We Have a Race for Governor

[onthestrip]

More future unfunded liabilities No thanks

So you are fine with paying higher hospital/insurance costs to make up for the emergency room visits by the poor? And since medicaid expansion is primarily paid for by the feds, Ill let them worry about money issues. As it is right now, Oklahoma has a incredible amount of fed money waiting to help the uninsured, which would create a better and healthier workforce, help lower hospital costs and prevent rural ones from closing, and would be a gigantic stimulus to our state. And besides, I pay federal taxes, I want some of that to come back to our state rather than help another states health issues.

Throwing money at education won't fix it. Throwing money hasn't fixed it in, what, five decades? Gutting the system, getting rid of the bureaucracies and bureaucrats that suck up the money and issue the fiats and re-empowering the teachers is what's required. But no one will ever do that. We get folks like you who say "just keep throwing money at it, and eventually it will get better." And constantly rationalize the practice by the quivering-voice mantra of, "it's for the children." People who want to throw money at the education system don't want to fix it. They want the status quo, because the status quo will always return the bad results allowing the same tired rhetoric of "throw more money at it." Why would anyone who benefits from the system ever be motivated to fix it, when its inherent system is a self-perpetuating waste machine?

Fixing education is the hard work no one wants to tackle. Teachers and the students in their charge are the ones that pay the price for our educational system.

Has Oklahoma ever been guilty at throwing money at education. As far as I can remember we have always provided some of the lowest amounts to edu. We keep talking about cutting costs and inefficiencies in edu, but if you want to free up more money for the classroom look no further than the ridiculous amount of money being thrown at locking people up. Even our red state brethren Texas is smart enough to enact some justice reform that has saved millions and its only a couple years old. We would have no problem freeing up hundreds of millions that could go to education if we stopped locking up nonviolent criminals and throwing money at the private prison companies.

[Midtowner]

Has Oklahoma ever been guilty at throwing money at education.

Actually, just a few posts ago, I showed how throwing money at U.S. Grant [yes, they had a good plan on what to do with it] actually worked.

[Edgar]

I don't understand the Barresi hate except that school districts don't like to be held accountable for failing at their jobs.

As for Governor, I'm in the "anyone but Fallin" camp, but fully expect to see Fallin win big on a faith/family/freedom y'all sort of campaign.

It was quite apparent early on that the dentist has a disdain for the people she is supposed to be leading and regards teachers unions as an evil empire. Nothing original with her. The "reform" is from the alec jeb bush chamber playbook to discredit public schools and promote their greedy voucher scheme, and if you like what letting the sharks in the tank did for health care in America, you'll love it when the profiteers get their mitts on the ed pie. The dentist is just a patsy.

[Midtowner]

It was quite apparent early on that the dentist has a disdain for the people she is supposed to be leading and regards teachers unions as an evil empire. Nothing original with her. The "reform" is from the alec jeb bush chamber playbook to discredit public schools and promote their greedy voucher scheme, and if you like what letting the sharks in the tank did for health care in America, you'll love it when the profiteers get their mitts on the ed pie. The dentist is just a patsy.

Strange that none of the schools she founded were part of a voucher scheme, and in ever case outperformed their traditional public school counterparts. That said, I don't think there's any disdain coming from the Super's office directed at unions. Unions, educators and folks in general have had this insane hostility towards her from the get go. My wife teaches at one of the schools founded by Barresi and they do just fine. Not having tenure has kind of been great. If a teacher is bad at their job, their contract simply doesn't get renewed. No hearings or any of that nonsense are required.

[Garin]

ive

[soonerguru]

I've known Joe for a number of years. He's pretty much a centrist, and he's good people. That said, he definitely has an uphill battle in this state.

That's OK. He can fight to win but even if he comes up short, he will have done us a service.

[Plutonic Panda]

And there's a cold question that everyone ignores, because others will paint you as evil and hating the children...

What percentage of Oklahoma children have been injured/killed due to lack of shelters in schools?

.00000000000000000000000000000000000000001%?

If one of your children had died in a tornado due to a lack of shelter in a school, you'd likely look at that question differently.

[jerrywall]

If one of your children had died in a tornado due to a lack of shelter in a school, you'd likely look at that question differently.

Certainly, and it's heart wrenching. But the realistic view of any threat is to consider both the potential of the threat and the cost to protect from it.

If one of your children died in a school due to a plane crashing into it, you'd be supportive of an air defense system being installed on the roofs of every school. Doesn't mean it's practical.

More kids have drowned in Oklahoma than have been killed by tornadoes, so maybe arks should be mandatory in all classrooms?

Now, don't take me wrong. I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything. In fact, I'm 100% in support of requirements for new school construction including sufficient shelters and looking at building what we can. It's just that the realities of economy require that these actuarial questions be asked.

[MWCGuy]

I don't think throwing millions of dollars at building storm shelters is the answer for protecting Oklahoma's Children during severe weather. We all know how this scheme will turn out some districts will get the best shelters for the money while others get taken by fly by night companies and shoddy workmanship that is not discovered until years after the shelter is built. You also have the possibility of district officials building cheap and pocketing the money.

What we need to look at is the fact that single story, brick and mortar, flat roof school houses have to be phased out in this state. Moore Public Schools has 23 of these type elementary schools strung out around the district. Most of them are less than a mile from one another. Imagine how much safer if these schools were cut down to 12 or 6 four to five story(including basement/concourse level) facilities on the same size footprint as the average elementary school in Moore. If a tornado hit the old Central High School in Downtown OKC or Capitol Hill High School there is a pretty good chance the schools would survive structurally and the kids inside would as well with minor injuries from flying debris.

[BBatesokc]

Joe Dorman, who has been working for years to get storm shelters in schools, has announced his exploratory run for Governor as a Democrat against Mary Fallin.

On paper, this looks like an uphill battle, but he is well positioned for this race: The people of Oklahoma wildly support his storm shelter issue, and Republican intransigence on this matter is well known. IMO he is the best possible candidate to run against Mary, who will have to defend herself not only on this common-sense issue, but also on the wackjob Janet Barresi, who is a probable loser against Freda Deskin and a major political liability.

Win or lose, Dorman will make this a race and will remind Oklahomans of the disaster of having 100% Republican governance. Here's hoping his "exploration" is affirmative and he moves forward, because Oklahomans deserve a choice.

Rep. Joe Dorman to explore run for governor | KFOR.com

Definitely would love to see Fallin gone - but your post reads a bit pie in the sky and unrealistic to me. IMO he certainly isn't the 'best possible candidate' - mainly because he's going to get so few votes (comparably). I don't know enough about him beyond that opinion. May be a great guy with some great ideas - but rarely does that alone make for a victory. I'd like to see a candidate with more going for them (the whole package with financing and big backing). If this was a little local race I'd say he's got a good chance - Governor? Don't see that happening. At least not from this early on perspective.

[SoonerDave]

Actually, just a few posts ago, I showed how throwing money at U.S. Grant [yes, they had a good plan on what to do with it] actually worked.

But having a sound plan that explains how funding is going to be used is precisely not "throwing money" at the problem. That's what perpetually irks me about the crowd that does nothing but spew "we don't fund education" rhetoric - give me a plan. How are we cutting waste? How are we cutting bureaucracy? How are we not doing all the things in the past that we already know don't work? We have a supplies and resources shortage problem. We have a teacher pay and, in some cases, performance problem. I never hear a, "we don't have enough bureaucrats" problem. When I hear "we don't fund education," I rarely if ever hear "this is how we solve these other problems with that money. We do hear a "send us money and get out of our way" problem from the bureaucratically controlled veneer of education. It sure sounds to me like Midtowner has experience or knowledge of one of the success stories, but the problem is most anyone following this thread would acknowledge that story is an outlier; it's an exception. Why does that have to be the case?

I do not pretend that there's a single magic bullet to "fix" education. But getting rid of the currently entrenched, smoke-filled-room, self-protecting middle-tier bureaucracy is a vital component to simultaneously eliminating the status quo and fostering the out-of-the-box solutions similar to that Midtowner has described that at least give us a start to fixing the myriad problems of education, even including societal issues that a school teacher in a six-hour classroom can't begin to fix.

