March 2007 | Main | May 2007
WC1>April 19, 2007 I am writing in response to the series “Leaving to Learn: DPS’ Enrollment Gap.” I was interviewed and quoted as part of day three, “Southwest Suburbs and Easy Choice.”
When Burt Hubbard called and requested my participation in the story I was pleased to be able to share my personal experience around the school choice issue.
This Speakout has not been edited
By Stephanie Cavallaro , Littleton
When Burt Hubbard called and requested my participation in the story I was pleased to be able to share my personal experience around the school choice issue. I became concerned about how my school and my personal comments would be portrayed as soon as I read the series title previewed by the editor on Sunday, April 15. I was hoping that this series would do more than point fingers toward a “failing” school district and really explore the issues surrounding school choice in the metropolitan area. The issue in my neighborhood is not a DPS/Jeffco/Littleton/ issue. It goes much deeper than that and I wish my family and school had received the exposure and positive light that the Jefferson County families and school did.
My full-time job is as an instructor for the Teacher in Residence Program at Metropolitan State College of Denver which is an alternative license program. A large part of my job is to coach my teacher candidates in their classrooms. In the past 7 years I have visited hundreds of classrooms in the metropolitan area. I know how to find high quality education and have consciously chosen that for my children. The article implied that I simply sent my children to the neighborhood school without a great deal of thought. Nothing would be further from the truth.
I will first say that I am not claiming that I was quoted incorrectly; just incompletely. I would like to take this opportunity to complete the facts about my “choice” of school for my children. The article quoted me as saying, “I made the decision that we would go to our home school (Grant Ranch K-8) unless there was a reason not to.” I also shared with Mr. Hubbard that we had been at Grant Ranch since its opening 6 years ago and that my children are absolutely thriving!
My fourth grader scored advanced in all areas on his 3rd grade CSAP and has been identified as Highly Gifted.
The article implied through a neighbor’s comment that Grant Ranch doesn’t have a GT program. On the contrary, most of the staff is GT trained and differentiates instruction for every student. My son has consistently been challenged by his teachers. My first grader is currently reading at the level of an end of the year second grade student. I credit their successes to every teacher they have had.
It was also implied that class sizes are bigger at Grant Ranch than at Blue Heron. Class sizes K-2 have been consciously kept below 25! And, those classrooms have paraprofessionals as well! I would challenge the reporters to find out how many schools in any district can say that.
The photos selected for the piece also made the angle of the story quite evident. There were four pictures of the Jefferson County family. One playing in a beautiful backyard, another fixing breakfast together while the picture of my daughter was holding a pancake over her face while having breakfast at school. The photos seemed to imply, “Poor DPS child, her mother shoves her out of the house for an industrial breakfast while the lucky Jefferson county kids get homemade breakfast.” What about my beautiful house and the walking carpool on my block in the same neighborhood?!!! Overall, the article was disappointing to me. The truth about school choice in our neighborhood is that we can’t lose. We have two schools within walking distance fighting for our children. They both do superb jobs educating the kids in our neighborhood which was not portrayed by your reporters. I will think twice before participating in future projects with the Rocky Mountain News. And, I will read your paper with a different eye from here on out.
Thanks for the opportunity to express my thoughts.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
Think Tank Review Project
By J. E. Stone, Ed.D., East Tennessee State University
By J. E. Stone, Ed.D., East Tennessee State University
Despite the fact that the field of education has historically been riddled with fads and failures, the Think Tank Review Project focuses exclusively on research conducted by education’s external critics, e.g., the Fordham Foundation, the Education Trust, etc. The vast inventory of studies supporting education’s failed and failing programs is ignored.
In theory, the Project attempts to protect the public from shoddy research. In practice, it attempts to discredit only those researchers who question the worth of policies and practices that are popular with educators but of dubious value to the consuming public.
For example, the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards is enthusiastically supported by teacher organizations. Teachers certified by the NBPTS earn bonuses of up to $10,000 for 10 years. Unfortunately, NBPTS was developed on the basis of flimsy research that claimed NBPTS teachers are exceptionally effective, and it is now being buried in an avalanche (www.education-consumers.com/nbpts-sanders.html) of unfavorable findings.
The Arizona State project has noticed none of these shortcomings despite the fact that they would be of great interest to parents, policymakers, and taxpayers; and don’t look for it to take an interest in NBPTS any time in the near future. If the NBPTS program expands to its planned capacity, it will put something like $17.5 billion into the pockets of teachers over the next 10 years.
The Think Tank Project and its friends are apologists for the education industry. At the heart of their work is a conflict of interest. They would have the public believe that they are impartial judges of educational research when, in truth, they and their industry benefit from reports that selectively target the industry’s critics. Not only are the Project’s fellows and editorial board mostly well remunerated, leading lights of their industry, they are celebrated as defenders. For example, one editorial board member won the National Education Association’s Friend of Education Award for writing a book that claimed public education’s declining quality to be a false crisis “manufactured” by its enemies.
In essence, the Think Tank Project engages in the same kind of misrepresentation (www.education-consumers.com/articles/Buyers%20and%20Sellers.pdf) that was at the heart of the Enron scandal. The brokerage houses that were presumably protecting the interests of Enron stock purchasers were really in bed with Enron.
The same observation applies to the ASU Think Tank Project. It will gain credibility only if it scrutinizes some of the costly and counterproductive fadslike NBPTSthat exist right under its nose.
J. E. Stone, Ed.D.. is a professor at East Tennessee State University and president of the Education Consumers Foundation (at www.education-consumers.com).
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By Richard Becker, Broomfield
This Speakout has not been edited By Richard Becker, Broomfield
For one thing, guns are not only available from gun stores, gun shows, and pawn shops. Anyone who wants a gun for illegal purposes can easily buy one from individuals. There is always the “black market", as illustrated by the Denver Post front page story of April 25, 1999 the weekend following themselves infamous Columbine shootings. Two reporters went down to the 16th mall and put out the word. In less than an hour, they were presented with fully automatic rifles, live grenades, and many handguns. Some were even presented by minors who were not supposed to possess them as per a long standing Denver law! Anyone barred by laws requiring background checks, but who wants a firearm for illicit purposes, will not be deterred by a waiting period. Once the waiting period for “cooling off” is over, and they take possession of the firearm, there is nothing to stop them from using it to kill or injure others because the resentment of bad behavior can exist a long time, or could flare up later after they have been qualified for a firearm.
For every mentally off individual intent on criminal activity with a handgun, there are thousands of others who possess a collection of firearms but will never use them for illicit purposes. A law abiding citizen possession a firearm does not necessarily mean that he or she is a potential criminal; they know the difference between right and wrong. Gun control requiring people to turn in their guns will not work because only people without criminal intent in mind will comply, but people with criminal intent in mind will will not. Therefore, gun control will work only if a “police state mentality” is established to authorize authorities to raid homes looking for firearms. That would be contrary to the Constitution of the United States! It should be noted also, it was known that the Virginia Tech shooter had mental problems before the shooting took place. He was reported to the administration by students and faculty members. And, a court ordered him to voluntarily seek mental treatment.
But do to “political correctness” laws, that information was not allowed to made public because the court sealed that information. How then could the background check be effective if authorities denied such critical information be made public? While this writer does not think it is reasonable for high school students to be issued a conceal and carry permit, however, teachers and faculty with a permit could respond to violence quicker than police. But college students and others with a conceal and carry permit could take action to stop violence before the police arrived. Had the Virginia Tech students been allowed to carry concealed weapons as per their legal permit, there is little doubt that they could have ended it after the first two in the dorm. And, responsible and intelligent people issued a conceal and carry permit after firearms training can thwart criminal activity. I am not concerned about people with a conceal and carry permit. I am concerned about people who illegally carry a concealed weapon to be used to settle disputes.
Now approaching 72 years of age, I remember the days when everyone had firearms in the home. But there did not exist the public mayhem as exists today. Schools shootings were unheard of, and mass killings were few and far between. But then, it was the day when kids were raised to respect the rights and lives of others. Kids were instructed in safety with firearms, and reminded that it was it was not acceptable to point the firearm at people. And, that was before all the violence in video games, television programs, movies where scores were settled with firearms. The VT shooter, according to television news accounts, posed in the manner of a violent Korean film.
My dad, when I was 11 and my brother was 9, bought us a .22 single shot rifle and .22 short ammunition for it. With a short lesson in guns safety, we were given free use of it. We hunted gophers in the fields, and used it for target practice shooting at bottles and paper targets. We did not become potential killers because of the way we were raised.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
By Brian Kelly, Denver
First of all there is no such thing as a semiautomatic machine gun. An autoloading weapon either fires one round per trigger pull, making it semiautomatic, or it fires repeatedly with one trigger pull, in which case it is automatic.
This Speakout has not been edited By Brian Kelly, Denver
First of all there is no such thing as a semiautomatic machine gun. An autoloading weapon either fires one round per trigger pull, making it semiautomatic, or it fires repeatedly with one trigger pull, in which case it is automatic.
Second of all to say the Second Amendment permits weapons of mass destruction is ludicrous beyond belief. We all now what weapons of mass destruction are -- nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, none of which are permitted by the Second Amendment. Shame on your hysteria Annie! The massacre at Virginia Tech is the latest in a continuing series of bloodbaths that have been occurring for years. Each time one occurs, there is a renewed outcry to further restrict firearms. And sometimes new laws are passed, sometimes not. In each case of further restrictions, it is the law abiding gun owner who pays the price. Outlaws by definition do not obey the laws. The guns are out there and have always been out there since firearms were first conceived. A person who wishes to use firearms for other than legal purposes will find a way to obtain them. There is tremendous traffic in illegal guns and purchases, not only in this nation, but all over the world. A person who wishes to perform a mass murder will find a way to do it if guns are unavailable to him. There are many ways to do it, such as a homemade propane bomb. Shall we ban propane now too? This event was horrible and shocking. Many promising young lives were ended.
Many other lives were permanently traumatized. Instead of further restrictions on guns, how about less? How about allowing concealed carry on campuses.
Suppose there was at least one person legally carrying a concealed weapon in the area where the massacre occurred, and this person drew his weapon and killed the shooter as soon as it started. Far fewer people would have been killed and injured. Yes, some would have been killed, but not 32 people. And taking a longer view, it may have acted as a deterrent to this lunatic and possibly he might not have done it.
I used to count myself among the antigun faction. But years of living in a neighborhood transitioning from bad to better taught me that there are entirely too many incidents where waiting for the police to show up would have resulted in a crime being committed with little chance of solution. I believe that a person must be prepared to take immediate action to prevent crime or carnage. If you are not prepared you could wind being yet another victim.
The assault weapons ban was a feel good, do nothing piece of legislation.
While restricting a number of weapons, it did not cover countless others. And it did not address most firearms at all. It was useless but it looked good on a politicians voting record to the antigun people.
In order to be safe, a law abiding citizen must have the option of protecting him or her self, either by taking defensive action, chasing the criminal away, or holding them at bay until the police arrive and take over. This means things like the "Make My Day" law and concealed carry permits. It does not mean that we all must own assault weapons. A simple six shot .22 revolver is sufficient. I don’t believe guns are for everyone. If you are considering becoming a gun owner, you must decide if you could use one if the time came. If you are not certain you would use it, then you have no business with a firearm because any hesitation works to the criminals advantage and you could wind up being killed.
Those of us who choose to defend ourselves must be permitted to do so. One of us might save your life some day.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (2)
| TrackBack
By Michelle Lindsey, Colorado Springs
The world won’t become a better place unless we help make it so.
This Speakout has not been edited By Michelle Lindsey, Colorado Springs
The world won’t become a better place unless we help make it so.
When I think of this, I think of two very special people: Teresa & John Kerry.
To be inspired - truly inspired - is, I think, one of the greatest gifts in this life. And that gift of true inspiration is what Teresa & John have given to me. Through their light, their hope, and their work, I see the world not for what it is, but for what it can be.
There is a light that shines in the darkness. And these are dark days and dark hours, but their light has given me hope, promise, and inspiration - as I know it has to so many.
I think there are precious few people who cross our path, who truly inspire us to find the light within ourselves, and to search for and discover the difference-making capacity within ourselves — and Teresa & John are two such people.
There isn’t a day that I don’t wake up and wish that they were in the White House. But I believe that leadership can be a beacon from so many different platforms, and that you don’t have to be at 1600 to embody and exhibit the true leadership that is the heartbeat of a country...and this is the leadership that I see in John & Teresa.
Through difficult situations and character building experiences in my own life, I have drawn hope and inspiration from Teresa & John, and from their light and example. They’ve helped me find my own path and helped me seek out my own difference-making heartbeat, and strive to follow it...always.
There are ways, large and small, that we can give of ourselves, and of our hearts, and of our efforts, everyday to make a difference. Sometimes, we will see the results - like a monument set securely in stone - and sometimes we never will...like a shell washed away in the tide...yet even though the shell has washed away from the shore, its beauty is being carried to another place, to bring hope and inspiration anew.
What we do here, in this life - the hopeful difference and change we endeavor to make - lives on and touches people’s hearts and lives, and the fibers of time, long after we are gone. The light we all have inside of us is a light that can bring hope and change to a world in need...in need of the promise of a new and better tomorrow. A new and better tomorrow that can be brought about by our hope, our faith, our efforts, and our willingness to search for that light within ourselves and make a difference.
In this moment on earth, there is a special light of hope and inspiration, lighting up a darkened world... Teresa & John, through their courage, effort, and service have illuminated the corners and shadows of hearts and minds across this country.
The world won’t become a better place unless we help make it so. And in this moment on earth, Teresa & John are making the world a better place through their efforts, their hope, and their light.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (5)
| TrackBack
By C C Page
This Speakout has not been edited By C C Page
Not long ago the News published a breakdown of the millions of dollars these illegals have cost taxpayers in their pursuit of the American dream; our American nightmare, as we pick up their million dollar tab in education, medical care, welfare and entitlement charges, judicial costs not to mention the social and cultural costs to this country.
These Mexicans need to come into this country in legally accepted numbers with the promise of respect, loyalty and assimilation to the U.S. and with the assurance that their entry and residence will be their sponsors responsibility with no burden to the American citizenry.
I know of nightmare stories about these illegals and their crimes, how they illegally drive on our streets and freeways, how they steal from our supermarkets and shopping malls and form gangs that promote crime in our communities.
The lists of negative impact on America are long.
As soon as you quit calling a noxious weed a flower it will be the first honest step in identifying the problem. Call a spade a spade for a change RMN, and bring back a little integrity in finding real solutions to the real problem of illegal invasion and all the enormous, varied problems that go along with it.
If we don’t tell it the way it is resentments will take hold and flourish.
Who in the real world wants anyone coming into their home uninvited much less raiding their cookie jar without permission?
Go home illegals. If you like America so much use it as your prototype and build up your own country in your own homeland. If you like America so much and what we have built respect it enough to come here legally and respect our entire array of laws and show a some respect for the people who have built America into what it is. Too much to ask? Apparently so as Mexicans come across the border daily in droves without concern or respect for what they do to damage America. They leave tons of garbage at the border that we have to clean up with bulldozers; a far cry from honorable, respectful, dignified behavior from people who come into our home uninvited, but persist in breaking down our doors.
If you want a welcome mat waiting outside the door, go home and have the dignity to re enter legally, according to the laws of the United States and show some dignity, integrity and honor for the country you sneak into in the dark of night as you throw your trash on our doorstep for us to clean up.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (9)
| TrackBack
By Lacey Berumen, executive director of the Colorado chapter of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill.
May is Mental Health Month and while there is much for mental- health advocates in Colorado to celebrate. The dark cloud on the horizon, though, is the Medicaid preferred drug list Ritter ordered the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing to implement.
By Lacey Berumen, executive director of the Colorado chapter of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill.
May is Mental Health Month and while there is much for mental- health advocates in Colorado to celebrate, there is a dark cloud on the horizon.
First, the good news: Gov. Bill Ritter has taken important steps toward lifting Colorado from the bottom of the heap when it comes to funding for mental- health services. He has proposed meaningful increases in mental-health funding and important initiatives to improving mental-health services as part of his efforts to reduce recidivism in the criminal justice system.
The dark cloud on the horizon, though, is the Medicaid preferred drug list Ritter ordered the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing to implement.
The theory behind this preferred drug list is simple: reduce Medicaid prescription drug costs by limiting access to only those drugs that a committee of “experts” has determined are effective and for which manufacturers are willing to provide deep discounts, or supplemental rebates. If the committee says a medication is effective and its manufacturer will pay a supplemental rebate, it’s on the list. Doctors are discouraged from prescribing drugs that are not on the list by forcing them to go through a cumbersome prior authorization process for medicines that are not The drug-list theory might make sense for many medical conditions, but its one-size-fits-all premise is a disaster for those with mental illness.
Scientists know that there is a genetic basis for severe mental illness and that these genes are found in different combinations in different patients. It follows that an antidepressant that helps one patient might cause unacceptable side effects in another patient.
When Coloradans with chronic mental illness are denied access to effective medications and treatment, all of us pay, both in terms of the loss of valuable members of society and in the cost of emergency room treatment and criminal justice system involvement. The number of inmates with mental illness diagnoses in Department of Corrections facilities has grown from 2,348 to 3,588 in the last five years. According to the National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice, the vast majority of youth involved with the juvenile justice system have at least one diagnosable mental- health disorder.
Other states have learned the hard way that a Medicaid preferred-drug list that is implemented as a cost-savings measure can actually drive costs up, if it is applied to psychiatric medicines. That’s why 26 states with Medicaid preferred-drug lists exempt drugs for mental-illness diagnoses.
While most states established preferred-drug lists through the legislative process and have statutory protections for psychiatric medications, Ritter bypassed the legislature and instructed the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing to create a preferred-drug list via executive order.
In his executive order, the governor promised to “protect vulnerable populations.” To keep that promise, mental- health medicines must be exempted from any preferred-drug list and prior authorization restrictions. To do otherwise would negate the positive effects of Ritter’s other mental-health initiatives.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (13)
| TrackBack
By Peter Groff, President pro tem, Colorado Senate
A patchwork of DPS educational reforms applied inconsistently, unevenly and, arguably, haphazardly over the past several decades has resulted in a product of doubtful quality. The Rocky’s series on DPS over the past few weeks, “Leaving to learn,” clearly points out the disconnect between what traditional DPS schools offer and what parents want.
By Peter Groff, President pro tem, Colorado Senate
The column in the April 25 Rocky Mountain News, written by the Denver Public Schools’ superintendent and board members, acknowledges that we can’t operate an effective and innovative Denver public school system using the antiquated methods of the early 20th century. A patchwork of DPS educational reforms applied inconsistently, unevenly and, arguably, haphazardly over the past several decades has resulted in a product of doubtful quality. The Rocky’s series on DPS over the past few weeks, “Leaving to learn,” clearly points out the disconnect between what traditional DPS schools offer and what parents want. As a DPS graduate and parent of young children I had hoped could attend my alma maters, I am gravely concerned about their generation’s academic preparation.
The system currently in place, though effective for some, has failed far too many young people in DPS, leaving them educationally unfulfilled or intellectually malnourished, in short, left behind. The numbers speak for themselves:
• 76 percent graduation rate
• No higher than 46 percent proficiency in math in grades 3-10
• No higher than 36 percent proficiency in writing in grades 3-10
• No higher than 52 percent proficiency in reading in grades 3-10
Truthfully, most of the DPS children being left behind are young African-Americans and Latinos and otherwise low-income children. Is there any wonder that so many of these students end up being counted among the disproportional representation of people of color who fill our prisons?
Superintendent Michael Bennet and DPS board members should be applauded for the boldness, clarity and vision of their statement, as well as their unequivocal and enthusiastic desire to chart a new course for Denver’s students. Bennet and the board are absolutely correct. We now find ourselves at an ominous fork in the road where our choices are stark and dramatic: We can continue down the road of declining graduation rates, poor test scores, children unable to attain the promise of a quality and preparatory American education or take the visionary and courageous steps on a path where all of our children are equipped with the necessary tools to find their own successes in a shrinking global society.
In order to provide educational stability for the more than 73,000 students in DPS and the generations that will follow, DPS needs to act quickly on the points outlined in the article:
• Identify the best and brightest principals and place them at the helm of our schools, meanwhile nurturing a bench of equally talented successors.
• Create a common curriculum.
• Increase professional development opportunities for teachers.
