bright shiny ball...:-)

September 27, 2010 at 12:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

The point is if 3rd parties grow then people eventually will have more to choose from. People say that is what they want. I question their sincerity. It seem that people are pushing one particular party. The party they are pushing is one of the same old same old parties. Way back when, I pointed out that I believed this to be their agenda all along. They say they want change but they are fine with their party(the one that starts with "D") and the only change they want is for people to change to their party. I was chastised for saying that the first time but the evidence keeps presenting itself that my suspicions are true. If that is the case that is fine. We live in America and people can be partisan if they want and they can be dishonest about it if they want, just don't be surprised when the dishonesty is found out.

September 27, 2010 at 1:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Lets see, we voted Bush 2 in and we got a huge increase in Fed spending, we voted barry in and we got more Fed spending,now we have an upstart 3rd party group made up of tax payers saying hold down spending.WHO DO YOU THINK REPRESENTS YOU,rep or dems OR PEOPLE WHO ARE MAD AS 'h' andhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_qgVn-Op7Q dont want to take it anymore.

September 27, 2010 at 4:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_qgVn...

September 27, 2010 at 4:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Pnghm...

September 27, 2010 at 4:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Or they say their party is fine just the way it is and they don't want to change anything except go backwards to what got us here in the first place (the one that starts with R). When I see a third party out there that stands for my views I will run to support it. But I am not going to support just any old third party, especially not one that fronts a candidate of highly questionable credentials, just to say I did.

I only like the Democrats a tiny bit better than I do the Republicans, and I don't see any third party that I like at all. So that tiny bit will get my vote until something better comes along. There are a couple of Republicans that will probably get my vote on the state level but many of their Republican brothers call them RINO's.

September 27, 2010 at 4:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

At what level of taxation will it take to make you say no to additional revenue inhancement.We are monetizing our national debt now,state taxation has gone to the stars, local tax increase each and every year.Compound our tax increase w/o increase in earnings the next few years and see what the mood of the tax payers will be.

September 28, 2010 at 7:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I see it as a chicken or egg argument sail. How does earnings ever start to increase again if nobody is buying anything or spending any money. Bush 2 cut taxes when he was in office....so far those tax cuts are still in place and appear as if they will stay in place for awhile.

But the economy is still as flat as my billfold. Unemployment is still high, production is low, and our infrastructure is falling apart. So how much more do we have to cut taxes....and how much more do we have to let everything deteriorate? And when we have cut everything to the bone and we have nothing left to build from....what starts us building again. The Bush tax cuts were some of what you seem to want....so why didn't they work?

September 28, 2010 at 8:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

bush one started this mess with his nafta push. Pres. clinton signed that #@@#@# bill. Remember Ross P. warning us about a giant sucking sound.How we can keep our first world status w/o jobs is a wonder to me.So the rep and demms both sold us out on jobs.

September 28, 2010 at 9:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

What party did Ross Perot belong to again?

Oh yeah! The Reform Party!

September 28, 2010 at 9:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

You have no disagreement from me at all on that one. Until...and unless.....we can figure out a way to bring back some of those good manufacturing base jobs we saw go off-shore I don't see how we can ever start to grow again. How can you have a flourishing economy that doesn't build anything.

An economy based on anything else is a house of cards. It's kinda like.....you pay me, so I can pay them, so they can pay you, so you can pay me. It's just spinning your wheels.

Of course one thing we could do is rebuild our infra-structure. Most of our highways , bridges, railroads, pipelines, and power grid are between old and falling apart. But to rebuild them would require a tremendous influx of public money. We would be mortgaging our future. But that might just be the kinda shot of adrenaline we need to get things moving forward. But something is going to have to break the inertia or we may just set right here and founder waiting for trickle down to start trickling. JMO

September 28, 2010 at 10:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Wealth for a country is created by minning manufacturing or aggriculture, We have shipped our manufacturing out of the country,our EPA has done its best to protect us at the cost of stalling most of our minning,we are in the process now of trying to regulate small farms out of the country with the animal ID program.PRESIDENT REAGAN said it best, "GOVERNMENT IS THE PROBLEM". Tarriffs, rational epa regs,get the gov. out of regulating aggriculture this would be a good start.

September 28, 2010 at 11:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

How do you think the fed was funded prior to income tax in the early 20th century?

September 28, 2010 at 11:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

By fed ,I refer to the federal government not fed reserve.

September 28, 2010 at 11:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Well...there were income taxes collected during some specific periods for specific purposes like during the Civil War. But much federal revenue was raised through tariffs and a ton of excise taxes on everything from liquor and tobacco to soups and nuts and about any and everything in between. In fact, not paying excise tax on liquor is what brought down Al Capone

During most of the early years the primary role of government was carried at the state or colony level. They used excise taxes also on many items not taxed as such today (playing cards as an example). Property taxes and head taxes (sometimes as a poll tax) were also popular. Taxes on your occupation were also not unheard of.

Basically, both state and federal governments used a mish-mash of about anything and everything they could conjure up which led to frequent tax protest and riots. Part of the idea behind the income tax was originally an attempt to simplify the system with something that was applied more equally to everybody. So much for the best laid plans of mice and men.

September 28, 2010 at 12:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

One of the best known and least liked excise taxes in this country's history of course was a tax on tea when we were still a colony. Tea however continued to have an excise tax collected on it long after the Revolution....this time however it was being collected by the colonies not the King.

September 28, 2010 at 12:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I think I know where you may be getting your information but for more factual information you might take a look one site above that one

Fact Sheet on the History of the U.S. Tax System....here's the link

www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets... -

September 28, 2010 at 1:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Great site, thanks, liked the quote by Jefferson.

September 28, 2010 at 1:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

b3bill (anonymous) says...

Excellent post, sail. The start of NAFTA is now getting far enough back in history that a lot of people have forgotten a lot about it or weren't old enough to remember. I doubt much time is spent in school teaching about NAFTA and what it did to wreck our nation.

sail (anonymous) says...

bush one started this mess with his nafta push. Pres. clinton signed that #@@#@# bill. Remember Ross P. warning us about a giant sucking sound.How we can keep our first world status w/o jobs is a wonder to me.So the rep and demms both sold us out on jobs.

September 28, 2010 at 9:36 a.m.

September 28, 2010 at 10:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Lindsay Lohan, 24, is all over the news because she's a celebrity drug addict. While Justin Allen 23, Brett Linley 29, Matthew Weikert 29, Justus Bartett 27, Dave Santos 21, Chase Stanley 21, Jesse Reed 26, Matthew Johnson 21, Zachary Fisher 24, Brandon King 23, Christopher Goek 23, and... Sheldon Tate 27 are all Marines that gave their lives this week, no media mention. Honor THEM by reposting

September 29, 2010 at 11:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

September 29, 2010 at 11:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

biscuitboy,AGREE with your respect of the above marines.

September 29, 2010 at 1:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )