(but not necessarily in that order...)
Also posted at BlogWood: Norwood's Fair and Balanced Nattering
This post ended up getting pretty long and rambling, so for those of you who would rather just take my word for it, here's a brief summary: Hateful, demagoguic state GOP, led by Jeb!, follows the lead of Jeb!'s brother and seeks to restrict individual freedoms while de-funding popular government programs and paying little more than lip service to initiatives that were announced with great pomp and self-congratulation.
Is it just me, or is
this AP article on a proposed Constitutional Amendment overly vague on exactly what went down today? Reading between the lines, I surmise that a House committee met and either approved or debated a resolution that would put an amendment on the ballot to restrict abortion. It seems that the entire House has not yet voted on this measure, and it will require a two thirds majority in both the House and the Senate to appear on this year's ballot as a proposed amendment.
Bill Requiring Abortion-Seeking Minors Inform Parents Advances
By Jackie Hallifax Associated Press Writer
Published: Mar 3, 2004
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) - The privacy rights of girls who seek abortions without first telling their parents or obtaining their consent would be curtailed under a measure lawmakers advanced Wednesday.
"We want parents to be involved in these important medical decisions of their children," said state Rep. Sandra Murman, R-Tampa. The House is expected to debate the bill and vote later this week.
The House considered the legislation (HJR 1) and amendments Wednesday. A companion bill in the Senate (SB 2178) has not yet been heard in committee and no vote is scheduled.
Florida has had both a parental consent abortion law and a parental notice abortion law. Both were overruled by the state Supreme Court, which concluded they violated the constitutional privacy rights of girls.
So lawmakers want to change the state constitution to make parental rights trump the privacy rights of minors seeking abortions. Their proposed amendments would need to be approved by three-fifths of both the House and Senate to reach the ballot.
If approved by voters, lawmakers next year can write a law that will either require minors to tell their parents they're seeking abortions or to get parental consent.
Since only voters have the power to change the Florida Constitution, lawmakers this year want to get their proposed amendment on the November ballot. Democrats, however, are critical of that push.
"By putting the amendment in the constitution, how will you improve the relationship between a child and parent and force them to communicate?" said Rep. Eleanor Sobel, D-Hollywood.
Democrats proposed a handful of changes; all were defeated, including one to provide an exemption for girls who were victims of rape and incest. Murman said a similar exemption, requiring any notice or consent law to allow case-by-case exemptions, is already in place under federal guidelines.
Democrats also proposed an amendment that would have required consent or notice of the parents of the father of the fetus. Rep. Shelley Vana, D-Lantana, said it was simply a question of equity.
"Clearly, they would love this to be unconstitutional," Murman said.
Meanwhile, Jeb! and the rest of the State GOP are crying about how easy it is for citizen's initiatives to get on the ballot in Florida, and they have no problem amending the state and federal constitutions to restrict the rights of individuals. How is it that they maintain a reputation as All-American defenders of freedom amidst all of their tough love stern daddy knows best rights-restricting demagoguery?
Jeb!:
Gov. Jeb Bush, a loud and passionate opponent of both the high-speed rail project and class-size reduction, asked lawmakers last spring to consider making it harder for groups to use the citizen initiative process.
Lawmakers didn't take him up on that recommendation last year but seem eager to in the two-month session that begins March 2. Both House Speaker Johnnie Byrd, R-Plant City, and Senate President Jim King, R-Jacksonville, created special committees to make recommendations.
rest of the State GOP:
This year's dizzying collage of 52 citizen initiatives, ranging from pie-in-the-sky universal health care to humdrum insurance rates, will be watched more closely than any in decades.
History suggests that only a fraction will reach the 488,722-signature threshold to even become an issue on Election Day. Fewer still can expect to land in the constitution.
But each is serving as ready ammunition for legislative and business leaders determined to combat what they see as a dangerously rising tide of direct democracy and a threat to their influence and authority. Their response: Make it even harder for ordinary citizens to mount a successful constitutional amendment drive.
Now, once they get an amendment passed, it's anybody's guess as to how well they will actually follow the intent of the amendment. Right now, Jeb! is doing his best to stall on the high speed rail initiative. As noted above, he wants to repeal both high speed rail and the class size amendments.
This latest high-speed project was written into the Florida Constitution by voters in 2000. But it still faces the governor's opposition. Bush is pushing a bill in the Legislature to seek repeal of the high-speed rail constitutional amendment with a statewide referendum next fall. Bush also has proposed no funding for the project, while the authority sought $75 million.
But what about an amendment that Jeb! actually likes? Well, if it has anything to do with poor people or poor people's kids, then Daddy Jeb! might just be a little short on spare change:
Amid the financial strain gripping public schools and universities, Florida is getting ready to embark on a new endeavor. In fall 2005, it will offer schooling for all 4-year-olds, and the question facing lawmakers designing the plan this year is one that has become emblematic in public education: Do we want the deluxe or economy model?