• Provide a wider range of career options for teachers.
• Ensure school-level decision making.
• Raise community expectations, monitor progress and open, transparent operations.
DPS should also request to be unshackled from the state’s educational requirements and be allowed to take whatever steps necessary to create a world-class 21st century school system.
We need to do what Bennet and the board ask and allow them to make this “Ultimate DPS Makeover.” Essentially, release DPS from trying “to compete with two arms tied behind its back.”
The Colorado General Assembly needs to work with the Denver community, DPS officials, the governor, the mayor and the state Department of Education to overcome obstacles that prevent the district from making these changes. We need to grant the necessary waivers, create the necessary policies and laws that will enable DPS to take charge of its destiny. Everything — from bonding, retirement plans, property management to teacher licensing, administrative structure and technology — needs to be placed under a microscope and scrutinized for better ways, better outcomes and better futures for children.
As the column rightly pointed out, charter schools and other schools of choice have driven innovation, competition and diversity of educational programming in districts across the country, but these assets shouldn’t be available only to those students lucky enough to enroll in a DPS charter school.
We need to give DPS the freedom to create 151 options and opportunities — a charter district, if you will.
We cannot be so attached to the past that we can’t create a better path to a better future for our children, our state and our country.
Right now, today, 73,399 youngsters are counting on the creation of that path.
Peter Groff is president pro tem of the Colorado Senate. He represents Senate District 33.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
By Michael Mosco, president, Denver Police Protective Association
Well, here we go again with another in a long line of editorials impugning Denver police Technician James Turney. By Michael Mosco, president, Denver Police Protective Association
Well, here we go again with another in a long line of editorials impugning Denver police Technician James Turney. Let’s look at some of the issues put forth in the editorial. First, Turney did, in fact, serve a 10-month suspension in 2004-’05. He received no pay or benefits during that time. Second, he also received a medal of valor from the Denver Police Department and the city for his actions in a 2002 shooting also mentioned in the editorial.
The Denver Police Protective Association does agree with the Rocky on one issue: the disciplinary process dragging on to absurd lengths. Turney is exercising his legal options even after a retired Appeals Court judge applied two weeks of testimony in determining that Turney exercised justifiable use of force according to all state, federal, constitutional and U.S. Supreme Court decisions, not to mention all Denver Police Department policies. Thereafter, it was the city that decided to appeal the decision.
Even the full Denver Civil Service Commission in its recent decision said that the use of force in this case was “necessary” . The commission reduced a 50-page decision to three pages in overturning the hearing officer, exhibiting a decided lack of concern — in the 18 months they have had to consider the case — for the detailed factual and legal issues presented.
The Denver Police Protective Association and its 1,400-member officers support Turney in his appeal but would also like to issue a challenge to Safety Manager Al LaCabe, Police Chief Gerry Whitman, Mayor John Hickenlooper and City Council. We would like to bring together all of the stakeholders and initiate a dialogue with the goal of streamlining the Civil Service system while maintaining the rights and interests of all involved.
We propose this dialogue with the goal of making the system more efficient so that officers do not have to suffer the constant public, political and media scrutiny for the four to five years it currently takes for controversial cases to be decided. We envision a disciplinary system based on fairness, rather than one based entirely on politics.
Michael T. Mosco is the president of the Denver Police Protective Association. He writes on behalf of the organization’s executive board.
Posted by denver-admin at 04:05 PM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
By Rich Hugo, Lakewood
A By Rich Hugo, Lakewood
A My second incident happened at T Each situation is different, and I truly believe officials at Virginia Tech did the best they could under all the circumstances. I applaud them for that.
Before we get too outraged at an institution for not doing By Roxana Witter, Denver
I am writing in response to the recent articles about poor middle school performance and DPS intentions to address the middle school problem. I acknowledge that the problems are no doubt deep and wide but I know of at least one shining star in DPS middle schools, to be found in a place not expected, a place not to be found unless one looks beyond "depressing data". It is my hope that the district finds and supports this star, rather than discard it with ever knowing it was there.
This Speakout has not been edited By Roxana Witter, Denver
I am writing in response to the recent articles about poor middle school performance and DPS intentions to address the middle school problem. I acknowledge that the problems are no doubt deep and wide but I know of at least one shining star in DPS middle schools, to be found in a place not expected, a place not to be found unless one looks beyond "depressing data". It is my hope that the district finds and supports this star, rather than discard it with ever knowing it was there.
I realize I am writing against common wisdom when I say there can be a very good middle school experience in Denver Public Schools. Our daughter attends Smiley Middle School in the International Preparatory Magnet Program (IPM). The curriculum is challenging and interesting, the school climate is productive and respectful. The staff maintains high expectations in academics and they provide daily, after school support to those that seek it and those that need it. Children are expected to succeed, and they are given the support to do so.
The staff and the administration also have high behavioral standards, with a philosophy that their job is to teach, not to discipline. This is achieved with consistent rule enforcement, strict dress code, boys and girls lunch and perhaps a bit of magic.
It is wonderful to walk into a middle school class rooms that are focused on learning.
The IPM population is as diverse as the DPS population as a whole and the 2005/06 CSAP scores in the IPM program are well above the district average (% proficient or advanced) Grade 6:
Grade 8: 20%
I hope that as the district administration and school board prepare much needed changes to the middle school plan, they look beyond depressing data and go inside schools and programs that are working. I hope the dedication of teachers like those at Smiley are recognized for their ability to teach, and teach well, in a system that has neglected them. I hope the district sees fit to support the Smiley IPM as a program that has already demonstrated it's ability to provide academic excellence to a student population as diverse as the district's own population.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
By Lara Wallace, Denison Montessori
I went into the teaching profession because of my love for the Montessori philosophy and curriculum. Over the last three years as a DPS Montessori teacher, my love for teaching has become seriously compromised due to DPS policies that get in the way of being an effective teacher.
This Speakout has not been edited By Lara Wallace, Denison Montessori
I am a teacher at Denison Montessori, which is a public Montessori school that is a part of Denver Public Schools (DPS). I teach lower elementary, which is grades one through three. I went into the teaching profession because of my love for the Montessori philosophy and curriculum. Over the last three years as a DPS Montessori teacher, my love for teaching has become seriously compromised due to DPS policies that get in the way of being an effective teacher. Because of this fact, I am giving my notice to vacate my position as a DPS teacher. I will finish out the 2006-2007 school year, but will not return for the 2007-2008 school year.
I feel I am no longer a teacher, but a test administrator. I spend most of my time preparing for tests, giving test or grading tests. Testing has increased each year at DPS, but I have not been given more time to prepare, administer and grade these tests. Because of this lack of time, I now have less time to teach. The constant demand of these tests show a lack of trust in teachers. All teachers, whether Montessori or not, have been trained in assessments. We are "highly qualified" due to No Child Left Behind, but yet we are still not trusted to know how our own students are performing. Maria Montessori talked about "sowing the seeds of learning." Instead, we are continually ripping up the plant to make sure it is growing.
We are also not supported financially. The Montessori program has different needs than other programs. However, everything at DPS seems to be a one size fits all program. They do not support our need to have paraprofessionals in each classroom. Montessori cannot be properly carried out without the support of another adult in the room. We need to be able to do small group instruction in order to meet the needs of each child. Though they will spend millions on assessments that do not fit our program. Some of these millions go to changing to new programs which will not be around the following year.
Money and time are wasted each year to buy the new materials and train the teachers. Millions of dollars are wasted on "improvements" for the schools.
They rewired all the buildings for more Internet access. However, they forgot to add any power outlets to run the computers that we can't even afford to buy. So, that was a waste of money. They spent money on fixing our heating system, which then ran worse than it did before. We still either had freezing classrooms or burning classrooms, depending on where they positioned the thermometer. However, they did not do a thing about our windows that have holes and cracks in them. When it is windy, raining or snowy, our windows rattle and let the elements in. Fixing the windows would have seemed the logical first step in controlling our temperatures in the classroom. DPS never looked at that, because what one school gets, they all get whether they need it or not. I won't even go into how hot our rooms get in late May and early August, though I would love to see a DPS official try to work in that heat. The district keeps cutting the financial support of our facilities managers. Our classrooms are dirty and cleaned only when enough staff is available to do so. We have rodents, ants and cockroaches in our classrooms due to the lack of cleaning. I would think a clean and safe classroom would be more important than trying out the newest assessment tools.
I think parents need to know that what DPS officials say to the media is not what they are supporting in our overcrowded classrooms. I know that DPS does not care about what the teachers think, but they should care about what the parents think because they can send their children anywhere. DPS keeps opening up Montessori schools, but without any knowledge of how Montessori works. They cannot open up new Montessori schools until they figure out how to make their already existing Montessori schools work. I cannot allow DPS officials to pretend to stand for the children and for the choice of parents, when their actions don't reflect any kind of thoughtful consideration. DPS either needs to fully support alternative choices or they need to be true to their actions and close down these alternative schools.
You cannot publicly say you support alternative options and then not actually support the school, the curriculum, the administration, the teachers, the budget, and most importantly, the children. Public Montessori can be and has been accomplished by several districts around the country, but DPS does not support their Montessori schools so that we can succeed.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (4)
| TrackBack
By Tony Robucci, M.D.,President, Colorado Psychiatric Society
Have you ever had a headache? Perhaps you've had a simple tension one, or worse, a migraine headache. My guess is that you have. Now if that headache persisted for days, despite your trying your favorite over-the-counter remedy, you'd likely seek medical help. It's also my guess, however, that you've never considered not having that doctor's visit covered by your insurance.
This Speakout has not been edited By Tony Robucci, M.D.,President, Colorado Psychiatric Society
Have you ever had a headache? Perhaps you've had a simple tension one, or worse, a migraine headache. My guess is that you have. Now if that headache persisted for days, despite your trying your favorite over-the-counter remedy, you'd likely seek medical help. It's also my guess, however, that you've never considered not having that doctor's visit covered by your insurance. You see, there is no test to prove you have a headache, and there are no objective signs that necessarily substantiate its presence.
Headaches, just like psychiatric illnesses, are a subjective experience. It's only by a matter of convention that most people consider them neurologic rather than psychiatric.
There's actually no dividing line between mental and physical illnesses. They simply exist on a spectrum.
That basic principle of diagnostic philosophy, however, seems to have been lost in all the debate I've been hearing over Senate Bill-36, the mental health parity bill. I realize that cost is a realistic concern, and the biological basis of these conditions and evidence-based practices are the sensibility of the day. There's a major problem, however, when those factors override fairness.
You see, headache sufferers are not required to prove that their condition is legitimate. They aren't expected to quote research studies or provide evidence that it's an illness. But when it comes to headaches, the biological-basis substantiated in the literature is essentially at the same point in development as that for psychiatric disorders. It's funny then that the mentally ill are asked to do something that people suffering from other neuropsychiatric disorders are never asked, specifically, to somehow substantiate their worthiness for coverage.
When you treat the mentally ill as a separate class and according to different criteria, then you've created a disparity. And indeed, this bill is about the stigmatization of people with mental illnesses for centuries. All the discussion about the biological basis and cost is nothing but a ruse to cover discrimination. I won't repeat the counterarguments already given to your April 5th article "Smitten by mandates" (see Dr. Hagman's response on April 13th and Dyana Furmansky's from April 12th), but it's time for the mentally ill to be treated equally.
As for me, I'm saddened to see the bill reduced to its amended state. A less than 1% increase for even full parity would have been a small cost to end discrimination. All this debate, however, has given me a headache. So I think the night before the bill is debated in the Senate, I'll take two aspirin.
Hopefully, the next day I won't have a reason for a headache.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (2)
| TrackBack
By Paul Sater, Kersey
Colorado is at a crossroads, irrigation wells are in danger of being shut off forever. A few cities, and indeed a few farmers have been trying, and succeeding in getting the Colorado Water Court to permanently curtail water production from water wells on the South Platte.
This Speakout has not been edited By Paul Sater, Kersey
Colorado is at a crossroads, irrigation wells are in danger of being shut off forever. A few cities, and indeed a few farmers have been trying, and succeeding in getting the Colorado Water Court to permanently curtail water production from water wells on the South Platte.
In backing these water court decisions the Colorado Supreme Court is shifting the 1969 law in a direction that was never intended. Fred Anderson was the President of the Senate in 1969 he says "This is not the legislative intent that we had going through the years of re-codification in 1967-1969". Why the courts are doing this is a mystery.
Colorado Supreme Court Justice Gregory Hobbs has made extensive study of early water use in the Americas, places like Titicaca, Machu Pichu, Mesa Verde and the ancient city under Phoenix. He studied their canals and reservoirs. But he couldn't speak with their descendants, because these civilizations disappeared. Perhaps he should study the cultures of ancient Hebrews and Egyptians. They are still around, there writings and art persist. Why? Because they dug wells. Moses met Zipporah, His wife at the well, watering livestock. Successful cultures in arid regions have had wells, for watering crops and livestock, for tens of thousands of years.
Droughts come and go, reliable water supplies are a must. Maybe Justice Hobbs should study societies that were successful, societies that flourished in spite of drought cycles. We should not model ourselves after the colossal failures. In arid regions what the successes have in common is wells.
The wells on the South Platte were dug for the same reason as the wells on the Nile, drought. Our drought in the 50's came at a time when technology was at a point to enable us to protect ourselves, and save our culture. With the blessing and encouragement of the State farmers dug wells, and agriculture in North East Colorado was stabilized.
Justice Hobbs is fond of saying that "when the law defies nature, the law is an ass". I wish he would study that a little farther. Wells are natural, for cultures that want to succeed in a dry land. As it worked on the Nile, on the Euphrates, and the Tigress. It worked on the Platte, and if left alone will continue to work.
When people in the third world are locked in drought, The Peace Corps doesn't send bulldozers to build canals, instead they send well rigs and the knowledge to use them.
I am a well owner and I won't apologize for having used them. Water wells are an ancient and honorable answer to drought, as natural to our culture as shelter.
Wells are not the cause of drought. Wells are the cure.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
By Michael Whiteman-Jones, Denver
Perhaps the massacre at Virginia Tech today will not only reinvigorate efforts of those lonely souls who have long worked to make our country more civilized by implementing stricter gun controls, but will also change the minds of the swaggering redneck gunslingers and killing-machine profiteers who say they believe our Constitutional right to bear arms outweighs the bloody violence that stains our society each and every day.
This Speakout has not been edited By Michael Whiteman-Jones, Denver
Perhaps the massacre at Virginia Tech today will not only reinvigorate efforts of those lonely souls who have long worked to make our country more civilized by implementing stricter gun controls, but will also change the minds of the swaggering redneck gunslingers and killing-machine profiteers who say they believe our Constitutional right to bear arms outweighs the bloody violence that stains our society each and every day.
Firearms are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24, according to statistics compiled by the Violence Policy Center. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2003 alone, 30,136 Americans - 10 times the number who were killed on 9/11 - died by gunfire.
Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries.
As appalling as the statistics are, however, numbers alone can't begin to convey the individual emotional pain and societal damage resulting from the gun violence that has become so commonplace in America. Anybody who was in Denver at the time of the Columbine shootings knows full well that it is shocking, depressing, frightening and life altering in ways that are extremely difficult to describe without tears and rage. But only those unfortunate souls whom have been direct victims of gun violence - and their ranks grow everyday - fully comprehend the terrible emptiness and grief it creates on a personal level.
America is not at war with Iraq or Iran, it is at war with itself. The biggest threat to our national security is not in the Middle East or Asia, but right there waiting in our own nightstands. Our Civil War ended long ago, but the Uncivil War goes on and on, the bodies of its victims stacking up in a vast, fetid pile while petty fools defend their rights and ignore their responsibilities.
It's time for a change. Our founding fathers never meant for the Constitution to be a static document. It can be amended - in this case, to ban firearms, especially handguns. That won't eliminate our problem with gun violence overnight, but in time - perhaps several slow decades - it will save countless lives and transform this nation from the brutal killing field it is now into something more peaceful and much, much prouder. Many other countries benefit greatly from strict gun controls, without any significant loss of freedom. In fact, it seems very clear that we'd all be more free - and happier - if we could live with little or no fear of getting shot than we would be if we were allowed to walk the streets with six-guns strapped to our hips to defend ourselves against marauders who claim the same right to bear arms that we're entitled to.
My heart goes out to the families of the victims of Virginia Tech shootings, and to all those who have been senselessly killed by a bullet.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
By Cathy Hazouri, Colorado American Civil Liberties Union
The legislature is considering By Cathy Hazouri, Colorado American Civil Liberties Union
The legislature is considering The natural reaction of most law-abiding citizens is to automatically reject the idea of parolee voting. We want those people to pay dearly for the crimes they have committed, and denying voting rights to parolees sounds just fine to many of us.
But does our lust for retribution outweigh our interest in cultivating civic and social responsibility Taking steps to rehabilitate prisoners before and after they leave prison makes good sense and is good public policy.
There are many conditions that contribute to the rehabilitation of parolees, like offering vocational training and access to higher education. Extending voting rights is also an important element. Voting aids in the successful reintegration into society for those with criminal convictions by creating connections to the community, developing a commitment to civil society and building a sense of civic duty.
Perhaps most important, there is a proven link between parolee voting and public safety. Research published by the Columbia Human Rights Law Review indicates that released prisoners who voted were half as likely to be re-arrested as those who did not vote.
In other words, individuals who have paid their debt to society by serving every minute of their sentence are subject to parole time. Continued denial of voting rights is part of that We need to stop obsessing about retribution and start focusing on results. If we are committed to Now is a perfect opportunity to make Colorado safer by passing SB 83.
By C. C. Page
The article in today's paper on the immigrant problem in Rifle is written with careful, political correctness. This political spin only serves to cover the real problem and prevents correctly identifying the real problem: illegal invasion of the United States and the enormous burdens that come across the border with the invaders.
This Speakout has not been edited By C. C. Page
The article in today's paper on the immigrant problem in Rifle is written with careful, political correctness. This political spin only serves to cover the real problem and prevents correctly identifying the real problem: illegal invasion of the United States and the enormous burdens that come across the border with the invaders.
Not long ago the News published a breakdown of the millions of dollars these illegals have cost taxpayers in their pursuit of the American dream; our American nightmare, as we pick up their million dollar tab in education, medical care, welfare and entitlement charges, judicial costs not to mention the social and cultural costs to this country.
These Mexicans need to come into this country in legally accepted numbers with the promise of respect, loyalty and assimilation to the U.S. and with the assurance that their entry and residence will be their sponsors responsibility with no burden to the American citizenry.
I know of nightmare stories about these illegals and their crimes, how they illegally drive on our streets and freeways, how they steal from our supermarkets and shopping malls and form gangs that promote crime in our communities.
The lists of negative impact on America are long.
As soon as you quit calling a noxious weed a flower it will be the first honest step in identifying the problem. Call a spade a spade for a change RMN, and bring back a little integrity in finding real solutions to the real problem of illegal invasion and all the enormous, varied problems that go along with it.
If we don't tell it the way it is resentments will take hold and flourish.
Who in the real world wants anyone coming into their home uninvited much less raiding their cookie jar without permission?
Go home illegals. If you like America so much use it as your prototype and build up your own country in your own homeland. If you like America so much and what we have built respect it enough to come here legally and respect our entire array of laws and show a some respect for the people who have built America into what it is. Too much to ask? Apparently so as Mexicans come across the border daily in droves without concern or respect for what they do to damage America. They leave tons of garbage at the border that we have to clean up with bulldozers; a far cry from honorable, respectful, dignified behavior from people who come into our home uninvited, but persist in breaking down our doors.
If you want a welcome mat waiting outside the door, go home and have the dignity to re enter legally, according to the laws of the United States and show some dignity, integrity and honor for the country you sneak into in the dark of night as you throw your trash on our doorstep for us to clean up.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (11)
| TrackBack
By
Recently, HB 1292, a bill mandating sex education standards for schools, passed the Colorado House and Senate. Representative Gallegos and Senator Schwartz both voted in favor of this bill.
This Speakout has not been edited By
Recently, HB 1292, a bill mandating sex education standards for schools, passed the Colorado House and Senate. Representative Gallegos and Senator Schwartz both voted in favor of this bill. This bill included an amendment that exempted Center Consolidated Schools from the standards of this bill in any year that we receive federal abstinence education grant dollars. We currently receive a federal Title V abstinence education grant through the Colorado Department of Public Health. It has been reported, that, due to this exemption, we are the only school that will be able to continue with an abstinence-only program. I would like to clear up some misconceptions about federal abstinence education grant mandates and about our program.