[Midtowner]

But having a sound plan that explains how funding is going to be used is precisely not "throwing money" at the problem. That's what perpetually irks me about the crowd that does nothing but spew "we don't fund education" rhetoric - give me a plan. How are we cutting waste? How are we cutting bureaucracy? How are we not doing all the things in the past that we already know don't work? We have a supplies and resources shortage problem. We have a teacher pay and, in some cases, performance problem. I never hear a, "we don't have enough bureaucrats" problem. When I hear "we don't fund education," I rarely if ever hear "this is how we solve these other problems with that money. We do hear a "send us money and get out of our way" problem from the bureaucratically controlled veneer of education. It sure sounds to me like Midtowner has experience or knowledge of one of the success stories, but the problem is most anyone following this thread would acknowledge that story is an outlier; it's an exception. Why does that have to be the case?

I do not pretend that there's a single magic bullet to "fix" education. But getting rid of the currently entrenched, smoke-filled-room, self-protecting middle-tier bureaucracy is a vital component to simultaneously eliminating the status quo and fostering the out-of-the-box solutions similar to that Midtowner has described that at least give us a start to fixing the myriad problems of education, even including societal issues that a school teacher in a six-hour classroom can't begin to fix.

I provided you to a link with a 30-something page plan on how they planned to use $5MM to fix that site and the fact is they got the money, spent it and the plan worked. There is no reason except money that such a plan can't be executed elsewhere. The problem with U.S. Grant was demonstrably in this case, three things, a lack of a plan to fix things (fixed), a lack of a competent faculty and administration (fixed by the plan) and a lack of money to fund any plan (fixed by a federal grant).

Now that teachers can be fired for incompetence and insubordination (we actually had to pass a new law to get that) bad teachers and administrators can be replaced, but are not replaced nearly often enough.

No there's no magic bullet, but the fact is the schools need access to resources to fix whatever problems they have. Oklahoma kids are not born dumber than Massachusetts kids, but out massively outgunned education department leaves them dumber on the whole.

When the problem is money, the solution is money.

[SoonerDave]

I provided you to a link with a 30-something page plan on how they planned to use $5MM to fix that site and the fact is they got the money, spent it and the plan worked. There is no reason except money that such a plan can't be executed elsewhere. The problem with U.S. Grant was demonstrably in this case, three things, a lack of a plan to fix things (fixed), a lack of a competent faculty and administration (fixed by the plan) and a lack of money to fund any plan (fixed by a federal grant).

Now that teachers can be fired for incompetence and insubordination (we actually had to pass a new law to get that) bad teachers and administrators can be replaced, but are not replaced nearly often enough.

No there's no magic bullet, but the fact is the schools need access to resources to fix whatever problems they have. Oklahoma kids are not born dumber than Massachusetts kids, but out massively outgunned education department leaves them dumber on the whole.

When the problem is money, the solution is money.

Uhm, Mid, sounds like you're angry with me - I'm trying to agree with you! Put together a solid plan, explain why and how the funding is needed and will be used, and execute the plan. I have no problem with that! ok? Money tossed into the current system to repeat prior mistakes is no solution to anything.

[Midtowner]

Taking the U.S. Grant experience, they needed money for ESL classes and teachers. They needed money to educate their own teachers in cultural and language competencies. They needed money to pay tutors, they needed technology, they had to hire almost an entire new staff.

The reason right now why Western Heights cannot do exactly what Grant just did is because they don't have $5MM sitting around or even available.

And soon, we're going to be looking at technology and infrastructure problems because there's not enough money.

[jdross1982]

Midtowner -

I am not saying poor/minorities/etc cannot be taught, not saying that at all. Just saying that everyone should "expect" each student to be at a "7" (just picking a number on the 1-10 scale) for a certain age group but to judge teachers by this very metric is not the correct way to go about fixing the problems. I am all for giving education more money and therefore raising taxes but only after the over head is brought to a minimum. All students should be taught the same and the expectations should be the same, but to grade teachers this way and paint every teacher with the same brush is a failed attempt to fix the problem. Several reasons for differences.
1) like it or not, a higher % of children living in poverty struggle with education not because of effort, not because of lack of understanding. It is because education does not fall at the feet of school teachers solely and is a 24/7/365 marathon that is aided by the teachers, parents, grandparents, siblings and the day care they attend. Everyone in these childrens lives have an impact on education and not trying to make an excuse but just stating facts. When there is a parent in the home,when the child gets home from school that is able to read to them, read with them, make sure homework is done and understood, and eating proper nutrition it enables the children to learn in a better environment than if those things are not available to them.