Not surprisingly, some lawmakers are saying cheap will do.
Ask Bev Kilmer, chairwoman of the House Education K-20 Committee, why she would shorten the prekindergarten school day from six to four hours, and she says, "It is not the state's responsibility to provide day care." Ask whether she thinks these schools should employ the highest quality teachers, and she throws up her hands: "It's going to be hard to find people with bachelor's degrees who want to spend four hours a day with 4-year-olds."
The debate over prekindergarten plays out against the backdrop of an education system that has been starved for money in recent years. Although Gov. Jeb Bush is proposing a 2004-05 budget that would increase overall education spending by 7.1 percent, much of that money simply restores some of the losses in the past three years.
......
In an election year, lawmakers don't want to appear indifferent to the financial needs of public education, and they are lauding the governor's budget plan as a good starting point. But the problem is, the governor builds his spending plan on $1.6-billion in one-time money, including $738-million to be taken from trust funds that were created and pledged for other purposes. And the following budget year, the state also will begin universal prekindergarten, which could cost anywhere between $300-million and $600-million a year.
That prekindergarten program, which is mandated under a constitutional amendment that Bush supported and voters approved in 2002, is aimed at giving young children a head start on school. Prekindergarten will be voluntary, but education officials estimate that roughly 70 percent, or 151,000, of the state's 4-year-olds will attend the first year.
To get ready for these children, the state first has to put together a prekindergarten framework. That task has been led by Lt. Gov. Toni Jennings, who as a Senate president helped write the current law on school readiness programs. Jennings has produced remarkably broad support for the initiative. In a political sense, her most amazing feat might be that she is aiming to put most of this new venture in the hands of private schools yet has avoided the histrionics that usually attend the voucher debate.
Clearly, part of the reason that public school educators are not fighting for a bigger share of the prekindergarten program is that they won't be paid enough to make ends meet. The state already has been cutting back reimbursements for preschools for poor children, causing 20 school districts to drop out. For the universal prekindergarten plan, the reimbursements might be cut back even more. Jennings' task force is projecting the state will spend $3,200 for each student, which is less than most districts now receive and won't come close to covering the cost of additional public school construction and certified teachers' salaries.
......
The other reason preschool privatization has drawn less ire from public educators is the manner in which Jennings devised her plan. She began with a task force that included public teachers, private educators and proponents of the amendment, who worked carefully through research and established common goals for quality. As such, the standards she proposes for prekindergarten stand in sharp contrast to the lack of those for voucher schools in K-12.
......
Under the prekindergarten initiative, the state would establish standards for teacher qualifications, class size, number of instructional hours, student testing and school accreditation. Not one of those is currently in law for the McKay or Corporate Tax scholarships.
In prekindergarten, Jennings and her task force determined that there should be no more than 10 children per instructor and that the quality of the teacher is the most critical component. But they also had to deal with the reality that the state faces a shortage of qualified teachers, which makes recruitment difficult. So the plan is to require, in the first year, that each prekindergarten teacher be certified as a "child development associate," which is currently required for basic day care. Within eight years, each teacher would be required to possess a bachelor's degree.
......
Two easy ways to cut costs are to shorten school days and hire less qualified teachers. Some early drafts of prekindergarten legislation do both: 1) The school day would be reduced from six to four hours, requiring parents to pay for before- and after-school care (though poor families may apply for federal money); and 2) Teachers would be required to meet only the child development associate standard, not the higher standard for college degrees, and Kilmer says she sees no reason to ever require degrees.
What is revealing about such low ambitions is that the prekindergarten plan enjoyed broad political support when it was presented to voters. The amendment, engineered by Miami-Dade Mayor Alex Penelas, was endorsed by the governor, Education Commissioner Jim Horne and most legislative leaders.
At the time, Horne said, "The research on the positive effects of prekindergarten education is among the strongest in education," and, "This investment should save the state millions of dollars that otherwise would go to remedial education, the criminal justice system and social services."
Horne's remarks were accompanied by education agency projections that pegged the cost of prekindergarten at $4,282 per student. That number was derived by adding inflationary costs to the reimbursement for readiness programs at the time, which had few of the educational standards the Legislature is being asked to adopt. As the bills come due, though, the dollars are disappearing. Already, $4,282 has become $3,200 or less, and the bidding seems to be going lower, not higher.
Florida, which ranks 49th in per capita education spending, is looking for the economy model again. At a time when elementary schools are dropping social studies curricula and universities are holding classes in movie theaters, Florida is heading down a familiar path with prekindergarten. Despite its good intentions to provide real educational opportunity for young children, it is preparing to treat 4-year-olds just like the rest.
Business as usual: lip service. And whatever money does eventually get appropriated will go to well connected companies which will provide shoddy and perhaps dangerous care to anyone who is unable to afford any "extras" (like lunch and breakfast?) for their kids.