Center Consolidated Schools does not have an abstinence-only program.
We are an abstinence-based program. Our program gives information to youth about contraception. However, we do not promote, demonstrate, or give out contraception. Our kids can get that information one-on-one or are referred to medical professionals. In addition, high school health teachers, outside of the abstinence program, can provide that information. However, our youth are taught that abstinence is the only 100% effective way to avoid pregnancy, STD's, and the emotional, social, and intellectual consequences of early sexual activity. Abstinence is not taught as merely another choice among the other options of contraception. Abstinence is the expected standard for the youth. This is true of all of the prevention programs we offer, including those for tobacco and alcohol.
Our program includes a comprehensive suite of information. We teach kids about their personal worth, value, and power. We teach students about goal setting and planning for the future. We practice refusal, assertiveness, and boundary setting skills. The kids learn about self-control and responsibility.
With goals for the future, a belief in their personal value and power, and armed with essential life skills, kids have a reason and the ability to wait. In addition, if kids are choosing to be sexually active, we want kids to know they do have a choice and they, too, need to know these essential skills to reduce their risks around this decision. Our program is about giving our kids information and empowering them with the skills to make healthy choices.
Lastly, I believe that, ultimately, the problem with this bill is not the standards it prescribes; it is that this bill takes away local control from our schools, communities, and parents to decide what is most effective of our community and reflective of our needs and social and cultural norms.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
By Ron Ludwig, Executive Director, The Conflict Center
The Conflict Center offers deep, heartfelt condolences to the families, friends, classmates, students, and colleagues of the victims of Monday's shooting on the Virginia Tech campus. Our wish is that the Virginia Tech community, while remembering the victims, will recover, heal, and find community and comfort in the words and arms of both friends and strangers.
This Speakout has not been edited By Ron Ludwig, Executive Director, The Conflict Center
The Conflict Center offers deep, heartfelt condolences to the families, friends, classmates, students, and colleagues of the victims of Monday's shooting on the Virginia Tech campus. Our wish is that the Virginia Tech community, while remembering the victims, will recover, heal, and find community and comfort in the words and arms of both friends and strangers.
In the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, President Bush told the nation, "Schools should be places of sanctuary and safety and learning. When that sanctuary is violated, the impact is felt in every American classroom and every American community." This violation of what we consider so sacred leads us to reflect on the pervasiveness of violence in our society.
In the coming weeks, newspapers will run feature stories about survivors, TV news will dissect the motives of the gunman, and some investigative reporter will trace how the gunman easily obtained the firearm used in the killing. Ultimately, this interpretation by the media might only stand to remind us how unsafe we are.
Instead of trying to explain this type of event in terms of fear, we need to start using these moments to explore how we can prevent violence in our communities. Peacemaking is a proactive process that requires us to move beyond fear and engage in difficult discussions and in the challenging process of identifying and managing emotions.
At The Conflict Center, we believe that "conflict is inevitable, violence is not." Therefore, our goal is not to prevent conflict from occurring but to teach individuals skills to deal with conflict in healthy, non-violent ways. We hope, at the very least, that yesterday's tragic shooting stands as a reminder to everyone that positive anger and conflict management skills are not to be downplayed, and that families, schools, and communities might find increased value in teaching practical skills and encouraging programs that prevent violence. The Conflict Center is available to provide these programs for youth, adolescents, and adults of all ages.
The Conflict Center, located at 4140 Tejon Street in Denver, is a non-profit organization that promotes non-violent conflict resolution by providing classes and programs that teach healthy anger and conflict management skills. Our mission is to reduce levels of physical, verbal and emotional violence. We teach skills to a broad constituency of people to handle everyday conflicts nonviolently with win-win outcomes. We offer both on- and off-site classes and programs. Please contact us at 303-433-4983 for more information. By Rev. Reginald Holmes
Senator Windels, We are appalled at the blatant statements you made in an email to a Community Coalition member on April 13 regarding the students and parents of HOPE Online. It is simply outrageous that you would feel free to degrade the honest and sometimes difficult decisions parents and their children must make about the lack of educational opportunities in the public school setting.
This Speakout has not been edited By Rev. Reginald Holmes
Senator Windels, We are appalled at the blatant statements you made in an email to a Community Coalition member on April 13 regarding the students and parents of HOPE Online. It is simply outrageous that you would feel free to degrade the honest and sometimes difficult decisions parents and their children must make about the lack of educational opportunities in the public school setting.
You are absolutely correct when you say children who are considering dropping out see Hope Online as a last chance. And there is nothing wrong with students knowing they do have a second chance at getting a good education. We would rather have children looking for second chances rather than just dropping out. HOPE Online offers that opportunity.
However, when you make what we consider a stereotypical and historical racist remark like, "Kids who are struggling or lazy see online as a "quick, easy" way to get a diploma without having to put in all the seat-time and effort," we need to call things as we see and hear them. We will not fear to be politically incorrect in our accusations, particularly around the racial tone of your comments. Are you insinuating that HOPE students and parents are taking the easy way out because public schools have been so challenging and academically rigorous? When you openly declare our children are lazy, we don't have to remind you that a majority of the children in HOPE Online are African-American and Latino children. Your statement referring to our children as lazy or struggling has crossed the line of civility, and we cannot remain silent and not call you out for making such an irrefutably patronizing statement.
Students struggling in school are children who do not want to give up or drop out. They are not looking for a "quick, easy way to get a diploma without having to put in all the seat-time and effort." How dare you make that comment calling our children "lazy" and looking for a "quick easy to get a diploma" when all they want is an education that will provide them more opportunities in the future? In fact, no HOPE student can graduate needing remediation.
They must test out and be college bound.
Unfortunately you have not focused on the real problem with education. Public education is a mess without any accountability or quality benchmarks that demonstrate success. In many cases, the schools are simply providing a day care center for children who should be challenged and motivated to learning. It is tragic that you are so limited in your vision for innovation, that are you are attempting to limit the possibilities and accomplishments of others.
Yes, we have heard the comment about parents needing to get involved. Senator Windels that is exactly what is happening with HOPE Online. Children are being motivated, challenged, and are learning. In many cases, parents are holding their children accountable for putting the time and effort to succeed through HOPE Online.
HOPE Online is not a free ride and your insinuations our children don't want to put "in all the seat-time and effort," are plainly the words of an elitist who does not understand the reality and need for innovation in education. The fact that parents are voting with their children and moving to HOPE Online is a clear indication that they seek better educational options for their children.
We simply cannot allow you to vilify African-American and Latino parents, along with their children in such an insulting and cruel manner. Your comments in the email show your prejudice and lack of understanding regarding educational concerns our children often face in the public schools. To validate that statement, one simply has to look at the drop out rates for Latino and African-American children and see the results of a system that is clearly broken.
Lastly, you criticize HOPE Online for being trendy and the fact young people love new things. Yes, we will agree with you in that HOPE Online is a new innovative program to reach students who are failing in the public schools. In fact, your statements demonstrate quite clearly your aversion for online education and that you stand for the status quo. The fact that HOPE Online is new should excite you as a legislator involved in education issues. In all reality, the state audit stated there is no other educational program in the USA like HOPE Online. Two other education online commissions have stated basically that HOPE Online is the trend setter and it is clearly the way of the future. Nothing wrong about looking at innovation with greater expectations as a better way of teaching our children We can tell you very openly we are disgusted, resentful, offended, hurt in our soul, and downright stunned that you would use such hateful words to describe our parents, teachers, mentors, and students. Your comments are simply out of touch with reality and they illustrate that you could care less about African-American or Latino children learning and experiencing success through HOPE Online.
It truly is a sad state of affairs, when a legislator feels it is okay to malign our children in such a reckless and distasteful manner. In fact, it is our opinion you too should resign your position as the Chairperson of the Senate Educational Committee, perhaps even withdraw from the Colorado Legislature.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (4)
| TrackBack
By Kathy Strand, Fort Collins
Moore's editorial seized upon Mike Merrifield's recent intemperate email in order to assail his own local Poudre School District. He accuses the district of using heavy-handed tactics against Ridgeview Classical charter school, where Moore currently serves as principal. But a look at Ridgeview's troubling history tells a different story.
This Speakout has not been edited By Kathy Strand, Fort Collins
Terrence Moore's recent editorial is long on his personal grievances, but short on facts that illustrate valid local and statewide concerns about charter schools. We are fortunate in Colorado that parents and taxpayers have strongly supported school choice. But those supporters have a right to expect public schools to meet their responsibilities in a manner that is accountable to their contracts, operationally transparent, and demonstrably fair to all parties. Under the current law, charter schools enjoy broad latitude and very little oversight, an unfortunate circumstance that has resulted in documented harm to students.
Moore's editorial seized upon Mike Merrifield's recent intemperate email in order to assail his own local Poudre School District. He accuses the district of using heavy-handed tactics against Ridgeview Classical charter school, where Moore currently serves as principal. But a look at Ridgeview's troubling history tells a different story. From Ridgeview's beginning almost six years ago, Poudre School District has received a litany of complaints from current and former Ridgeview parents, teachers, students, members of the governing board, and even one of the school's founders, all of whom have called for stricter oversight of Ridgeview's adherence to its charter. Complaints filed with Poudre School District about RCS have documented mistreatment of students and teachers, retribution against those who have asked questions or expressed concerns about school actions and/or policies, governance improprieties, and charter violations. Ridgeview has routinely responded to its critics with personal attacks on their motives rather than a principled and fact-based defense of its actions, policies or governance. Indeed, Moore himself has gone further, characterizing demands for accountability as an existential threat to the school itself.
Unfortunately, Poudre School District has been unable to address these ongoing complaints under the terms of the original charter contract. In his editorial, Moore makes the simplistic claim that "Ridgeview was treated to a grueling re-chartering process spearheaded by a notoriously anti-charter lawyer ..." But the facts are unambiguous, and they confirm that the district's actions were in fact a response to appeals from members of the community to address ongoing problems at the school.
Moore further makes the false claim that "...the school knew it had the option of seeking a charter though the state Charter School Institute, an option that at least allowed our teachers and parents to sleep at night during the months of unnecessary 'negotiations' ...". As Moore is no doubt aware, the deadline for applying to the Charter School Institute was long past before Ridgeview submitted its charter renewal application to Poudre School District.
Finally, Moore appears to be most dissatisfied with the new contract because it contains a new provision that closes a funding loophole that had permitted Ridgeview to retain full funding of students who left the school after October 1 of the academic year. But Moore neglects to mention his school's high attrition rate. That attrition rate makes it more than reasonable for Ridgeview's new contract to include a provision that proportional funding follow students who either enter or leave the school after the October 1 count. Long-time observers of Ridgeview were not surprised when the school filed a lawsuit against the district on this funding issue. They were even less surprised when the court dismissed the suit. They knew - and apparently the court agreed - that the new funding provisions will ensure that Ridgeview is more sensitive to its high turnover rate. In other words, they will be more accountable. It's as simple as that.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By Rep. Anne McGihon, (D-Denver) and Rep. Tom Massey, (R-Poncha Springs)
This Speakout has not been edited By Rep. Anne McGihon, (D-Denver) and Rep. Tom Massey, (R-Poncha Springs)
Rather, this important legislation supports a proven key component of effective health care reform by protecting consumers from insurance rates based on health status and claims history. Our measure is designed to support small-business owners, especially in rural areas. It also paves the way for implementation in the next three to five years of the large-scale reforms we expect from the Commission's work.
A growing and vital driver in the Colorado economy, small businesses make up 70 percent of all firms in Colorado. What's disheartening, though, is that 63 percent of uninsured Coloradans work in small businesses with fewer than 50 employees.
With health insurance premiums rising 5.5 times more quickly than real earnings, owners of small firms often are faced with the difficult decision to either "thin down" health insurance coverage or discontinue it altogether.
Employer-sponsored health insurance is declining in Colorado at a rate greater than the national average. Moreover, evidence suggests a direct correlation between the runaway cost of health insurance premiums and the staggering number of uninsured Coloradoans.
Consider the facts: Colorado is among the states with the nation's highest insurance premiums - even California has lower insurance rates. Despite having the country's seventh-highest per capita income, Colorado has 774,000 uninsured consumers. That equates to nearly one out of every five people, well above the national rate.
For the state's small businesses and their employees, one critical driver of high health insurance premiums is the "rating up" of small groups by insurance carriers. Currently, Colorado has seven rating adjustment factors, or "rate bands," that allow insurers to increase premiums for small businesses. The two most damaging and discriminatory rate factors for small business are health status and claims experience.
Since 2003, with the passage of House Bill 1163, insurance carriers can discriminate against small groups by rating up groups whose members have health conditions as minor as allergies, or have accessed the health care system numerous times. If your child needs ear tubes, or if you went for medical care a few times for a bad knee, insurance rates for everyone in your small firm can be increased by as much as 10 percent per policy.
It is also possible to receive a discount from insurers if your small business has exceptionally healthy employees - and if you don't get rated up by one of the other five rating adjustment factors (geography, industry, tobacco use, age, family composition).
But no group can go for too long without someone developing a health problem and/or filing a claim. Eventually, every small business will be rated up at some point. When employers find that the cost to insure the group is too expensive, these employees and their families enter the ranks of the uninsured, driving up everyone's costs by deferring preventive care and using emergency departments for primary care.
This is contrary to the purpose of insurance, which is to spread the risk.
Insurance should pool a wide group of health care consumers to achieve economies of scale and thereby spread risk broadly.
These particular rate factors - health status and claims experience - not only discriminate against consumers and small businesses, but also are proven to increase administrative costs for insurance carriers.
We eagerly anticipate the findings of the 208 Commission and implementation of comprehensive health care reform for all Coloradans. By eliminating these two rate factors now, we are protecting our small businesses from potential increases of up to 50 percent over a period of three to five years.
House Bill 1355 actively supports the work of the 208 Commission and ends a system that forces small-business employees into the uninsured population.
By
I used to listen to Don Imus decades ago when he was a shock jock on WNBC radio in NYC. Imus was totally outrageous and completely different than anything else up until that time, and often extremely funny.
This Speakout has not been edited By
I used to listen to Don Imus decades ago when he was a shock jock on WNBC radio in NYC. Imus was totally outrageous and completely different than anything else up until that time, and often extremely funny. Turns out he was also high on something or other much of the time, which seemed to fuel his rapid fire zaniness. After rehab and a few venue changes, Imus returned with a morning "crew" and lots of satiric commentary that was heavy on politics, and not so much comedy as the rants of a cynical and angry man, although he was still somewhat funny.
More recently I've caught his simulcast radio/TV morning show on MSNBC, primarily because I'm frequently up in the wee hours. He also has a way of providing news makers an opportunity to let go of the mask a little, and show a more candid side than usual, which occasionally can be refreshing. But, it's been a long time since Don Imus has actually been funny, although he does have some funny people on the show with him. Much of what he passes off as humor are simply meaningless strings of insults and epithets that usually make little sense and seem disconnected from any real thought process. We're talking about a guy who has built a very lucrative career on a certain nasty style of broadcasting and in his golden years the daily show seems more and more like the affectations and postures of what he used to do.
The flap over his ridiculously insensitive comments about the Rutgers University women's basketball team was a long time in coming, and this is certainly not an isolated incident of a blatant senseless remark being casually tossed off as though it was a joke ... only this time, for so many reasons, Imus has to face the music and pay the piper. Should he be fired? Should he be prevented from polluting the airwaves ever again? It may be a fitting punishment for years of cruel commentary, but Imus, also happens to be a significant humanitarian off-the-air, a man whose charity work, particular with children, has deservedly won him accolades and awards. If he manages to stay on the airwaves, Don Imus is now in a unique position to elevate the discourse in this nation regarding the casual, and unfortunately all too ingrained, tendency to throw out racial and sexist remarks at the drop of a hat. What Imus did on his multi-million dollar morning show is rampant in our society, and I proffer this challenge to everyone who is now so loudly calling for his total banishment, will you demand the same kind of silence next time you hear such comments from your friends, relatives, co-workers, teachers, employers...and let's not even get started on the many zillionaire rap "poets" who regularly put out much much worse. So maybe we can get past the massive hypocrisy of public outrage and make some lemonade out of these very sour lemons.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
By Jessica Peck Corry, Independence Institute
It's been a tough month for state Sen. Sue Windels, D-Arvada.
First, her conspiracy to dismantle Colorado's Charter School Institute comes to light. Second, she angers minority leaders when she calls charter students "lazy By Jessica Peck Corry, Independence Institute
It's been a tough month for state Sen. Sue Windels, D-Arvada.
First, her conspiracy to dismantle Colorado's Charter School Institute comes to light. Second, she angers minority leaders when she calls charter students "lazy Sen. Windels' troubles began late last month when an e-mail conversation she had with state Rep. Mike Merrifield, D- Windels' comments, while less offensive on their face, revealed that she wanted a "full repeal" of the institute Windels next went on the attack. In an e These latest comments, reported in the Rocky Mountain News, came late last week in an e As reported in the Rocky, co-chairmen of the Community Coalition to Access and Equality in Education, Butch Montoya and the Rev. Reginald Ho By
First Pre beautiful baby girl, I used to read the paper on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Now, post husband and child, I savor the Friday paper because, if nothing else, I manage time to squeeze in the large, play-with-me-on-and-off-all-weekend, crossword puzzle.
This Speakout has not been edited By
First Pre beautiful baby girl, I used to read the paper on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Now, post husband and child, I savor the Friday paper because, if nothing else, I manage time to squeeze in the large, play-with-me-on-and-off-all-weekend, crossword puzzle.
This is not to be confused with the small, daily crossword tucked in with the comics puzzle. We are talking about the BIG, half page, come-to-mamma, hanging out with the books and Dear Abby section, only shows up on Fridays, crossword. (Take special note here as this bit of info will come in handy later.) Making a nice cushion for Mr.Mechanical pencil to ride evenly without tearing. Now, with an Ed Norton wrist and pinky flourish, I prepare to begin my salvation.
Houston, we have a problem: WHAT?! NO!! This can NOT be??!!! This is my entire afternoon! This is my one shot for the next several months! Possibly years! HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN? Some idiot at the newspaper has published the crossword WITH THE ANSWERS! The devastation. The horror. What kind of insensitive oaf could do this to ME???? Would this happen at the New York Times? I call the newspaper. “Yes, we know. We are very sorry.”
But you don’t understand, this is my one chance. I plead. I cry. “Why don’t you just print it from our web site?” … I can do that? I don’t have to stand on line every Friday? I can just go get it, for free? “Absolutely.” I’m amazed. I have to check this out right now, I’m running out of time. Wait. This is the little crossword.
“Yes, absolutely.” But I’m looking for the come-to-mamma, take all afternoon, most of the weekend, size. “We only have one crossword.” No, on Fridays you have two. This Friday, specifically, one published with completed answers and o ne without. “If you want the crossword puzzle, it’s on our web site. Have a nice day.”
Ah, Houston… ?
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
By
This Speakout has not been edited By
Knowing that the students I work with daily have been let down in their previous educational experiences and now the vote of no confidence is again letting them down, really is tough to handle. We, as a school staff, are dedicated to the growth of our students both educationally and in life in general. Our focus will continue to be on students and their growth for their future.
Please know that as a person that comes from poverty, a graduate of Denver Public Schools, a two-time college graduate, a former DPS teacher, administrator and a concerned citizen; when it comes to our students that a traditional public school has not worked for, I am committed to choice. I am committed to making sure we offer an opportunity to students whom have been left behind. This commitment is genuine and is a passion. I want all young people to realize their potential. I am unconventional in my methods and personality. I also know that I connect well with this population because I am unconventional. This is what public education needs, a different way of thinking.
I truly hope that the community really pushes for true reform with their state legislators, state school board members and local school board members. We are all responsible for the education of our young people. Let’s not allow students to be left behind. Respect the child, understand their needs, and work with them to make learning a comfortable and safe experience. Too many of our students have had too many doors closed on them. When will this stop? When will the true problem be looked at? When will a plan be put in place before rendering a decision to put so many students on the streets? After all, aren’t we all educators that are concerned about the same problem? I do wish the decision were different; however, I know that our focus will be the same at Life Skills, OUR STUDENTS!!!