2) The education budget has been cut in Oklahoma which prevents teachers from being hired, or materials from being provided for them. Teachers get a $250.00 tax credit for materials they spend out of their own pockets each year, yet many teachers spend much much more than that and we know how much teachers get paid or dont get paid.

3) I am all for consolidation of school districts as the state has 520 total. This leads to multiple issues of having a superintendent who has less than 100 students in his district to ones that have 10's of thousands of students. Yes the pay varries between them but this leads to a lot of O/H. If schools were willing to combine districts especially in the rural towns that are close to one another (not give up their own schools - just consolidate them into one district) this would save those districst thousands each year that could be redirected into the classroom where the students need it. The same could be said for school districts in the urban setting and would result in greater savings.

4) Baressi has made it her mission to demonize teacher unions and all of their members (teachers). She has not acted as a CEO of a company (at least not one that is performing well) but as someone who doesn't care about the people she is trying to serve and has her own agenda that she is trying to push through.

5) Teachers are all for congress to come up with a way to pay teachers for performance as an increase to the pay they are receiving. I dont think teachers should be able to reach tenure status as quickly as most districts allow, but I do think there should be some level of tenure they can reach after X amount of experience. Whether tenure means the same going forward as it does today remains to be seen.

[soonerguru]

Definitely would love to see Fallin gone - but your post reads a bit pie in the sky and unrealistic to me. IMO he certainly isn't the 'best possible candidate' - mainly because he's going to get so few votes (comparably). I don't know enough about him beyond that opinion. May be a great guy with some great ideas - but rarely does that alone make for a victory. I'd like to see a candidate with more going for them (the whole package with financing and big backing). If this was a little local race I'd say he's got a good chance - Governor? Don't see that happening. At least not from this early on perspective.

Pie in the sky? I never suggested he would win. My point is he has been going around the state leading the efforts on a very popular issue, gaining support and name ID. As for financial backing, I think donors will come out of the woodwork to support him because there is a lot of animus toward Fallin.

Did anyone see Brad Henry winning against Largent? Brad was no multimillionaire with huge name ID. I realize it was an open seat, not going against an incumbent, but I have no doubt Dorman can make this a race.

I spoke to a pollster recently and he reminded me that Fallin has never really been as popular as people think. She underperformed in 2010 in a year when anyone with an R next to their name could have won anything. The intangibles are different right now, and if Dorman runs a smart, aggressive campaign, he could pull off an upset. But whether or not he wins, he gives voice to these issues.

Do people in Oklahoma want to eliminate the income tax when our school funding is the worst in the US?

Do people in Oklahoma want to eliminate the income tax when we cannot find funding to pay corrections officials a living wage?

And then he has this storm shelter issue, which is the kind of thing a smart candidate can use.

That's why he's the best candidate right now.

[BoulderSooner]

Pie in the sky? I never suggested he would win. My point is he has been going around the state leading the efforts on a very popular issue, gaining support and name ID. As for financial backing, I think donors will come out of the woodwork to support him because there is a lot of animus toward Fallin.

Did anyone see Brad Henry winning against Largent? Brad was no multimillionaire with huge name ID. I realize it was an open seat, not going against an incumbent, but I have no doubt Dorman can make this a race.

I spoke to a pollster recently and he reminded me that Fallin has never really been as popular as people think. She underperformed in 2010 in a year when anyone with an R next to their name could have won anything. The intangibles are different right now, and if Dorman runs a smart, aggressive campaign, he could pull off an upset. But whether or not he wins, he gives voice to these issues.

Do people in Oklahoma want to eliminate the income tax when our school funding is the worst in the US?

Do people in Oklahoma want to eliminate the income tax when we cannot find funding to pay corrections officials a living wage?