Santiago Lopez, Thornton, administrator of Life Skills Center of Denver
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By
Dave Flomberg is about as sharp as a cue ball when it comes to pool in general, and Denver’s scene in particular. I have played in every pool room that has ever existed in Denver since I moved here in 1978.
This Speakout has not been edited By
Dave Flomberg is about as sharp as a cue ball when it comes to pool in general, and Denver’s scene in particular. I have played in every pool room that has ever existed in Denver since I moved here in 1978. Allow me to set Flomberg and the readers he misinformed straight.
The game’s popularity preceded Fast Eddie and Minnesota Fats by a few centuries. “Let us to billiards", said Cleopatra in Shakespeare’s words.
President John Qunicy Adams had a pool table installed in its own building on the White House grounds shortly after his election in 1824. This “moral scandal” was the key to Jackson’s comeback defeat of Adams. Jackson removed the pool table, of course, but Ulysses S. Grant restored it immediately upon his victory over Jackson, to no further public outcry.
Wagering on pool is NOT illegal in Colorado, contrary to Flomberg’s blithe assumption. C. R. S. 18-10-102(a) explicitly exempts from the definition of illegal gambling “bona fide contests of skill, speed, strength, or endurance in which awards are made only to entrants or the owners of entries". It is perfectly legal to bet upon a game of pool in which one participates, or to be the “stake horse” who puts up the money for another player to enter a wager or tournament.
Only a fool or the ignorant, lazy hack who quotes him would claim that Shakespeare’s players are “a notch or two below the best". There’s a big difference between “competition” and “action", or the availability of easy victims with too much money.
(Incidentally, table rates at Shakespeare’s go up only 25 cents an hour at night, and the cost per player declines with three or more players on a table.
I’ve never had to walk more than half a block from a free parking space, which is hardly “at a premium". Flomberg also ignores the fact that “Shake’s", like Tarantula Billiard Café’, offers free wireless Internet access, with which I am sending you this letter.) Flomberg should have spent more time with the lovely and knowledgeable Sammi Diep and not relied upon the clueless “James", who hustles only himself. I know James; if he ever played for $200 he was “firing air barrels", betting money that he didn’t have and praying to win instead of getting his thumbs broken when he couldn’t pay up.
Flomberg’s lame excuse for a blog contains his most ironic comment: “The only thing more pathetic than a no-talent has been is a talented never was...” What a fitting epitaph for this no-talent hack. His “experiment in obscurity aversion” richly deserves to fail.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
By
Now that all charges have been dropped in the Duke University lacrosse case, it may be a good time to consider what lessons we can learn from this unfortunate case. Mike Nifong, the original Durham prosecutor, became the poster child for what can happen when a prosecutor stumbles.
This Speakout has not been edited By
Now that all charges have been dropped in the Duke University lacrosse case, it may be a good time to consider what lessons we can learn from this unfortunate case. Mike Nifong, the original Durham prosecutor, became the poster child for what can happen when a prosecutor stumbles. Most of us concluded that Politics caused him to pursue that case far beyond what was justified. And the result is that he damaged the University and caused severe personal harm to those who now seem to have been falsely charged.
But the allegations that he suppressed very critical DNA forensic evidence and later lied about it to the court is even more troubling. He is currently facing ethics charges and if everything alleged about Mr. Nifong turns out to be true, he certainly does not deserve to be in office and probably should be considered for disbarment.
Still, the larger question is: How does this happen and how do we prevent it from occurring? The Sad truth is that the list of prosecutors who have put pride and politics ahead of justice is longer than any of us would like to believe. Last May, Bob Herbert of the NEW YORK TIMES chronicled quite a list of just such occurrences. He concluded that piece by pointing to the government's "Pervasive indifference to injustice in the justice system." Those are harsh words, but he reached that conclusion only after pointing to innocent People unnecessarily going to prison and much more.
The solution rests with all of us who must be certain that those we elect as district attorneys deeply believe and understand that their ONLY client is justice. And we must remember that they are elected to follow whatever direction they must go to see that they faithfully serve that client. The simple truth is that we place a special burden on the government, those who prosecute cases for all of us, to be sure that all of their investigations are thorough, that confessions are not coerced, that line-ups are done correctly, that forensic testing is accurate and that those test results are readily shared. They must also be confident that the witnesses they call (law enforcement people, experts, snitches, etc.) are competent and honest. And, yes, we expect them to be ready to admit a mistake and change directions the moment contradictory facts emerge. Unfortunately, some otherwise good prosecutors suffer a momentary lapse when they are driven by a zeal to win, political ambition or pride in wrongly holding to an announced position.
The good news is that Denver should be exceedingly proud of those they have elected to the office of District Attorney over the past many years. Those who knew Dale Tooley, Norm Early, Bill Ritter or today's Mitchell Morrissey know the extraordinary high caliber of professionalism they represented and continue to represent. They stand for justice at the highest level and we are very fortunate for the quality of service they have provided all of us. Those citizens in Durham need a model and they need only to look a mile high to find the best.
Dr. Richard J. Crawford, Denver, is a former communication professor who specialized in the study of the American jury at both the University of Northern Colorado and the University of Colorado. He was a founder and past national president of the American Society of Trial Consultants and served as a trial consultant in over 400 trials. . He is a frequent author and is the co-author of a new book for trial lawyers entitled, THE PERSUASIVE EDGE. He became the first trial consultant in the nation to become a full-time in-house trial consultant inside a law firm when in the early 90's he joined Denver's prestigious firm, Holland & Hart.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (2)
| TrackBack
By
This Speakout has not been edited By
It seems like from the time you are 16 years old there are distractions and insurmountable obstacles to continuing one’s education. Many of us old ‘fogeys’ know because we experienced it ourselves. Parents often send mixed signals about college, either because they are hard pressed to help finance it or they are projecting their own personal life history on the situation. My grandfather quit school after the 8th grade and my father never completed high school.
Unfortunately, school authorities can often do more harm than help. In my personal case the high school coach, who doubled in the off-season as a counselor, interviewed me in my senor year. When he asked my plans, I informed him that, of course, I was going to college. (It was 1968 and the Vietnam War and draft were a big consideration) He whipped out the results of an intelligence test I had supposedly taken at some point and strongly suggested that I consider the plumbing or electrical trades.
In his mind it would still be a step-up from my grandfather and dad who were working class stiffs.
I walked out of that meeting devastated. By the next day I had become angry, and determined to prove him wrong and go to college. I attended the only college that would admit me; by today’s standards it would be on a par with one of Colorado’s community colleges. I soon discovered that when I could pick my own classes and teachers I really enjoyed learning. Somehow the girls, pizza and beer all tasted better in college than high school. I ended up getting a degree and would have become a professional student if I hadn’t been drafted after all. And while it took me until my forties, I now have four college degrees including a masters degree from the University of Colorado, Graduate School of Public Policy.
The real point here is that many of my high school assumptions turned out false when I got to college. In high school I was labeled an underachiever and suspected of having learning disabilities. My college professors, on the other hand, saw me as gifted. I compensated for my attention-deficit disorder by overloading myself with classes and keeping so busy at a part-time job that I had to stay focused.
I was overweight in high school, but lost 50lbs and bought a car to replace my bicycle. Left to my own devices I was able to transform the situation. I came to realize that families and school systems are often so dysfunctional they can be more of a hindrance than help.
During the past couple of years I have spent a lot of time looking over high school curricula and have come to some conclusions. I think we may be trying to teach too much content and not enough of the process of learning-how-to-learn. I dare say that the requirements laid out by school experts could not be passed by the teachers themselves, much less the governor, school board members, or state legislators.
What is the purpose of making high school such a drag that students drop out and WalMart has to teach them how to add? McDonalds probably teaches more young immigrants English than the schools. Only a high school student destined to be a scientist needs a 900 in math on the SAT. Most accountants or psychologists need little more than a programmable calculator. I suggest we test, students, teachers, parents, policy makers- everyone and do it on a curve. I’ll bet most students will test above average and it will be the adults who need remediation.
The Promise!
My experience with young adults is that they crave validation far more than unsolicited advice. But, let me share with you the one and only thing I know absolutely for sure. Your life will be different with a high school diploma than without one. If you somehow manage to get a college degree, your life will almost certainly be different than without it. Same thing goes for a masters or PhD.
There is nothing else in life that I can guarantee you will influence your life with as much certainty as an education. I can also assure you that the dominant factor that will determine whether you get an education will not be your race, religion, sex, good looks or class status.
It will be your ability to read. That is really the decision you are making every day and, it determines the rest of your life.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By
This Speakout has not been edited By
Today, I couldn’t care less what somebody calls me. If they insult my family, I might respond butI know that if I allow stupid, disgusting, and insensitive remarks to eat at me, I will be a miserable person. A couple years ago, I converted to Christianity and am now a member of the Mormon church. Talk about jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire! Now, I get the remarks about having multiple wives, get told I’m not really Christian even though my church is called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, am informed, quite sincerely at times, that I belong to a cult, and get mixed up with the Jehovah’s Witnesses. That last part doesn’t phase me, the Witnesses are as reverent a group as I have ever met. That’s similar to being comparedc to being as compassionate as Mother Teresa, hardly an insult.
Don Imus is a jerk who makes his living being a jerk. Just like Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken, G. Gordon Liddy, and all those other loud mouth talking heads, his chosen career field is in insulting people and pushing the boundaries of acceptable speech. I havne’t listend to a word he has siad in twenty years, don’t listen to Rush or Al, or Howard Stern either. It’s a simple task to NOT listen, takes no effort whatsoever on my part.
I think the Rutger’s Women’s B-ball team has a right to be angry and hurt. I think it’s a waste of their obvious academic and athletic talents to even recognize Imus’ remarks let alone respond to them. I listened to their news conference and was impressed by their articulate, controlled and intelligent remarks. They have already surpassed Don Imus and his ilk with class that he will never know.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By
The metaphors are plenty - “The elephant in the room", “The camel’s nose in the tent", “Whistling past the graveyard” - and on, and on. These and many others, I’m sure, are part of the discussions of the day: Imus got fired!
This Speakout has not been edited By
The metaphors are plenty - “The elephant in the room", “The camel’s nose in the tent", “Whistling past the graveyard” - and on, and on. These and many others, I’m sure, are part of the discussions of the day: Imus got fired!
While there may be ‘universal’ agreement about the abhorrence in the pejorative characterization uttered by Imus - it must have its place in public discourse. The onslaught of issues surrounding that utterance seem without end - ‘can the FCC regulate such speech’, ‘can the FCC regulate good-taste’, ‘are there “bright lines” that distinguish speech as it relates to race, gender or ethnicity’, ‘are there rules about who can speak to such issues’, ‘what are the medias’ roles in matters of race, gender or ethnicity issues’, ‘do lawmakers and/or the courts have roles to play or add to the public discourse on matters of race, gender or ethnic relations’?
I don’t know. One thing I do know for sure, however, is that until future social scientists and geneticists determine that “we” should all look and behave alike, there are going to be ‘social, racial, gender and ethnic chasms’ that divide us. I’m not implying that ‘social civilities’ should not be part of our existence - I am simply pointing out what is obvious to most folks - there will never be the utopian social structure envisioned, pandered by, espoused by or wished for, by those who make pronouncements about the need to live in a society free of discrimination - discrimination in any form.
Our (American) society has determined that practical measures must be in effect to ensure that employment, housing, health, education and other social needs are available and provided indiscriminately. The argument / discussion continues as to whether those measures (laws) are as effective as they were meant to be. The famous contemporary rhetorical question remains: How many and what kind of laws should we have to ensure that “words” uttered do not hurt another? Politicians, pundits, prognosticators, and others who profess to own (or at least claim to know more about) the ‘higher ground’ on social relations, would have us believe ‘innate’ human tendencies, propensities and learned traits can be changed. I respectfully disagree. It is a human condition to discriminate (not entirely in the sense of creating adverse conditions).
So, we’re left with ‘loud voices’ and those voices lost in the wilderness. When it comes to ‘loud voices’, as they relate to race and ethnicity, Reverend Jesse Jackson and Reverend Al Sharpton come to mind. And, why shouldn’t they? When issues of “race” have dominated the media, in recent years, it has been Mr. Jackson and Mr.
Sharpton who ensure the topic remains at the forefront of ‘public discussion’, whether monologue or dialogue. These two gentlemen are viewed as ‘consciousness-raisers’ - A term used by many to describe a process that ensures ‘an issue’ remains in the public discourse for as long as possible.
For sure, both Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson have served their causes well over the years.
This brings me to the cathartic purpose of this note.
The conversation that has dominated the news media and ‘water cooler’ conversations for the last few days, has been the Don Imus / Rutgers Women’s Basketball Team story - the despicable characterization used by Mr. Imus and the resulting termination of his employment at NBC and CBS. Is there a balance - was the offense committed by Mr. Imus (despicable as it was) so severe as to cause his termination of employment? I don’t know the answer to that question. But, according to the networks (CBS and NBS) it was ‘severe’ enough and fired him. I don’t believe them (the networks) for one second. I will never be convinced that it was their concerns about ‘social sensibilities’ that resulted in Imus’ termination. It was, plain and simple, the sponsors withdrawing their commercial contracts.
I’ll ask the question. Why didn’t the sponsors who support Jesse Jackson show the same outrage and indignation over comments Mr. Jackson has made about other races or religions - his “Hymietown” comments, for example. A jury found Sharpton liable for making seven defamatory statements about others during the Tawana Brawley case - subsequently determined that Ms. Brawley had lied. Why isn’t the media asking Jesse Jackson about his support for the young lady who claimed to be raped by some North Carolina students?
I know, I know - the issue at hand is the outrageous and despicable comments made by Mr. Imus. But, my rhetorical, cathartic question remains: Why aren’t we just as outraged about comments (and deeds) made by other ‘public figures’, including Mr.
Jackson and Mr. Sharpton? Why aren’t commercial sponsors of media programs that support Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson, rife with indignation? Why? Because it is not ‘politically correct’ to ‘question’ outrageous comments or statements made by members of a minority group - mine included.
I am saddened by the fact that we’ve allowed an ‘open public discourse’ on race, religion, gender or ethnicity to be ‘hijacked’ by a very few in this country, without being ‘branded’ as a sexist, racist or other adjectives.
Should Mr. Imus have been fired for those outrageous comments? I don’t know. Should we have been just as outraged about Mr. Jackson’s and Mr. Sharpton’s comments and deeds? Absolutely! But, we’ll just continue ‘whistling past the graveyard’.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (2)
| TrackBack
By Darin Schanker
Picture an economy in which an individual By Darin Schanker
Picture an economy in which an individual The facts of the bill are straightforward. If SB 248 is implemented, any insurance company with a 65 percent or greater market share Prior approval for insurance companies is not a new concept. One COPIC insures 80 percent of the state SB 248 is designed to address such abuses. COPIC has strongly opposed this legislation, making several inaccurate assertions which must be addressed: 2. SB 248 won 3. Why do Colorado trial lawyers support this bill? Because every year, COPIC testifies at the Capitol in favor of legislation limiting an injured person The aim of SB 248 is to create a transparent process and empower the insurance commissioner to monitor excessive rate increases. The outcome will have no impact whatsoever on the number of lawsuits filed, settled or brought to trial; it will merely create an honest process where citizens are charged appropriately for the coverage they purchase.
Perhaps honesty is what has COPIC running scared. If subject to a public hearing Darin Schanker is a partner with Bachus & Schanker LLC and president-elect of the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association By
This Speakout has not been edited By
Stanton’s obsession has cost him his $140,000/yr. job, destroyed his marriage, damaged his son, split the community, and troubled normal people across the globe. And the psychiatric community – psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers – had a lot to do with bringing about this widening tragedy.
Stanton kept his obsession under control for seven years of marriage until he went on the Internet to ‘find out’ about a dream he’d had in which he had appeared in public as ‘Susan.’ After reading the propaganda on the Internet, he began covertly cross-dressing, as he had done before his marriage. He exercised some degree of control over his obsession for the next 5 years. Then he went to see Dr. Kathleen Farrell, a clinical psychologist. After three months of counseling, Farrell diagnosed Steve with ‘gender identity disorder’ – the name psychiatrists give to those obsessed with wanting to resemble and act like the opposite sex.
According to The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the standard guide for psychological diagnosis: “There must be evidence of a strong and persistent cross-gender identification, which is the desire to be, or the insistence that one is, of the other sex, [AND]evidence of persistent discomfort about one’s assigned sex.” Dr. Farrell told him there was no cure for his condition, but there was ‘treatment.’ She told Steve he could start the treatment by taking hormones – pills to suppress his testosterone and add estrogen. He could grow breasts. He could have electrolysis to remove his beard and body hair. He could start to feel and look more like a woman. And down the line, he could have his penis removed.
‘Treatment’ for a middle-aged man with responsibilities – to his wife, his son, and his employer? Steve wasn’t sure.
After 9 months of further counseling, Farrell said, “I want to meet ‘Susan.’”
Farrell said that at their next appointment a professional and “extraordinarily well-dressed woman” walked though the door. “So,” Steve asked the Doctor, fidgeting in his dress. “What do you think?” “You’re a beautiful woman,” Farrell said.
Dr. Farrell had given Steve the ‘courage’ he needed. After all, professionals who supposedly ‘knew about this kind of thing’ had defined this new ‘condition’ and ‘treatment,’ and Dr. Farrell had diagnosed him according to the guidelines of the profession. So Steve told the city council he was going to come to work as ‘Susan’ and dress accordingly.
Five of seven Largo city council members were appalled and fired Steve.
Because of his liberating ‘diagnosis,’ his wife and son have lost their privacy, dignity, and a bright, normal future. The community has been put through the ringer. Steve feels fulfilled, but hurt: “They just don’t understand.”
Knowing the catastrophic impact on his family and his professional life, why did Dr. Farrell give Steve ‘license’ to act on his obsession? Will Steve’s wife sue the all-knowing Doctor for ruining their marriage, causing torment for their son, and eliminating the family income? Why would a licensed professional tell a man to act on an obsession that would impact negatively on so many lives? The focus of the psychiatric community today is to ‘advocate for the patient.’ The wife, the son, the neighbors, the community, and greater society – who don’t pay the Doctor’s bills — are all but irrelevant.
‘Susan’ must be served according to the new ethics of the profession. And if others have to suffer for his ‘condition’ – perhaps they should hire a ‘therapist’ of their own.
It wasn’t always so. Psychiatry was once at peace with society, realizing that one cannot be constantly at war with social norms and be truly happy. It accepted the duty to uphold society’s norms and attempted to help the disturbed become socially acceptable. So Psychiatrist, Dr. N.S. Lehrman: I would see anyone I thought I could help, although I would not treat them if I thought their activities were harmful to themselves or others.
Thus when a woman newly involved in an adulterous relationship came to me because she was suddenly feeling upset, my condition for treating her was that she end that relationship, since it was the reason for her upset state. When she declined, treatment ended.
Today’s psychiatrists would have few qualms about counseling an adulteress to continue her relationship and put the feelings of guilt behind her. The marital, familial, and social implications of her conduct are unimportant when measured against her loss of self-esteem. Restore that, and you have earned your $150 an hour.
But focusing exclusively on their clients’ sense of well-being affects us all. You don’t have a right to medical care because you don’t have a psychiatric ‘condition.’ You are ‘normal.’ Steve has a psychiatric ‘condition’ – so he’s special. If we continue to permit psychiatry to order society in conformity with what ‘pleases its clients,’ the disturbed will rule and the ‘normal’ will be their servants.
Watch out, because Steve Stanton or someone like him is in your community waiting to make you pay for his sexual obsession. If SB36, which gives the psychiatric community almost unlimited funding, is enacted, normal folk will become slaves to the disturbed.
Paul Cameron, Ph.D.. Family Research Institute, Colorado Springs
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (6)
| TrackBack
By
Democrats in Colorado are attacking traditional family. Oh, they might have good intentions, but a quick glance at a few bills reveals that the Democrats' views of family and morality are far from mainstream.
This Speakout has not been edited By
Democrats in Colorado are attacking traditional family. Oh, they might have good intentions, but a quick glance at a few bills reveals that the Democrats' views of family and morality are far from mainstream.
House Bill 1330 is a bill regarding second parent adoption. It would allow any adult to become a child's second parent if the child's first (and sole) legal parent agrees. By allowing same-sex parent adoption this bill backstabs the standard definition of the family. It defies the obviously natural structure for the family (male and female).
Perhaps some would argue that children will do better with sort-of parents than with one parent. I disagree. Attacking the long-term definition of family to allow kids a non-family is not constructive. Do we use the means to damage the very end the means should promote (family)?
Democrats have emphasized the apparent good in this bill, yet it is obvious that same-sex adoption is a major objective. After all the bill's senate sponsor is, this paper has informed us, the only openly gay member of the state legislature.
It is interesting to note that Referendum C, a proposal that raised spending caps, passed by 52%, the same margin that Referendum I, a same-sex domestic partnership proposal that included adoption rights, was defeated by a year later. However, the passage of Referendum C was hailed as the voice of the people, while the defeat of Referendum I is being disregarded and Democrats are passing a piece of Referendum I (which could become a legislative jigsaw puzzle) while most voters are oblivious.
Another bill, Senate Bill 25, adds sexual orientation to the list of things that employers are not allowed to discriminate against in Colorado . This bill is a step to put this wrongful lifestyle into a protected position (and yes some of us do see it as an issue of right and wrong).
House Bill 1292, concerning standards for sex education, further drains the health of the family. This bill would, with an exception explained below, make school districts, family resource centers, and teen pregnancy prevention programs use universal standards for sex education.
Considering that the new standards require instruction in emergency contraceptives and the effective use of condoms, these mandates will violate the beliefs of some of the above-mentioned groups (not to mention parents). The only recourse is for individuals to opt out, or for organizations to discontinue sex education. If sex education is so important, why should organizations or individuals have to stand aside due to personal convictions that could be accommodated?
Because it requires training in contraceptives, this bill could disqualify public schools from getting federal monies for abstinence education. Without that money, abstinence education may stop in some schools. Although those currently receiving the federal abstinence money are exempt, the bill could indirectly result in pressure even on them to adopt a standard sex-education curriculum (contraceptives included). House Bill 1292 may bring an end to normal abstinence education in many of Colorado's public schools.
Democrats doubtless claim they favor the family and are working to make things better and more fair. I suggest most Coloradans think mandated condom education is worse, not better. They don't think fairness demands accommodating a wrongful lifestyle and changing the family structure to the detriment of children, as in the case of same-sex adoption.
Liberal politicians will obviously push limits. Hopefully the Governor's veto will be more favorable to families than his legislative colleagues have been. As they legislate liberalism, Democrats should remember this: you cannot tamper with the family, the basic fiber of society, without damaging your state and nation.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (4)
| TrackBack
By Jim Beers, Centreville, Va
This Speakout has not been edited By Jim Beers, Centreville, Va
Folks, make no mistake, the Federal government (bureaucrats and politicians) and national environmental organizations like The Nature Conservancy and The Wildlands Project intend to gain authority and jurisdiction over Eastern Colorado at the expense of landowners, rural communities, and the State of Colorado. Sadly, the situation is steadily worsening and state politicians and bureaucrats are cooperating or remaining silent as their Federal counterparts bargain away Colorado’s future. Their (state officials) excuse is the promise of future money and continued employment to retirement.
You are being hoodwinked by Army claims of more (private) land needed for training when there are literally millions of equally suitable (similar to mideastern topography and climate) acres already in the Federal estate in National Forests, BLM lands, National Wildlife Refuges, and National Parks. Similarly, Federal claims of Platte and Republican Rivers water being “critical” for plovers, terns and cranes when predators that are killing them as you read this go uncontrolled: or the claim of it somehow being “necessary” to maintain year around sturgeon at the mouth of the Platte when they inhabit hundreds of miles of the Missouri River would somehow be laughable if they were not so seriously detrimental to the future of Eastern Colorado.
You are being bombarded with myths and doublespeak meant to confuse you, divide you, and to put you at ease as the Army and The Nature Conservancy lay claim to SE Colorado and the US Fish and Wildlife Service and, eventually, the Wildlands Project replace NE Colorado with unoccupied space. All of this will eventually be untaxed, unoccupied, and a Federal/Environmental NGO fiefdom of easements, Federal land, closed to all but a few.
Be alert when you hear the following terms:
• Conservation Easement — These are obstructions meant to make current owners think they are getting something for nothing but future owners and land values will dispel this notion. Go to where “Easements” have been in place for 50 years. Ask the members of the Landowners Association of North Dakota what it is like to have a road project back up water on a field and then to face Federal law enforcement thrice as much as any illegal ever faces as agents trained and equipped for combat with Russian Special Forces descend on your farmyard as your wife is in the kitchen and your kids are playing in the yard.
• Biological Assessment — This literally means the device meant to either stop any use or development of private property or to devise a means to extort money or land from citizens wanting to use or improve private property.
• Up Front Promises — Federal Politicians and Administrators say that public use will be maintained or continued. Ask the sportsmen of Florida about Federal promises concerning hunting when asking for the Florida Panther Refuge or on Everglades purchases.
All lies.
• Corridors — If “riparian” corridor isn’t sufficient justification how about “wildlife” corridors” or “Native Ecosystem” corridors. They are all nonsense. Ask the retirees of Eastern Connecticut about the state and Federal lies about corridors and when that didn’t work about “Scenic Rivers” and “Scenic Highways” that involved TNC and easements and set-asides for no reason other than government control. The same goes for “Buffer Zone".
• Coalition Board and Consensus — These are merely monikers for managed government actions meant to give the aura of cooperation and wise decisions while being merely smoke and mirrors to attain the original government purpose where citizen opposition is expected.
• Tools in the Toolbox — This Orwellian term was coined by Federal regulators to mask the weapons they were using (much like a dentist’s tools). The impression is that certainly there is “something in the toolbox” that is helpful or fair, but that is only a mirage; they are all one-sided and harmful to targeted citizens.
Ask the Maine newspapers fighting TNC takeovers (with government funds and their tax-free status) or the former Oregon logger driving a cab in Los Angeles about what is happening. Denver, like Boston and Chicago and San Francisco thinks it will not harm them but a weakened State government, evaporating property rights, and emboldened radicals driving Federal politicians and bureaucrats will soon enough get around to you.
If your state politicians refuse to fight these Federal schemes; replace them. If your Federal politicians pander to these groups or refuse to control the Federal agencies; replace them with those who will. This is perhaps, next to the Terror issue, the most important and threatening issue of our day, especially if you live in Colorado.
Jim Beers is a Retired Wildlife Biologist, Wetlands Biologist, Special Agent, &Refuge Manager, US Fish and Wildlife Service.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (2)
| TrackBack
By William Autrey, Boulder
This Speakout has not been edited By William Autrey, Boulder
Without the luxury of 21 column inches, I can offer several arguments for limiting property rights when it comes to hazardous substances like cigarette smoke:
1) Property rights do not give owners the right to dispose of hazardous materials in the public commons; raw sewage cannot be dumped in the gutter, tainted mining runoff cannot be diverted into waterways, smokestack emissions cannot exceed tolerable limits. Why then are smokers permitted to pollute the common air with hazardous emissions, especially in confined, often densely populated indoor areas?
2) Proprietors might own their property, but when they hang an “open for business” sign, their rights are not absolute. Their desire to sell to and profit from the public opens them to the rules of “public accommodation” for which they forfeit certain property rights in exchange for doing business. The right to sell comes with a responsibility for the health of your customers while on your property.
3) Armstrong’s simplistic assertion that “patrons and employees are free to come and leave as they wish” belies the fact that for many bars and restaurants smoking is a sales tool, where smoking patrons are used to “dry out” the non-smoking customers who will then purchase drinks to quench their parched throats. Owners simply don’t chase non-smokers from their establishments. A level playing field (smoke-free air) improves the health of all, which is bad business for proprietors craving a reliable revenue stream.
4) Yes, “property rights are a centerpiece of a free society", but why does your right to inhale carcinogenic material include disposing of it in the air I breathe? What about my right to access the untainted resources my body needs to function correctly? Protecting your right to poison your body shouldn’t trump my right to live free of sharing your choice of slow death.
I’m eager to hear a reasoned and passionate defense of a smoker’s “right” to poison the rest of us. Unfortunately, Armstrong and the Rocky waste space, paper, and ink on empty hyperbole.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (27)
| TrackBack
By Jay and Robin Davis
F By Jay and Robin Davis
F The in The known dangers of the in • T • T • The r • T • T • And the d Were By David Tryba, FAIA 2007 President, The American Institute of Architects (AIA), Denver
A little more than 100 years ago, civic leaders, aided by Mayor Robert Speer, took steps to adapt principles of The City Beautiful movement to distinguish Denver from other dusty, poorly organized frontier towns. Boosters were inspired by the belief that urban beautification — landscape, city planning and architecture — would elevate the lives and health of citizens, as well as ignite economic development and impress visitors.
This Speakout has not been edited By David Tryba, FAIA 2007 President, The American Institute of Architects (AIA), Denver
Influenced by European Beaux Arts architecture and the 1893 Chicago World Exhibition, the movement was popular in America from the 1890s through the 1920s. Characterized by parks, fountains, public statuary, grand boulevards, handsome civic centers, prominent civic buildings and comprehensive planning, The City Beautiful Movement was both aesthetic and based on the belief that a quality public and civic realm was key to the public health of the citizenry and the financial stability and wellbeing of the community.
Speer’s legacy remains as the visible organizing principle of our city: Civic Center, Denver’s park and parkway system, Denver Mountain Parks and commanding civic buildings. The city’s five original high schools — East, West, North, South and Manual, plus 10 junior highs and two dozen elementary schools built between 1900 and 1940 — reflect The City Beautiful ideals. They are located on prominent sites, usually adjacent to a park, and possess commanding mountain or axial views.
It is again time for Denver to distinguish itself from other cities beset by a half-century of rampant growth, the negative impacts of the automobile and environmental degradation. The substantial capital investments in public infrastructure from the tree canopy, to parks and parkways, civic buildings, fountains, sidewalks and statuary are eroding.
Denver’s beauty is more than the sum of its parts; rather, it is the elegance of the whole, the physical tapestry of the places we love and use. When those elements deteriorate, the fabric is weakened and the daily lives of citizens are subtly impaired.
It is time to renew our commitment to public stewardship, to care for our inheritance of the legacy of The City Beautiful movement and to reinterpret The City Beautiful for the 21st century.
The planets are aligned. Mayor John Hickenlooper has directed citizens and public employees to perform a thorough analysis of the condition of Denver’s assets and capital budgeting protocols. The recommendations of citizens and government leaders are expressed in the Mayor’s Infrastructure Priorities Task Force Report. Denver will host its second Democratic National Convention in 100 years. The renewed vitality of the urban core demands a renewed focus on the public realm.
Downtown is becoming a 24-hour neighborhood. With more people living and working in the core, connections must be strengthened — sidewalks widened, streets designed to facilitate the easy movement of transit, bikes, pedestrians and vehicles and ground floors activated. A focus on moving people as well as vehicles demands a quality public realm.
The region’s investment in comprehensive, multi-modal transportation can be maximized only if we recognize that land use should drive transportation decisions. Since the end of WWII, we have done the reverse. We have worried about how to get cars out of the city instead of improve people-scaled connections and places.
Also, we must take care of our investments in civic art. From public buildings to parks and parkways, from statues and monuments to irrigation systems, roads and cultural facilities, Denverites have been consistently generous in acknowledging the importance of public and civic infrastructure. We must respect that investment, address deferred maintenance and commit to sustainable building practices, land use policies and resource management.
We have a remarkable legacy to protect and expand. During Colorado Architecture Week (April 13-20), The American Institute of Architects (AIA) Denver chapter offers the public several opportunities to re-engage with the city:
• April 12: Denver: The City Beautiful and Its Architecture, a lecture by Tom “Dr. Colorado” Noel, Ph.D. A corresponding exhibit will be on display through June.
• April 14-15: Doors Open Denver expert and self-guided tours of the city..
• April 19: Transit-Oriented Development: Reshaping the Great American City, a 60-minute film.
Visit the online calendar at www.aiacolorado.org for more details about these events.
With great excitement, AIA Denver joins citizens and civic leaders in rejuvenating The City Beautiful legacy. From the updating of the city’s zoning code to the revitalization of Civic Center, tree planting, infrastructure improvements and a renewal of civic places throughout the city, we applaud a rededication to the words that inspired Denver leaders 100 years ago: “Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men’s blood and probably themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die, but long after we are gone will be a living thing, asserting itself with ever-growing insistency. Remember that our sons and grandsons are going to do things that would stagger us. Let your watchword be order and your beacon beauty. Think big.”
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (2)
| TrackBack
By Sandy Nienaber, ASID President, ASID Colorado, Denver
In this column, Mr. Will made a number of very ill-informed statements regarding the interior design profession, in particular the issue of certification.
This Speakout has not been edited By Sandy Nienaber, ASID President, ASID Colorado, Denver
In this column, Mr. Will made a number of very ill-informed statements regarding the interior design profession, in particular the issue of certification. As the current President of the Colorado Chapter of the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID), representing 1200 members in our state and over 38,000 members internationally, I am writing to correct this misinformation.
Mr. Will made several misleading statements regarding the difference between interior design and interior decoration. The differences are well-documented and easily researched; however the critical point is that professional interior designers are qualified by education, experience and a rigorous two-day examination to enhance the function, safety and quality of interior spaces, and thus the health, safety and welfare of the occupants.
Certification or licensing of professional interior designers is currently in force in 24 states and growing. The purpose is not to restrict entry into the profession, or raise fees as Mr. Will states; the purpose is to raise the bar of the profession so that one must meet certain requirements to use the title. Currently anyone who has a flair for color or accessorizing can call themselves an interior designer — whether or not they have any education or training in the field. The certification process will restrict only non-qualified, non-educated people from using the title of interior designer — and that will protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, not to mention their wallets. Mr. Will stated that interior designers are “getting government to impose a regulatory hardship on your competitors". Mr. Will, these are not competitors to professional interior designers — they are not qualified to be competitors.
For additional information, please visit www.asid.org Clients wishing to engage a professional need only look for the appellation “ASID” after the designer’s name — it is the hallmark of professionalism in the field.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By Linda Meric, Colorado-based director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women
Yes, paid benefits!
Paid benefits would have saved Tammera Bravo’s job. When a hit-and-run driver hit her son, she had no paid sick days and had to choose between going to work or caring for her injured child. In choosing to care for her child, the next day Tammera lost her job at a Colorado landscaping company. She had to go on public assistance to make ends meet.
By Linda Meric, Colorado-based director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women
Yes, paid benefits!
Paid benefits would have saved Tammera Bravo’s job. When a hit-and-run driver hit her son, she had no paid sick days and had to choose between going to work or caring for her injured child. In choosing to care for her child, the next day Tammera lost her job at a Colorado landscaping company. She had to go on public assistance to make ends meet.
Tammera isn’t alone. Almost half (47 percent) of full-time, private sector workers have no paid sick days. For low-wage workers, those in the bottom quarter in earnings, more than three in four (76 percent) lack access to paid sick days. Only one in six part-time workers has paid sick days.
The problem is particularly acute for working women, who are still predominantly responsible for meeting family care-giving needs. Almost half (49 percent) of working mothers report that they must miss work when a child is sick. Of these mothers, 49 percent do not get paid when they miss work to care for a sick child.
But this is not only an issue for families with children. Nearly four in 10 employees already report that they’ve missed work because of elder-care responsibilities. This number is likely to grow higher, as nearly two-thirds of Americans under age 60 expect to be responsible for the care of an elderly relative by 2008.
Lack of paid sick days means more than a loss of pay. It often means discipline, up to and including termination. No one should have to choose between their health, or their family’s health, and their paycheck or job.
The Healthy Families Act (S. 910), reintroduced on March 13th by U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., is an important step toward making it possible for employees to meet responsibilities at work and home. The Healthy Families Act would guarantee full-time workers seven paid sick days annually, with a pro-rated amount for part-time workers. Employees could use the paid sick days to recover from their own illness, obtain medical treatment or care for a sick family member.
Children are healthier, do better in school and recover more quickly when a parent is able to stay home when the child is sick. Regular medical care prevents illness and decreases the need for emergency care, saving money for public and private payers of health insurance.
Public health officials recommend that workers plan to stay home from work for up to two weeks to prevent and control epidemics of influenza and other illnesses. Workers who lose income or potentially their jobs when they call in sick cannot afford to be off work.
Paid sick days are also good for business. According to a 2001 study published in the Journal of Managerial Issues, offering workers the option of taking time off when a family member is sick affects profits positively.
The costs of replacing an employee (including advertising, interviewing and training) are far greater than the cost of providing paid sick days to retain existing employees. This holds true for low-wage employees as well as highly paid and skilled professionals.
Forty-four percent of human resources executives say that “presenteeism” — employees going to work sick — is a problem, estimated to cost employers $180 billion annually in lost productivity and may cost employers more than absenteeism due to illness.
Numerous studies have found that businesses providing flexible leave policies for workers benefit from higher morale and productivity, lower absenteeism and turnover, and an improved bottom line.
The HFA will level the playing field for covered employers, and will have no impact on companies that already provide the minimum number of paid sick days.
Government shouldn’t tell business what to do — but government should establish the floor of what business cannot do. That floor must be raised until no worker has to choose between a healthy family and a job or paycheck. The HFA is an important part of raising that floor.
Linda Meric is the Colorado-based director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women, a membership organization of low-wage and low-income women organizing to improve workplace and welfare policies.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
By Suzanne O’Neill, Executive Director, The Colorado Wildlife Federation
We are the Colorado Wildlife Federation, a nonprofit organization of conservationists including hunters, anglers and wildlife viewers. As such, we are concerned with wildlife habitat. Directly and indirectly, wildlife contributes more than $2.0 billion annually to the Colorado economy. Wildlife, moreover, makes an immeasurable contribution to the quality of life of all of us who live in Colorado and the West.
This Speakout has not been edited By Suzanne O’Neill, Executive Director, The Colorado Wildlife Federation
We seek to ensure sustainable wildlife populations, and to conserve important wildlife winter ranges, reproduction areas, migration corridors and summer ranges. The impacts that rapidly expanding oil and gas development are having on Colorado’s and the West’s native wildlife such as mule deer, pronghorn (antelope) and sage grouse have been well documented by respected wildlife biologists. We recognize that oil and gas production is a vital part of Colorado’s economy. Yet we also know that energy development need not jeopardize the wildlife and habitats that help define our state and the West.
Right now, there are two bills before the General Assembly that relate to wildlife and conservation interests. We and dozens of other conservation groups came together in support of the Colorado Wildlife Habitat Stewardship Act of 2007 (HB 1298), a commonsense measure that directs the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to consult with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and to promulgate rules and manage operations in a manner that balances development with wildlife conservation. We are very pleased that the State House unanimously passed this bill of vital significance. It is now headed for the Senate and we urge full support of this bill.
This bill will be even more effective with the passage of House Bill 1341. HB 1341, already approved by the State House, would make changes to the membership of the Colorado Oil and Gas Commission and assure that Colorado’s wildlife and other natural resources are fully considered when key decisions are made on energy development. As conservationists, we also support this bill.
As things stand today, there is no practical, formal process before the Oil and Gas Commission to give consideration to wildlife issues on nonfederally held mineral estates. Oil and gas companies who are good corporate citizens have made a conscious decision to seek wildlife data and confer with the Colorado Division of Wildlife regarding major wildlife factors. More and more, these companies are finding it feasible to accommodate wildlife through use of advanced drilling technology. Others have worked with the Division to address wildlife issues at the beginning of their process, but have failed to maintain their attention to these issues later as they seek greater wellpad density. The duration of a company’s adherence to its initial resolutions concerning wildlife habitat has depended on the company’s internal decision-making or, in some cases, the sale of the company.
Other energy companies, however, have not demonstrated any interest in discussing critical wildlife habitat information. The Oil and Gas Commission has approved requests by such an energy company to increase the density of gas wellpads amid critical winter range for mule deer in Western Colorado. Division wildlife managers repeatedly asked for consideration of the impacts the reduced spacing of wellpads would have on this winter range for our native deer herd. Yet the Oil and Gas Commission gave wildlife managers no voice in the process of reaching the decision. This should not continue. We believe, therefore, that a change in the composition of the Oil and Gas Commission is important. A member of the Commission who has some interest and expertise in wildlife considerations would likely ensure that wildlife data are considered in a timely and appropriate manner.