And then he has this storm shelter issue, which is the kind of thing a smart candidate can use.

That's why he's the best candidate right now.

The issue he is leading around the state is not that popular.

Yes we should eliminate the state income tax

[soonerguru]

Well we wil soon find out, Won't we?

[LakeEffect]

Yes we should eliminate the state income tax

And replace it with what? More fees? More sales tax?

[Midtowner]

And replace it with what? More fees? More sales tax?

As long as we can have the poor shoulder the burden, why not? That's what Republicans want these days, right?

[MustangGT]

Win or lose, Dorman will make this a race and will remind Oklahomans of the disaster of having 100% Republican governance. Here's hoping his "exploration" is affirmative and he moves forward, because Oklahomans deserve a choice. Rep. Joe Dorman to explore run for governor | KFOR.com

100% Democratic rule is JUST AS BIG A DISASTER to informed/intelligent voters.

[onthestrip]

Pie in the sky? I never suggested he would win. My point is he has been going around the state leading the efforts on a very popular issue, gaining support and name ID. As for financial backing, I think donors will come out of the woodwork to support him because there is a lot of animus toward Fallin.

Did anyone see Brad Henry winning against Largent? Brad was no multimillionaire with huge name ID. I realize it was an open seat, not going against an incumbent, but I have no doubt Dorman can make this a race.

I spoke to a pollster recently and he reminded me that Fallin has never really been as popular as people think. She underperformed in 2010 in a year when anyone with an R next to their name could have won anything. The intangibles are different right now, and if Dorman runs a smart, aggressive campaign, he could pull off an upset. But whether or not he wins, he gives voice to these issues.

Do people in Oklahoma want to eliminate the income tax when our school funding is the worst in the US?

Do people in Oklahoma want to eliminate the income tax when we cannot find funding to pay corrections officials a living wage?

And then he has this storm shelter issue, which is the kind of thing a smart candidate can use.

That's why he's the best candidate right now.

I think this is a very smart move by Dorman, that is if he can get the storm shelter thing on the ballot and if it is a popular issue to voters. He gets them to come out and vote on storm shelters while also hoping to get some of their votes for Gov since he is the face behind the shelter movement. Although I still think the shelter thing is best left as a local decision, Dorman will be getting my vote regardless

The issue he is leading around the state is not that popular.

Yes we should eliminate the state income tax

Cut taxes when revenues are down? What a genius plan...
Oklahoma Legislature is projected to have about $170.8 million less revenue available to appropriate | News OK

[Midtowner]

100% Democratic rule is JUST AS BIG A DISASTER to informed/intelligent voters.

Agreed. What we need is a slim enough majority on either side which instills a healthy fear in legislators that if they start working for the lobbyists instead of the people, they can and will be replaced.

[MustangGT]

Agreed. What we need is a slim enough majority on either side which instills a healthy fear in legislators that if they start working for the lobbyists instead of the people, they can and will be replaced.

Here is something we can wholeheartedly agree on.

[Plutonic Panda]

Certainly, and it's heart wrenching. But the realistic view of any threat is to consider both the potential of the threat and the cost to protect from it.

If one of your children died in a school due to a plane crashing into it, you'd be supportive of an air defense system being installed on the roofs of every school. Doesn't mean it's practical.

More kids have drowned in Oklahoma than have been killed by tornadoes, so maybe arks should be mandatory in all classrooms?

Now, don't take me wrong. I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything. In fact, I'm 100% in support of requirements for new school construction including sufficient shelters and looking at building what we can. It's just that the realities of economy require that these actuarial questions be asked.

You make good points and I somewhat agree with you. I would support building storm shelters in all schools seeing as we are right in the heart of tornado alley.

I don't have kids either so it's not a big deal to me, but it would've been for those in that elementary school in Moore. Installing air defense systems and including arks in schools would make sense if we had seasons of plane crashes and severe floods, but we don't. We have tornado seasons. If we use your perspective, why should anyone anywhere waste money on tornado shelters? That is like saying that schools should spend no money upgrading their security in response to the recent school shootings because a very minuscule amount have died compared to the ones that haven't. Just my 2 cents on it. I support it anyhow.