As Coloradoans and Americans, we recognize the need for responsible energy development. We heat our homes with natural gas and use gasoline in our cars and trucks. But energy development need not, and must not, come at the expense of our remarkable wildlife resource and the traditions and heritage it represents. Colorado’s natural resources, if properly sustained, will only increase in value, both in direct dollars to business and in the quality of life that make Colorado such a special place to live and work.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By John Hyduke, Erie
The recent mean-spirited nature of the democratic process regarding Iraq, prompted me to write.
This Speakout has not been edited By John Hyduke, Erie
Both political parties seem to have gravitated into polarized camps far removed from the beliefs of the mainstream independent voter. Signs reading “Impeach Bush” seem to be very much in vogue at peace protests. Leading a Nation at war is not easy. Presidents must order soldiers into battle knowing many of them will die. Those actions are never popular, but I don’t remember seeing “Impeach Truman” signs when we sent troops into Korea. Nor do I remember seeing “Impeach Johnson” signs when the Vietnam conflict heated up. We lost a lot of soldiers in those wars.
Similar to Iraq, no one could claim our enemies in those wars were an imminent threat to our homeland. To put it into perspective, we have lost 3,400 troops in Iraq over the past four years. In contrast, we lost over 40,000 troops in Korea and over 50,000 in Vietnam. Fighting any war is costly for America. What is distressing to me is our loss of civility as we discus the options of how to best deal with war. How do we, as a Nation, want to deal with Islamic extremists who will be satisfied with nothing less than the annihilation of our way of life?
How history will judge our actions remains to be seen. How I think the Iraqis will remember us may be similar to the views voiced by old Frenchman in an interview I watched on TV last June. This Frenchman said he was a young boy from a village near Normandy when the invasion took place.His viewpoint is thought provoking. “You must understand that we residents of Normandy have a different perspective on the Iraq war than the rest of our fellow Frenchmen. Like the Iraqis, we too, were living under a dictatorship when the Allies invaded our country. These Americans left their families and homes to come here and fight for our freedom. When they left, they took nothing. All they left behind were these crosses,” he said as he pointed to the nearby military cemetery. “Perhaps, ten years from now, the Iraqis, like us, will appreciate the sacrifice the Americans made so they might live in freedom.”
I believe his statement to be true. Most of Europe lives in freedom because of the sacrifices of American troops. The same is true of South Korea and the Philippines.
I do not profess to have any answers on how we should conduct this war.What really galls me, personally, are the war protests. They had a negative effect on the troops thirty-five years ago and they are having the same effect today. No matter how many signs protestors carry saying they support the troops, their actions are not really supporting the troops. When they urge public officials to cut funding for the war, they are not really supporting the troops. When they call for the impeachment of the President, they are not really supporting the troops. They may think their actions are supporting the troops, but like Jane Fonda’s protests during the Vietnam era, the troops don’t see it as support. I know this to be the perception of the soldiers over in Iraq. You see, my only son is serving near Baghdad as a paratrooper in an Army Airborne unit. He and his friends fear the few amenities they now have will taken away from them if Congress cuts funding. Infantrymen in Iraq work in conditions we cannot fathom back here in our comfortable homes. He is gone from his forward operating base for three weeks at a time. They sleep wherever they can find a safe place to lie down. He and his fellow troopers want only to finish their mission and come home.
If either Congress or the President decides to change our current policies, I will live with the result. Poisonous rhetoric and disruptive public protests undermine the morale of our troops. Let the political process run its course.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (5)
| TrackBack
By Bill Menezes, editorial director of Colorado Media Matters
A talk radio host calls a sitting member of Congress a “scum-sucking pig wench” on air. During another broadcast, the host labels a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff “a lying sack of c---.”
By Bill Menezes, editorial director of Colorado Media Matters
A talk radio host calls a sitting member of Congress a “scum-sucking pig wench” on air. During another broadcast, the host labels a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff “a lying sack of c---.” A second talk radio personality supports a guest who calls the nation of Mexico “one of the most despicable countries on Earth,” and days later praises another guest who says an illegal immigrant seeking sanctuary in a church should be dragged out by her hair.
The preceding remarks were delivered on Denver talk radio shows, hosted by personalities such as “Gunny” Bob Newman and Peter Boyles. But the vitriol is not much different from that of Don Imus, the national talk radio personality suspended on April 9 and then fired on Thursday for making racially charged and bigoted comments — the latest in a career marked by such statements.
Imus’ firing for going — by his own admission — “over the line” raises the question of whether local talk radio hosts also sometimes go too far in their efforts to foster dialogue with their listeners. Newman, Boyles and their fellow talk-radio hosts such as Dan Caplis and Jon Caldara use the public airwaves to promote their positions on important issues such as immigration reform, ethnic tensions and politics. However, they frequently resort to inflammatory remarks and factual misinformation — that is, statements that can be proved untrue — to make their points.
Since the days of Alan Berg in the early 1980s, talk radio hosts have relied on ever more outrageous styles and comments to attract listeners. Constitutionally protected free speech generally includes outrageous opinions and commentary, and credible media watchdog organizations such as Colorado Media Matters have no interest in silencing such opinions.
But what should the public make of radio hosts who routinely offer falsehoods stated as facts to support their opinions? Simply put: Is it all right for these local celebrities to use lies and smears to back up their assertions regarding ethnic groups, immigration or any other topic?
I don’t believe that it is. This is a line Denver broadcasters should fear to tread, yet Boyles and other talk-show hosts cross it frequently. Some examples of falsehoods and ethnic smears among the many that Colorado Media Matters has recorded from Denver-area talk radio:
Given the frequency with which these radio talkers use falsehoods to promote their opinions, the real question is: Will anyone hold them accountable for not telling the truth?
Until listeners answer that question, we can expect the truth to be an infrequent guest on these shows.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (13)
| TrackBack
By Thad Tecza, Denver
This Speakout has not been edited By Thad Tecza, Denver
First, accepting a private donation to attack gangs smacks of the Bad Old Days in the West when City Fathers, including newspaper editors, took up subscriptions to drive out “undesirables”. Moreover, as too often was the case then, the current effort has racial undertones where, given anonymity, we can only suspect that the funds are being raised from predominantly White sources to target predominantly Minority individuals. That just may explain what the Rocky seems to find so mysterious; namely the fact that other cities never use, “(c)ontributions from private sources, even nonprofit foundations, …(to help)… underwrite any city program to expand prosecutions.”
Second, the Rocky is absolutely correct in stating that this isn’t the first time that private money has been used to sweeten the pot for public programs. What the Rocky doesn’t acknowledge is that there is a fundamental problem with all of these occurrences. Thus, too often in regard to City spending, “Lola wants what Lola can get!” That is, rather than rational, neutral criteria, what determines what policies are pursued is what the City can afford.
Given this fact, however, when the rich offer to blend their money with City funds they are using their wealth to influence how public dollars are spent. And that, of course, violates the democratic principle that every citizen’s voice should count equally.
Third, perhaps the most troubling aspect of this issue is the secrecy component.
Frankly, every citizen of Denver should be outraged at the Mayor’s arrogant “trust me” attitude toward this donation. Democracy is built on transparency. With very limited national security exceptions, citizens have a right to know in detail how their government operates. We have that right both as a mechanism to protect ourselves and as a prerequisite for informed decision making. That’s why we forced elected officials to pass open records and open meetings laws.
According to the Rocky, the Mayor has sought to justify secrecy in this instance by arguing that, with anonymity, “the DA’s Office would be less likely to imagine that the funders (sic) were trying to micromanage the prosecutions.” Here, at least, the Mayor seems to recognize that money can buy influence. This position betrays arrogance, though, because “Hizzoner” seems totally oblivious to the possibility that they could be buying influence with the Mayor himself! After all, with anonymity we have no idea whether this Foundation is involved in a land swap with the City or seeks to curry the Mayor’s favor in some other matter.
Finally, there is an implication in the Rocky Editorial that this donation is less offensive because it comes from a “non-profit Foundation”. Unfortunately, in the current political environment it has become all too common for wealthy individuals to shelter themselves from public scrutiny by hiding under the cloak of impersonal organizations. As with 527s and other such devices, operating as a Foundation should not be allowed to provide a shield from responsibility.
So, what’s not to love? Allowing the wealthy to use the criminal justice system to target minorities that they don’t like is something not to love. Allowing the rich buy their chosen public policies is something not to love. Allowing them to gain influence with the Mayor by donating their money to his pet projects is something not to love. Allowing them to do so anonymously is something not to love. And, at least from my perspective, taken together all of those things really are a big deal!
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
Gen LaGreca, Chicago, Ill. This Speakout has not been edited By Gen LaGreca, Chicago, Ill.
On April 13th every American should pay tribute to one of our greatest Founding Fathers, born that spring day in 1743: Thomas Jefferson. This farmer, scholar, and third U.S. president lovingly carved the government and character of his precious gem, America. He penned the stirring words on the parchment that is the soul of America, “The Declaration of Independence.” Do we — and our officials — today understand its meaning?
The “Declaration” launched the first country ever based on the unalienable rights of the people. According to Jefferson, these rights are “derived from the laws of nature” and not “the gift of their Chief Magistrate.” No tyrant — nor any majority vote in Congress —- can violate them.
Rights belong to individuals. There are no “rights” of groups. If pizza eaters lobby Congress for a “right” to a free pizza every Thursday, and if Congress, out of concern for their nourishment or their votes, grants their wish, it acts illegitimately. In Jefferson’s words: “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated [in the Constitution].”
Our rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness are rights to act, not entitlements to free goods and services. Jefferson defined liberty as “unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.” This means we may earn money and buy a house, but we may not expect the government to seize taxpayers’ money to provide us with a house for free. Life requires effort, a fact Jefferson considered our glory. When his farm fell on hard times, he proudly manufactured nails, saying “every honest employment is deemed honorable [IN AMERICA]. . . . My new trade of nail-making is to me in this country what an additional title of nobility . . . [IS]in Europe.” What would he think of today’s innumerable handouts to special interest groups, rewarding people for non-effort?
Does one citizen have fewer rights than another? Does a rich person, for example, have less of a right to property than a poor one? According to Jefferson: “To take from one because it is thought his own industry . . .
has acquired too much, in order to spare others who have not exercised equal industry and skill is to violate the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” What would he think of today’s cries to “tax the rich,” depriving them of their Constitutional rights?
Jefferson ardently championed spiritual autonomy. His “Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom” in Virginia, an achievement he had etched on his tombstone, stopped the practice of paying clergy with public funds because “to compel a man to furnish . . . money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical.” Jefferson was “against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another.” What would he think of today’s faith-based initiatives, allocating taxpayers’ money to religious organizations, and attempts by elected officials to dictate public policies based on faith?
Governments are instituted solely to protect our rights from violation by force or fraud, apprehending perpetrators who pick our pockets or break our legs; otherwise, government stays out of our lives. Wise government, explains Jefferson, “shall refrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.” What would he think of today’s 150,000-page Code of Federal Regulations and endless agencies that swallow 40 percent of our national income?
Jefferson believed citizens capable of self-government because they possess reason. “Fix reason firmly to her seat and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion.” He expected people to use their minds to control their own lives. He gently chastised his teenage daughter when she relied on her teacher’s help to read an ancient text. “If you always rely on your master, you will never be able to proceed without him. It is part of the American character to consider nothing as desperate — to surmount every difficulty .
. . “ What would Jefferson think of today’s entitlement programs, which destroy our capacity to think and act for ourselves, and transform us into helpless dependents?
Today Jefferson’s jewel, a country where individuals live free and pursue their happiness unencumbered by the state, is losing its brilliance.
Officials who can’t tell a diamond from a rhinestone hammer away at our rights. The way to pay tribute to Jefferson — and ourselves — is to rescue liberty and live up to the ideals for which he, as a signer of the “Declaration,” pledged his life, his fortune, and his sacred honor.
Genevieve (Gen) LaGreca holds a master’s degree in philosophy from Columbia University and is the author of “Noble Vision,” a ForeWord magazine Book-of-the-Year award-winning novel about liberty. Learn more about her and her writings at www.wingedvictorypress.com.
(sources of Jefferson’s quotations available on request)
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
This Speakout has not been edited By Allison Hunter, Colorado Springs, president, El Paso County Democrats Club
This letter is regarding Rep. Michael Merrifield stepping down as Chair of the Education Committee in the State House, and a response to the opposers of Representative Michael Merrifield, and his so called “true feelings” about education, vouchers and charter schools in the email to Senator Windels.
This Speakout has not been edited By Allison Hunter, Colorado Springs, president, El Paso County Democrats Club
First, let’s stop all the partisan rhetoric, or what I like to call “bully speak". To all the opposing legislators, and community leaders you know who you are. Let’s put aside politics, and put the spotlight on our children’s education and their needs. Please stop ignoring the actual facts, and trying to bash the opposition hoping that others will simply just buy into your words because you throw in other words like Republican, Democrat, Liberal, or Conservative. I like to think the general public is more discerning, and prefer the facts over your usual “bully speak".
I keep looking for some supporting information illustrating why Rep. Merrifield is wrong about his opinions on charters, and vouchers. Hmmm...surprisingly enough I can’t find anything....shocker. Lucky for all of you I do have factual information that is non-partisan, based on real numbers, and information that came from a new D-11, and Colorado Statewide study. Also, use of an actual “cost benefit analysis” was used, you know... those formula’s that successful organizations and corporations use to make sure they are efficient, and fiscally responsible? Please let me share this information with you, and the public.
As an example I will refer to the local area I live in:
Oh and let’s not forget about vouchers, this is what I know:
So, if you know Rep. Merrifield you also know he is aware of all this information, which is what fuels his passion against what the opposition is trying to do with education. In my opinion he was far too nice in his email. People like his opposition, and the groups who are crying out the loudest against him are turning this situation into a partisan bully match. All of you are truley the ones responsible for taking the money directly from our children’s public school education. Deprogram yourself from the steady stream of partisan instruction from the elders, and think for yourself for a change. Did someone say...agenda???
Rep. Michael Merrifield has always been a knowledgeable valiant crusader for our children, and will survive the likes of bully’s like you.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
> By Sarah Thompson, Sacramento Calif. I am a retired public high school teacher. This Speakout has not been edited By Sarah Thompson, Sacramento Calif.
During my thirty years of teaching, how often I heard business owners complain that they were having difficulty finding employees who could write a clear paragraph describing a billing error or internal problem of some sort. It was worse, of course, when their employees could not properly convey an idea in writing to a potential customer or client.
I am a retired public high school teacher.
On numerous occasions when I was teaching, I suggested to our administrators that the difficulties we were then, and still are, facing in the public schools, especially the high schools, could easily be solved. Generally, the reaction was a smile and a “Good day to you, Mrs. Thompson.”
The solution to our educational problems is hiding in plain sight. It is Student-First Accreditation. Student-First Accreditation is practical, economical and effective.
The Federal Government has approved Student-First Accreditation for funding. However, it is the State itself that has been laboring under the impression that the top-down, centrally controlled programs we maintain in our public schools are the only formats that makes sense.
Coloradons have been trying to find a way to reform the public schools seemingly forever, and have failed, in my opinion, only because all the suggestions for reform are simply add-ons applied within the same school structure, that rest on the same foundation, a foundation that was adopted in the early 20th century as a result of the work of John Dewey, William Harris and others. They designed the top-down, military model we still use in all Colorado public high schools, a model that requires students to respond to bells, whistles, klaxons, being grouped by age, and required to stand in lines and sit in neat rows.
Most parents and educators in Colorado are not aware that there is a much better way to organize a school, and that better way is the result of adopting student Student-First Accreditation as our standard.
Usually, when I mention accreditation method, people unfamiliar with the process (which sometimes includes school board members) are puzzled. Why would a different accreditation method make a difference?
In the top-down system we have used for many many decades in Colorado, teachers are required to walk into classrooms with prepared syllabi, and deliver their subjects according to the dictates of a central authority. Variations from the syllabi are truly frowned upon, irrespective of what principals and superintendents might say regarding the goals of preplanning.
The individual student’s learning style, aptitudes, skill levels, emotional preparedness, and interests are typically unknown to a teacher, and, if known, addressing them is virtually impossible when the focus of a school is on management, standard method and content.
As a result, ALL public school students are disengaged to some extent, and, therefore, underachieve to some degree. For example, our State’s public high school valedictorians place 20th in the world in general knowledge, science and mathematics when compared to the best students of other first world countries. (Of course, some Colorado public high school students compare well with students in other places in America, but that’s just being good when compared to a generally poor showing.) When we apply one method and canned materials to students as if they were all the same, even our best will not achieve what they could if they were studying in a Student-First Accredited atmosphere.
Currently, all Colorado education tax dollars continue to be poured into attempting to “massage” the status quo. In the “massage” category, we can put every single school reform proposal suggested in our State during the past fifty years.
Programs such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) are add-ons and will never, in my opinion, improve results because our students have grown way beyond such systems psychologically. (Since 1995, America’s test scores in science have actually dropped, this after spending another eighty billion dollars each of the last six years to follow the requirements specified by NCLB.) Said differently, we cannot take a group of young people who have been rightly sold the American message that their individuality is important, place them in a school where they must jump to the sound of repetitive auditory cues, march in lines, and sit in rows, and expect a competitive first world result.
School reform proposals in Colorado are offered by just about everyone, and everyone feels qualified to do so. It is no wonder that the Legislature and the Governor are confused. It is a bit like everyone feeling that they sound like Frank Sinatra or Rosemary Clooney in the shower. The reforms being recommended are just as good as the shower singers. What we really need though are the real Frank and Rosemary, who sounded great both in and out of their showers.
As it is, everyone is blamed for the poor performance of our public schools: politicians, parents, teachers, administrators, school boards, even the bus drivers. No one, as I’ve explained, really looks at the school structure, the foundation. Everyone wants a better product using a system that is a poor match for the psychological position of Colorado students.
I am not aware of one experienced teacher who wouldn’t have given a limb to teach in a school like those described by Student-First Accreditation advocates.
I am confident that once elected school boards in Colorado know how Student-First Accreditation works, and how smooth transitions are possible, there will be an educational revolution in the State of Colorado. Suddenly, our students will become a lot smarter.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (4)
| TrackBack
By Addy M. Hansen, Colorado Springs
This Speakout has not been edited By Addy M. Hansen, Colorado Springs
Oh REALLY?!?!?!
In today’s (03-25-07) Sunday Gazette, on the front page of the Metro Section, we (the home-owning, tax-paying voters of El Paso County) get to “see” the REAL Jan Martin. Jan LIKES taxes. In fact, of all the current City Council candidates....she SUPPORTS ALL of the (proposed) tax increases: One to fund Public Safety; one to renovate the City Auditorium, one on funding trails and open space acquisitions and one to raise our energy (CSU) bills. WOW!!! Jan Martin wants to SPEND, SPEND, SPEND and in order to spend all the money she wants....she is willing to raise EVERYONE’s taxes!!!
Where did that “anti-money-spending, vanguard of citizens money” who “instigated” the 2003 recall against County Commissioners Tom Huffman and Chuck Brown for securing COPs to fend-off a serious jail/courthouse situation - go???? Where is the Jan Martin who wanted to save all of the people of El Paso County so much money these days??? Well, that Jan Martin does NOT exist - nor has she EVER.
Welcome to reality, Colorado Springs. Jan Martin will spend money (on City Council) as fast as she can get her hands on it.
Do we really want a “free-wheeling, fast-spending”
City Council member who has no problems spending your money as fast as she can get it???
NO!!!
Do NOT elect Jan ("spend at her whim")Martin to City Council. Not now. Not ever.
Fiscal conservatism - it really “fits” this City/County/area and ALL of the (potential) leaders therein. And, we will NOT have that with Jan Martin.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By Dennis Avery,
The Supreme Court apparently wants the EPA to suppress human CO2 emissions so they won’t overheat our planet or inundate the coast of Massachusetts.
The Court essentially ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency offered no valid excuse for not regulating CO2 in American skies as a pollutant.
This Speakout has not been edited By Dennis Avery,
The Court essentially ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency offered no valid excuse for not regulating CO2 in American skies as a pollutant.
Ultimately, this might well mean you won’t get electricity for your home or gasoline for your car.
Never mind that the evidence exonerates CO2. Seventy percent of the heating came before 1940, while 80 percent of the man-made greenhouse gases came after 1940. The earth has warmed, probably by 0.7 degrees C since 1850. But human-emitted greenhouses gases didn’t have the opportunity to commit that “crime.” The Supreme Court looked only at circumstantial evidence against CO2. The Justices didn’t know that the Massachusetts attorney general was hiding the real culprit outside the courtroom-a big, violent fellow with a known fiery temper called The Sun.
Your honors, if we graph the global thermometer records since 1860, they show a jaggedly erratic pattern: 1) a strong warming from 1916 to 1940; 2) a moderate cooling from 1940 to 1975; 3) another strong warming from 1976 to 1998-and then 4) no warming from 1998 to the present despite soaring human CO2 emissions.
The record of human-emitted CO2 shows only a graceful upward curve that doesn’t align with the world’s temperature history until 1976! Even the 1976 to1998 alignment looks like a coincidence-circumstantial evidence. After 1998 the temperature stops rising while the CO2 levels keep climbing. No correlation.
In rebuttal, we offer the sunspot records, the trail of evidence that leads directly to The Sun. The sunspot numbers and cycles accurately mirror virtually every bump and dip in the global temperature record. Any member of the jury who looks at the temperature-sunspot correlation will immediately vote to find The Sun guilty. You can look it up yourselves: search the internet “images” “tim patterson tcsdaily sunspots.” The Sun has been more active recently than at any time since the beginning of the Medieval Warming more than 1,000 years ago. That’s why the Earth has been warming for the past 150 years since the end of the Little Ice Age.. We call as witnesses to The Sun’s power a) the Roman Warming, which ended about 600 AD; and b) the Medieval Warming, which ended in 1300 AD. They say there were no CO2 variations to trigger their temperature shifts either. The Sun was guilty then, too. The Greenland and Antarctic ice cores testify that The Sun has committed at least 600 such cycles, going back at least a million years.
At worst, the court should find CO2 a mere accomplice after the fact. Humans might have added 0.1 degree C warming-half of the post-1940 temperature increase. That’s not even a felony, let alone life imprisonment-without energy-in the Kyoto Protocol.
The Supreme Court has spoken, however. America must reduce its greenhouse emissions by 90 percent, or the global CO2 levels will keep rising. Not that this will have much impact on the temperatures; they’ll continue to dance to The Sun’s tune.
It’s too late for evidence. The EPA’s bailiffs have their nightsticks at the ready.
DENNIS T. AVERY was a senior policy analyst for the U.S. State Department, where he won the National Intelligence Medal of Achievement. He is the co-author, with atmospheric physicist Fred Singer, of the book Unstoppable Global Warming-Every 1500 Years, available from Rowman & Littlefield.
Readers may write him at the Center for Global Food Issues ( www.cgfi.org )
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
By Lewis Thompson, Denver
There is so much that I find disturbing about the story of the controversy surrounding the memorial to Danny Dietz By Lewis Thompson, Denver
There is so much that I find disturbing about the story of the controversy surrounding the memorial to Danny Dietz To die virtually alone, surrounded by a vicious and fanatical enemy in a country half Surely, D The I in no way wish to be disrespectful of By Robert E Forman, Lakewood
Let’s say that I owned a restaurant that sold a variety of food that catered to a variety of people — both adults and children.
And let’s say that I developed a “secret ingredient” to add to my food that added, to some people, to both the taste and the aroma enjoyment of my food. That is, when cooked, my “secret ingredient” gave off an aroma and a taste that that some found “enjoyable,” while others thought it to be “annoying,” while still others found the aroma to be “foul.”
This Speakout has not been edited By Robert E Forman, Lakewood
And let’s say that I developed a “secret ingredient” to add to my food that added, to some people, to both the taste and the aroma enjoyment of my food. That is, when cooked, my “secret ingredient” gave off an aroma and a taste that that some found “enjoyable,” while others thought it to be “annoying,” while still others found the aroma to be “foul.”
And let’s say that my “secret ingredient” just happened to be rat poison — not enough to kill or harm anyone outright or even in the course of a a few years; but enough to cause “suspected” harmful effects in a a fairly large number of people who would consume my food — or even breath the aroma — on a regular basis 20 or 30 or 40 years down the road.
Questions: Should I be allowed to sell my food? Should I be allowed to sell my food even if I disclose the fact that my food is “tainted” with rat poison? Should the government step in and either outright ban or regulate the presence of a poison in my food no matter how small the amount?
If the answers to the question are that there is no place for rat poison in food nor in the air that other people in my restaurant can breathe, then aren’t you trampling on my property rights, private property rights in general, and infringing on the rights of a free society? That last question was a paraphrase of a statement made by Art Armstrong in the Speakout column in the Saturday 3/31/07 edition of the combined Rocky Mountain News / The Denver Post in his opposition to the smoking ban.
While some people will not equate smoking with consuming rat poison, other people will. And the warning labels printed on the cigarette packages themselves are now used by the cigarette companies themselves to defend themselves from litigation from selling a product whose consumption does not lead to better health, but, instead, whose consumption may very well lead to, over time, the very health risks and hazards that are printed on the packages.
And while there are certain tradeoffs we as a society must endure for the greater benefit of society as a whole, smoking is hardly one of them.
Yes, factories pollute and cars and trucks add to the pollution. But the tradeoff is that we have jobs, a high standard of living, and are able to go father distances at a much faster rate than the old horse and buggy. (And for those who yearn for those days, just try to imagine Denver with a million horses who pee and poop on the ground. A hot summer day would bring about a far different “aroma” to our nostrils.) (Ever notice how when a new housing development goes up near a cow or pig farm, the new arrivals start complaining about the smell?) While the manufacturing, distributing and selling of cigarettes has a certain “job value,” those jobs are replaceable simply by growing something else (like real food), distributing that something else and selling something else.
Read the warning label on a pack of cigarettes. If what you read starts to sound a lot like slow-acting rat poison, then maybe that is something that we as a society should outright ban or, at the least, ban from public. Let the smokers enjoy their “poison” all they want in the privacy of their own homes and let them and/or their insurance companies deal with any medical bills.
But the rest of us who choose not to smoke should not have to suffer and/or endure the smoke from those who do. There is no health advantage or benefit gained by breathing secondhand smoke; instead there may very well be serious health disadvantages and consequences.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (24)
| TrackBack
By Linda Panepinto, Loveland
Dear Senators Allard & Salazar: Please do not give final approval for unfettered access to large commercial Mexican trucks on our highways. The recent announcement of this program raises serious concerns for the safety of all US motorists, who will be traveling on our roads with these semis.
This Speakout has not been edited By Linda Panepinto, Loveland
- - - - - - - - Foreign ships transporting cargo into US ports are inspected prior to docking for national security reasons. Foreign trucks bringing goods into this country from Mexico should be subject to similar scrutiny as a condition of entry. Failure to examine these large freight haulers will seriously threaten national security. It will also open the door to the Mexican and South American drug cartels. Instead of sneaking their narcotics across the border on the backs of smugglers, they will be welcomed in by the truckload. Please don’t abandon us, Senators. This is a matter of life and death as these big rigs get ready to roll on our roads at 70-80 mph. Please use your influence in the Senate to ensure that foreign nationals are identified and not on the terrorist watch list before they enter this country. If I need a passport to re-enter my own country, surely these unknown, foreign truck drivers must at a very minimum carry a valid Mexican passport. Please also ensure that they comply with the same safety regulations as our own domestic commercial truckers. Our lives and the lives of your loved ones are depending on it. By Dr.
Unfortunately, Judge Lewis T. Babcock's decision on Monday to block access to important records about the attack in 1999 at Columbine High School will hurt ongoing research about school shootings. In his ruling, Babcock banned, for the next 20 years, all access to the statements made to the police by Eric Harris' and Dylan Klebold's parents. The decision is disappointing — the transcripts might have helped clarify the role of computer games in the attack
By Dr.
Unfortunately, Judge Lewis T. Babcock's decision on Monday to block access to important records about the attack in 1999 at Columbine High School will hurt ongoing research about school shootings. In his ruling, Babcock banned, for the next 20 years, all access to the statements made to the police by Eric Harris' and Dylan Klebold's parents. The decision is disappointing — the transcripts might have helped clarify the role of computer games in the attack.
In researching the Columbine shooting, what is surprisingly clear is how obsessed the two killers were with computer games. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold enjoyed their "virtual" lives on the computer more than they liked their "real" ones. The computer was where they felt most powerful, expert, and alive. As a result, their relationships with their computers were remarkably important — think of how you feel about your best friend or lover and that was probably how the killers felt about their computers.
For example, Harris believed he had a unique relationship with his computer and the games he played there. For one class, he wrote of his "…love for a computer game called DOOM.... I know almost anything there is to know about the game, so I believe that seperates (sic) me from the rest of the world." In another paper, Harris noted, "Doom is so burned into my head my thoughts usually have something to do with the game…What I cant (sic) do in real life, I try to do in doom." While Klebold was less prolific, he was also entangled with his computers. In college, he was going to major in computer science. After the Columbine attack, three computers were found in his room.
My research has led me to believe the following happened to the teens: Starting in their sophomore year, Klebold and Harris began getting into trouble at home and school. In an escalating pattern, they were disciplined by their parents, principal, and, ultimately, the law. One way they were punished was to ban them from using computers. Unfortunately, doing so also cut them off from the most important relationship in the two adolescents' lives.
In addition to being the best of companions, their computers also served another purpose. The computer games they played defended others from the two teenagers’ anger. Initially, rather than hurting others, they killed virtually. As a result, the games probably hid and delayed the teen's homicidal and suicidal tendencies. After getting banned from their computers, the two teenagers’ rage erupted. They became quite dangerous and they began plotting the attack on their school.
Why is this important? Since the attack on Columbine, computer games have become vastly more popular and immersive. Tens of millions of people play computer games each day — one game alone, World of Warcraft, has well over 8 million subscribers. Like Harris and Klebold, many people play games, much to the exclusion of other activities. In my clinical practice, I have seen numerous players who have logged over 3,000 hours in a year on just one game.
The real risk of computer gaming has little to do with the content. Instead, we need to worry about how gratifying the virtual can be. Abruptly prohibiting or discontinuing someone's computer use may inadvertently release unanticipated emotions that might result in tragedy, as happened at Columbine. Because of Babcock’s decision, we will have to wait another two decades before learning exactly what the parents saw when they tried to stop the teens from using their computers. To anticipate and prevent other such attacks, such information is needed today.
,I.Dr. By Terrence O. Moore, Fort Collins
State Rep. M By Terrence O. Moore, Fort Collins
State Rep. M The venomous statement against school reformers was made in the context of Merrifield’s and Windels’ plans Translation: groups of parents and school founders wanting a better education for children who are constantly rebuffed by local school boards controlled by ed-school professors, union activists, and retired public-school teachers and administrators.
Just how hostile those districts can be is well illustrated by the heavy-handed tactics used by the Poudre School District of Fort Collins against the charter school of which I am principal. Though boasting a steadily growing enrollment, a substantial waiting list, a strong financial balance sheet, and the unique advantage of being ranked as the Every school reformer in the state suspects that the Democratic assault on the Charter School Institute will be only the first battle in a war to undo the impressive school-choice legacy of Gov. Bill Merrifield’s revealing e-mail suggests that those fears are far from paranoia. Anyone who assumes that the gains made by “charterizers” and “voucherizers” will remain safe with the likes of Merrifield and Windels at the helm would do well to remind themselves of the words the real Dante placed above the entrance to Terrence O. Moore is the principal of Ridgeview Classical Schools, a K-12 charter school in Fort Collins.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
By Jack Kaufman, Federal Heights
According to Steers and the Rocky, By Jack Kaufman, Federal Heights
If you read Stuart Steers If you were a lawyer or any other professional who worked your way through school as a cab driver, would you be offended by the Y Of course we never want to study our map books, that According to By Roni Bell Sylvester, LaSalle
Let's start with explaining who Steve McCormick is. He's the head of The Nature Conservancy (TNC), a group that wields more control over America than a hundred Alberto Gonzales's combined.
This Speakout has not been edited By Roni Bell Sylvester, LaSalle
Headlines shout jubilantly, "Republican backing of Gonzales ebbs," and- "Gonzales' GOP support erodes." Let's get some perspective on this While U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales may be generating good ink for reporters, he isn't jeopardizing your opportunity to feed, clothe and shelter you or your family.
Frankly, I'd rather read headlines stating, "Republican AND Democrat support of Steve McCormick erodes." Why? Well let's start with explaining who Steve McCormick is. He's the head of The Nature Conservancy (TNC), a group that wields more control over America than a hundred Alberto Gonzales's combined.
How? Well, it's said that over the past several years TNC has gained control of more land and water than any other entity in the world. These guys are seriously messing with agriculture and resource production in the United States.
For evidence of TNC's reach, just look at what's happening in Colorado. Rightful users of water are told, "Stop using the water NOW!" Why? Because the federal government's Endangered Species Act (ESA) now demands use of mostly all water everywhere in America.
The ESA started with noble intent, but was high jacked by groups, like the Nature Conservancy, who found it as a means to get control over your land and water.
We have governors and senators who tout the wonders of bio fuels as the saving grace towards energy independence. Simultaneously, they allow ESA to plunder and usurp state water rights. Denying water to crops used for this type of fuel production, will of course, stop this fuel production.
Seated next to any ESA program you'll find groups like TNC. They will tell you they're not there, and although their documents appear to contradict their actions, they are never questioned.
Then there's Pinon Canyon in the South East corner of Colorado. The Army had ample training ground in the Pinon Canyon area, but thought they might want to expand. Seated at the left hand of the Army, the Nature Conservancy secured $7,000,000 from the federal government to...help the Army.
Subsequently, the Army and TNC decided they wanted the entire South East corner of Colorado for purposes both decline to define.
Their on going pursuit of all this land and water, trample the human rights of the Indigenous of Pinon Canyon and surrounding communities.
Why don't these activities compel investigation? Where's that human rights activist who would speak out in behalf of the Pinon Canyon residents? When celebrities including Ed Asner, George Soros, Jessica Lange and Tim Robbins plow millions into their "Celebrities Against Iraq War" campaign, don't they see their hypocrisy when gifting money to groups that support expansion of military training grounds?
Wouldn't you like to see a bold headline: Sen. Chuck Hagel states " McCormick, we cannot have this cloud hanging over your credibility!" Or read - Sen. Diane Feinstein claims "Nation not well-served by TNC's destruction of resources." Or - Senator Alan Specter demands "McCormick should not stay on." Or under a picture of Susan Sarandon scratching her head, the caption "Why does the Nature Conservancy support the war in Iraq?"
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (2)
| TrackBack
By Steve Enrici, Denver
On Saturday March 10,2007 it was my misfortune to be arrested for driving with no insurance and a suspended license. While I don't dispute this I do have a serious problem with the way I was treated during my stay.
This Speakout has not been edited By Steve Enrici, Denver
On Saturday March 10,2007 it was my misfortune to be arrested for driving with no insurance and a suspended license. While I don't dispute this I do have a serious problem with the way I was treated during my stay. I have been under a doctors care for pain management for over three years now. I take six different drugs that I have to take or I will have very bad things happen to me . Seizures, withdrawal and even death are all possibilities.
When I saw the nurse I told her the meds I was taking and even produced two of them in their original drug store bottles with my name on them. She said this did not matter and I would just have to suffer. Needless to say, suffer I did. I started into withdrawal from the opiates approx. 4-6 hours after I was admitted. The pain was agonizing. A little while later the pain from not taking my other med started. I was hallucinating, in extreme agony and nothing was done.
At approx 7 am I was escorted to court. By this time I could barely stand on my own and stumbled to the podium when my name was called and had to lay on the podium to stand up. The judge noticing my condition asked the problem. I told him the problem and he proceeded along as if nothing were amiss. He asked if I had consumed any drugs or if I were mentally unable to proceed and I said obviously I shouldn't. I had no legal representation and went ahead and pleaded guilty just to get it over so I could go back and sit down before I collapsed. He accepted my plea, fined me 760 dollars, assessed me 9 points against my license and said I would be free to go ASAP.
Next thing I know I had another charge AND THE BAIL INEXPLICABLY HAD BEEN RAISED FROM 750 DOLLARS TO 2,000 DOLLARS. Needless to say at this point I just wanted d out and my friend and brother posted my bond and got me out of there.
The real problem here is one year ago a girl died in the city jail when jailers ignored her pleas for help and told her "to sleep it off". The girl had suffered injuries during a traffic accident and the city jails negligence cost this woman her life.
I could have just as easily been in the same predicament. The jail needs to change it's policy regarding meds immediately before someone else dies, The other problem I find is a judge accepting a guilty plea from myself when I was by my own admission withdrawing from opiates and still under the influence of several tranquilizers and didn't really understand what I was pleading to.
There is something seriously wrong with the city jail and it needs to be fixed before someone else dies.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (7)
| TrackBack
By Stacey Hammond, Boulder
A wall is an ineffective approach to solving the problems of illegal immigration from Mexico to the United States.
This Speakout has not been edited By Stacey Hammond, Boulder
As a smoke stack peers across the distance, I sit and notice the smoke that floats over the bridge into the sky above my head. It then becomes evident to me that a border is arbitrary. It is socially constructed. If it cannot keep out the pollution, then really it is not a border at all. To make this border something real, something we can see instead of an imaginary line, the United States government is building a wall. A wall is an ineffective approach to solving the problems of illegal immigration from Mexico to the United States. There is a need for structural change that will take finding a solution at the source of the problem, which in this case is the Mexican economy.
Not only is a wall an inappropriate gesture but the cost of the wall is important to take into account when analyzing it as a solution to the illegal immigration difficulties. It is estimated that the completed wall will cost $74,000,000 (Robbins). The wall is treating a symptom of a problem rather than identifying and addressing the source. The source that needs to be reviewed is the Mexican economy. Since the United States is closely linked to the Mexican economy through policies such as NAFTA, we as US citizens should look at and evaluate our own policies as well. People's lives are affected when a select few that reside far away, sit and make decisions without understanding the reality that people live.
Throughout history, walls have not been successful and in this situation, it will not be either. If a moat with an undertow, a barren desert, or border patrol cannot keep people out, than a wall will not either. One must focus on the problem source and find a solution there instead of spending millions of dollars on deporting people or building a wall. What if we spent that money to help the Mexican government? Would that decrease illegal immigration into the U.S.? To tackle the problem we need to make it an issue of people not numbers. These people are economic refugees. It is our obligation to think about and focus on structural change instead of only alleviating the symptoms.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (8)
| TrackBack
By David Petersen, Durango
No matter what you think of By David Petersen
No matter what you think of Unrestricted legroom and cover are essential to elk through all seasons, and especially Former What's more, those who hunt with ATVs, and those who hunt in heavily motorized areas, A major But increasingly in the Western outdoorsman's mind, "access" also refers to too many motors in the backcountry and their negative impact on fair and equitable opportunities to enjoy traditional quiet-use outings on public lands. When crowds of motorized users spook and chase away wildlife, tear up the landscape, muddy streams and drown out nature's voice with far-reaching engine noise, those of us who work hard to gain access to these very values As award-winning Legitimate off-road users and organizations need to own up to the fact that the problem isn't merely ATV abuse, but overuse as well Working together, traditional sportsmen and motor By Barbara Beecher, Arvada
This Speakout has not been edited By Barbara Beecher, Arvada
A business owner must be able to run his/her legal business in a way that delivers a profit, else the business fails. Only simpletons and socialists never seem able to grasp the fundamental concept, that no business is viable unless profitable. Socialism ignores this concept which is why it fails every place it has been, and is being tried.
Smoking is not an illegal activity so smokers are not breaking any laws.
Business owners are not law enforcers. They are not the de facto policemen and women that anti-smoking ordinances or laws make of them. People like a cigarette with a cold beer or a hot cup of coffee. To Millions of people it is a simple pleasure at the end of a long hard day and this America. No one should have to hide in secret to do something that is legal.
There are other endeavors out there that would produce more beneficial results than the constant upset these select few do to millions of people's lives. Many businesses have been forced to close and many more will follow due to the non-smoking ban. The closing of these establishments has cost many people their jobs and their families must also pay the price because a few selfish zealots want to control what others do. That is wrong. It is bad for business and for the economy. It takes jobs and livelihoods away from people who are doing nothing illegal. Do our Legislators who entertain and pass these silly laws that restrain personal activities realize that they are actually destroying freedom?
Taking miniscule freedoms away, one by one as is happening, and expecting people to accept it is WRONG. And because we as citizens allowed others to take away the smaller freedoms will we also knuckle under when they take away the bigger freedoms? Probably. It begins by introducing the little things which people just accept and say, "It doesn't effect me." Then we start losing more and more of our freedom. When will it begin effecting our freedom of speech, the right to vote, how we worship, what kind of music we listen to, who we marry? We no longer have a democracy. We then have a dictatorship.
America is my Country, my home and I love the multitude of freedoms that our fore fathers worked hard to give us under The Constitution. We must guard these freedoms very carefully or we will lose them and all of those who have fought and died over the past two hundred years to protect these rights for us will have done so in vain and all we have left is our shame.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (9)
| TrackBack
By Rick Taylor, Athmar Park Neighorhood, Denver
This Speakout has not been edited By Rick Taylor, Athmar Park Neighorhood, Denver
I met Carol Campbell at the first meeting of the Athmar Park Neighborhood Association (APNA) in Southwest Denver in October 1991. She "stepped up to the plate" and nominated herself to be the newsletter editor and stated, "When people work together for a common goal something happens. A sense of purpose, a sense of control, a sense of direction. I think Athmar Park residents can utilize APNA to redirect our neighborhood in a more positive direction and to foster a real sense of community among us."
Within a month she published our first newsletter and distributed it to 3,000 households. Within a year she organized APNA's participation in Denver Digs Trees that has led to hundreds of trees being planted in Athmar Park and obtained a grant from Neighborhood Cultures of Denver to create a mural painted by local schoolchildren and to present an evening of music, dance and song performed at Rishel Middle School performed by children based on neighborhood history told to them by older residents.
In subsequent years Carol organized "Graffiti Busters", a group of local volunteers who gave up their Saturdays to paint over graffiti vandalism that led to the passing of the 1998 Anti-Graffiti Ordinance, and obtained another grant to construct mosaic tables at Aspgren and Huston Lake Parks. For Valverde School's 75th anniversary, she organized a book drive to restock the library.
Carol has never waited for others to lead. When an issue arises, she finds the solutions. As the chair of APNA's zoning committee, she spent countless hours assisting neighbors with code compliance issues and implemented the "Landlord Project" to foster cooperation between residents and owners of rental properties. She was a strong advocate of "Broken Windows" policing in 2005 after a series of crimes in Athmar Park that included the murder of a Denver police officer and her advocacy helped to convince the Denver city administration to implement "Broken Windows."
This year she is "stepping up to the plate" again to run for City Councilmember-at-Large. Typical of Carol, she has the courage of her convictions to take on two well-known and well-funded incumbents. She is unwilling to wait for a "safe" time to run for office and believes, strongly, that every election should be contested.
I strongly urge Denver voters to elect Carol Campbell to the Denver City Council. It is a mail-in ballot this year! Send them in to be received by May 1, 2007.
www.carolecampbell.com
Rick Taylor is former president, Athmar Park Neighborhood Association
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
By Addy M. Hansen, Colorado Springs
Dear Mayor Rivera: Sometimes everyone (even "titled" people such as yourself) but be held "accountable" for their words, deeds and actions....
This Speakout has not been edited By Addy M. Hansen, Colorado Springs
Dear Mayor Rivera: Sometimes everyone (even "titled" people such as yourself) but be held "accountable" for their words, deeds and actions....
So, in the "spirit" of accountability (which NO ONE LIKES - not just the "BIG NAMES" of this City/County/area): 1.) If you have "loved" being the Mayor of Colorado Springs so much - why did you run (unsuccessfully) for the 5th Congressional District Seat??? Do you (suddenly) LOVE being the Mayor of this City simply because you "lost" the other election?
2.) Why do you feel compelled to put a "desperation pitch" for Larry Small ("PLEASE vote for Larry...he really is a good guy")into you OWN/PERSONAL TV ads (which you/your campaign committee/office pays for) - but not Randy Purvis nor Bernie Herpin??? Do you think that Larry Small is in such "need" of your help???
3.) If the City of Colorado Springs is not accountable for this CSU customer's sewage drainage problem....(from today's Gazette article): "Even though Colorado Springs Utilities admits its blocked main line, clogged with tree roots, caused the problem, the city refuses to pay damages, which could reach $50,000."....then who/what is, Mayor Rivera???
4.) You say you want to "lead" this City - but a BIG part of leadership includes responsibility and accountability for mistakes, missteps and in-actions (when actions are required/necessary.) If you won't assume responsibility and/or hold yourself accountable for the many and (seemingly) on-going wrong-doings, mistakes, missteps and in-actions of the City of Colorado Springs - and neither will City Manager Lorne Kramer - then WHO, exactly, is the REAL, TRUE "leader"
of this City....and when will the citizens be able to count on their "leaders" to hold themselves responsible AND accountable for wrong-doing???
5.) You will win the upcoming election....mostly because you are the current Mayor and your opponents are not as "politically-savvy" or well-known as you.
But, you want SOMETHING ELSE - a "Higher-up" position.
Lorne Kramer just wants to retire (on his upcoming 65th Birthday) with his two (2) "cherry-picked"
retirement packages/benefits packages in place (one from CSPD and one from City Management) - and he will (no doubt) receive his wish - just as you will receive YOUR "wish" to be re-elected. But, I am not so sure that either of those wishes SHOULD be granted - because NEITHER one of them is warranted.
Four more years - and then MAYBE, just MAYBE the City will have found some "real leadership" - someone (some people) who WILL be willing to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.
Until then....we have you and Lorne Kramer...
(God?) (Heaven?) help us all....
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
By Bill Heldman, Arvada
I read with interest Brian Crecente's article on SecondLife (SL) in the Saturday, March 24, 2007 print edition of the Rocky Mountain News. While the article is timely, I believe that it missed a lot of detail (though providing numerous interesting screenshots) and may be somewhat misleading.
This Speakout has not been edited By Bill Heldman, Arvada
I read with interest Brian Crecente's article on SecondLife (SL) in the Saturday, March 24, 2007 print edition of the Rocky Mountain News. While the article is timely, I believe that it missed a lot of detail (though providing numerous interesting screenshots) and may be somewhat misleading.
May I add a few more informational elements that might be helpful for those interested in what I believe will become the new Internet-this 3D interactive environment they're calling the metaverse?
While the article concentrated a lot on the seedy side of SL I thought it was weak in mentioning many of the other efforts going on, most of which are good. For example, readers might want to know that:
Readers should be aware that there are other virtual worlds besides SL.
MTV's Virtual Laguna Beach (www.vlb.mtv.com By James M. Hagood, Lakewood
We read of all the great concern over the firings of 8 U. S Attorneys, in the second George W Bush Administration. This will play out, and politics will surround the issue. However, America should never forget the firing of Angela Wright, who had worked in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, as Director of public relations.
This Speakout has not been edited By James M. Hagood, Lakewood
We read of all the great concern over the firings of 8 U. S Attorneys, in the second George W Bush Administration. This will play out, and politics will surround the issue. However, America should never forget the firing of Angela Wright, who had worked in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, as Director of public relations.
Ex Senator Simpson(R, Wyo; Richard Cheney's master hunting best buddy) read Ms Wright's interview taken by the Senate Staff, over the phone as she was living in North Carolina. She had been fired, earlier. She was a political appointee, and could be fired on the spot for any reason.
However, her ex boss was Clarence Thomas, EEOC(ex) chairman. In 1991, during the Presidency of Bush Sr. The Senate was examining his fitness to be on the U. S. Supreme Court. Angela Wright stated in the Senate staff telephone interview that; 1) the short letter firing her gave no reason, 2) she spoke to Thomas on why she was fired. 3) he told her she had not fired career government workers--who are different than political appointees 4) Then, he did not fire her because of some claimed slur toward an other, in the statement provided to the Senate.
On Oct. 13, 1991, Angela Wright flew from North Carolina to Washington D. C., and was standing by to testify under oath in open Senate sessions, and had been subpoenaed to testify by the Senate. Instead, Senator Joe Biden(then chairman of the Judiciary Committee) sent her a letter, and noted her statement could be put in the record and would not be subject to being rebutted.
Based on that representation, she consented. At the time Scooter Libby's wife had been a main Senate Staffer for Senator Biden. It turns out Ms Wright had been duped. Later on, Alan Simpson attacked Angela Wright, and then for the first time, Clarence Thomas was asked why he had fired Angela Wright. He said because she called someone(no specifics) a f****t.. Yet she was barred from testifying under oath in the Senate Hearing to give her response from the attacks of Alan Simpson, and the reasons provided by Clarence Thomas. In 1991, Simpson had been lambasted in the press as using McCarthy like tactics, designed to quash the full truth.
Alan Simpson started out, as a person who pled guilty to destroying federal property in Wyoming, and was on probation(matters of public record, Wyo).
He likes to talk about second chances, used it in his Senate races-in Wyoming. In the instance of a black women from North Carolina, Ms Wright, she was not given even a first chance, and she denies that she did what Clarence Thomas claimed, under oath. Mr Thomas was barely confirmed as a Justice of the Supreme Court, by a very narrow margin. Even today, many people around America wonder on why Angela Wright was so badly treated in the U S. Senate, were they afraid of her sworn testimony in an open session ? What does that say on seeking the truth, and the firing of political appointees. With today's growing 2007 scandal on political Bush/ Rove firings, America might recall what happened to Angela Wright, and the fear not to address the full truth--in the Senate of the USA.
Clarence Thomas' wife worked for the Chamber of Commerce, an entity devoted to fighting fair working conditions for American workers.
Ask the Senate today, its members, are they for black women from the South having the right to testify before the U. S Senate; in this matter there is no limitation on the truth-but are some afraid to really find out what that truly was. And, ask them not to go for a flawed process to avoid the full truth-for America's sake, in the latest fishy U. S. Attorney firings ?
James M. Hagood is Ex Federal Attorney who has testified before Congress on the application of some laws, and he has testified in federal court as an expert witness on federal matters. He is a graduate( advanced law degree, LL'M) of George Washington University Law School. In 1971, Jim was awarded one of the most prestigious fellowships in America from the Government of the U. S., to get an advanced law degree, and has worked with U. S. attorney's offices in at least 4 states, over a period of 16 years. He is currently a private attorney in the Denver , Colorado area.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By Paul J Schroder, PAN Congressional Coordinator Colorado First District
I am writing to remind you that April is Parkinson’s disease awareness month. The fact that Colorado has the second highest concentration of Parkinson’s disease (PD) in this country makes this an important topic to all Colorado people.
This Speakout has not been edited By Paul J Schroder, PAN Congressional Coordinator Colorado First District
I am writing to remind you that April is Parkinson’s disease awareness month. The fact that Colorado has the second highest concentration of Parkinson’s disease (PD) in this country makes this an important topic to all Colorado people. My daily struggles to just be able to move; I am now 46 years old and I was diagnosed at age 35; makes this a very important topic for me.
Parkinson’s disease has been given more coverage since people like Janet Reno and Michael J Fox have admitted having the disease. This coverage, while welcome, is only telling a small part of the story. Who can forget the controversy that arose from Rush Limbaugh’s comment about Michael J Fox. I personally know that stress levels play a part in how this disease manifests itself in individuals.
I tend to get much more dyskinetic; involuntary movements usually caused by the medications that are used to alleviate the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease. Parkinson’s disease seems to have quite unique traits depending on the person afflicted. Some patients can go for years taking minimal doses of medication. In my case after seven years I was taking 21 pills per day, and I was never sure if my body would react to the dose or if it would remain rigid.
It was 2004 when that I opted to have Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) surgery. The surgery took the whole day to map and place the DBS probes in my head in just the right place. My experiences with PD and the DBS procedure are documented in the Award winning film “Shaken” produced and directed by independent film-maker Deborah Fryer from Boulder. I have attached a file that is the cover jacket for the film. For more information you can go to www.lilafilms.com and click on Shaken.
Unfortunately I developed an infection in my head last June and I had to have the DBS unit removed entirely. They did that so the infection could not travel down the probes into the brain. Today I am taking 30 pills per day and dreaming of getting the DBS surgery done again. That could happen in April which would be somewhat ironic as it is Parkinson’s disease awareness month.
I tell you all this as I need you to understand that I am as close to an expert on the patient side of PD as you are likely to find. I am also the Parkinson’s Action Network (PAN) Congressional Coordinator for Colorado First District and I have been to Washington D.C. with PAN for over seven years now. I would like to make myself available to you as a resource on Parkinson’s disease. I was thinking perhaps one of your reporters could do an article on Parkinson’s Disease Awareness Month for the Newspaper that would bring some more awareness of this chronic, progressive, and debilitating disease to the Community. I am also attaching a photo of the Colorado contingent of PAN meeting with Congresswoman Dianne DeGette this last February in Washington D.C.
Thank You for your time and hopefully I will be hearing from you on what information you may need for an article about Parkinson’s Disease Awareness Month in April.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By Nate Braden, from Iraq
RAMADI: Major General M is the commander of the 7th Iraqi Army Division. He is a short, well-mannered gentleman who is quick with a smile and bears an uncanny resemblance to Dustin Hoffman. He ushers you into his spacious office at the 7th Division headquarters in Ramadi and offers sweet tea - the customary drink that is the lubricant for any conversation in the Middle East.
This Speakout has not been edited By Nate Braden, from Iraq
RAMADI: Major General M is the commander of the 7th Iraqi Army Division. He is a short, well-mannered gentleman who is quick with a smile and bears an uncanny resemblance to Dustin Hoffman. He ushers you into his spacious office at the 7th Division headquarters in Ramadi and offers sweet tea - the customary drink that is the lubricant for any conversation in the Middle East. Two enormous flags are crossed behind his desk: one of Iraq and the other of his division. A flat screen TV on the opposite wall rolls out a steady stream of news.
General M took charge of the 7th Division last year after the previous commander was relieved for corruption. He was a career army officer in Saddam's time but was sacked by the coalition after it dissolved the army in 2003. When the Ministry of Defense offered him this post he jumped at the chance. "I'm tired of seeing foreign interference in my country. These al-Qaida terrorists, the Iranians, the Syrians - all of them should stay out of our affairs." The irony of condemning outsiders for interfering in Iraq while sitting amidst his American military advisors may be lost upon the general. Nevertheless, although he refers to the 2003 American-led invasion as "a liberation," he longs for the day when his country can stand on its own two feet without any outside help. A native of al-Qaim, a town on the Syrian border 200 miles northwest of Ramadi, the general is a sheikh of the al-Bumahel tribe. A product of Iraq's secular tradition, he is an avowed enemy of Islamic fundamentalism in general and al-Qaida in particular: "they mix religion with politics and this is a very bad combination. We've got to separate the two if we want to get anywhere. Before 2003, no one paid attention to who was Sunni and who was Shi'a. It was only when the terrorists incited this violence that it became an issue." He is personally offended by what the insurgents have done to his native Anbar Province. The glass factory across the Euphrates River from his headquarters has lain dormant since 2003. "If we got that up and running again we could employ 3,000 people in Ramadi. Think what that would do to get this community back on its feet. The schools here are very old and almost all of them need to be rebuilt. Only 20% of the people have access to health care. The dam at Haditha used to provide power to the entire province; now it's only operating at one-third capacity. There's a lack of clean drinking water. Economic activity can be revived in this region, and quickly, provided we have stability." The general's chief American advisor, Marine Colonel Scott Cottrell, agrees, and notes that there's been a significant shift among the local sheikhs in favor of the Baghdad government. "They're fed up with AQI [al-Qaida in Iraq] violence and are starting to throw their weight behind the government, which has greatly improved security in Ramadi." Proof of this was seen in a recent 7th Division recruiting drive in Anbar. The last recruiting campaign six months ago netted precisely one volunteer. On March 17, Col. Cottrell and Major General M visited a local sheikh in the town of Hit, 50 miles northwest of Ramadi. The sheikh had previously been non-committal when it came to supporting Baghdad, but al-Qaida forays through his territory and attacks on his people had changed his mind. When the two left their meeting they had a list of over 700 local men the sheikh had pledged to recruit for the 7th Division. "That was the ultimate commitment" Cottrell said, "what more can you invest than the lives of your sons?" The foremost political problem in Anbar now is how to balance the traditional power of the sheikhs with the democratic mandate earned by local officials in the last elections. Because the Sunnis boycotted those they are not popularly represented except through the sheikhs, but of those who did vote, the majority elected Mahmoun Alwani as Governor of Anbar. Both command some authority, and the trick is to thread their respective mandates together. "It's all about wasta (influence)," says Major Greg Black, an advisor on Cottrell's team, "who has it and who doesn't." Right now Mahmoun and the main sheikh in Ramadi, Sattar, both have wasta. Getting Sattar's support was a huge political victory for the central government, prompting Prime Minister Maliki's visit here two weeks ago. Achieving this delicate balance has been a hard-won success for American efforts in Iraq and contributed to the recent improvement in Ramadi's security. It makes life much easier for everyone involved, especially the local citizenry. "There are lot of good things happening out here," Cottrell insists, "You just have to look for them." By Trina L.C. Sonnenberg, Nucla
In 2005, the San Miguel Power Association [SMPA]urged the consumer/owners of the co-operative to vote to deregulate the power company. Their efforts met with success. San Miguel Power is no longer regulated by the Public Utilities Commission [PUC]. What exactly does that mean?
This Speakout has not been edited By Trina L.C. Sonnenberg, Nucla
In 2005, the San Miguel Power Association [SMPA]urged the consumer/owners of the co-operative to vote to deregulate the power company. Their efforts met with success. San Miguel Power is no longer regulated by the Public Utilities Commission [PUC]. What exactly does that mean?
The PUC has full economic and service regulatory control over public utility providers, such as SMPA. Since being deregulated, the PUC no longer has this control over San Miguel Power. This means that they are self governing.
The purpose of deregulation is to promote competition; that is to say, it was meant to allow utility companies to be more competitive in regard to their rates and services. Being that SMPA has no competition here, why did they push so hard to deregulate? Their service area has no other electrical service option for consumers, except to self generate power.
While campaigning for deregulation, SMPA stressed that they would not raise our energy rates. They stated that rate control was not their motivation for deregulation. Then what was their motivation, does anyone remember? All I recall hearing was their insistence that rates would not increase.
When, the deregulation issue was put to a vote, the rate per KWH for electricity was .105203, which is basically, 10.5 cents per KWH. Following the passing of deregulation, (August - September 2005 billing) SMPA increased its rates to .106836 per KWH, which is edging toward 11 cents per KWH. Then, for the November - December, 2005, billing period, the rates went up to .116283 (close to 12 cents). Now, the rate they are charging for electricity is.121293 (13 cents). That comes to three increases, in rates, after they said they wouldn't do that. Rather than deregulating in the spirit of being more competitive, the deregulation served only to increase SMPA's profit margin. Do you feel cheated, or lied to?
Did you know that the national average rate for electricity is 8.14 cents per KWH? The Colorado state average is 7.64 cents per KWH. So, why are we paying close to 13 cents per KWH?
DMEA has listed its residential rates online. They are as follows:
Energy - 0 to 1400 kWh (1000 kWh in 2006) $0.09285
Energy - over 1400 kWh (1001 kWh in 2006) $0.07732
DMEA buys their electricity from Tri-State, just like SMPA does, so why are we paying so much more than DMEA customers?
Additionally, several people that I have been in contact with, noticed a major usage jump on their power bill, in the month of February, myself included. My usage went from a ten year average of 34 KWH per day to 64 KWH per day, for February. The issue here is not the rate I am paying, but the amount of power actually being used. I couldn't understand the jump, since I am actually using fewer electrical appliances than I have in the past. SMPA came to re-read my meter, and then replaced it because it was old. They tested the meter and declared it to be in working order; therefore, they had no explanation as to why my usage metered so high. At first, the cold was blamed as the culprit, but I heat my home with wood. Every excuse they came up with, I had an answer for, but since the meter checked out, I am sentenced to pay an electric bill I feel is not right. The stories I have heard from others, regarding their own recent increase in usage, is very similar to my own. No explanation.
Perhaps we, as a community of consumers, should discuss the re-regulation of SMPA. Obviously they seem to have taken self-regulation to the bank.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By Tom Peterson, executive director, Colorado Asphalt Pavement Association
The harsh winter of 2006-2007 is giving way to a beautiful spring throughout Colorado.
However, the evidence of the winter weather is very noticeable – especially the out cropping of
potholes in parking lots, city streets, and state highways.
This Speakout has not been edited By Tom Peterson, executive director, Colorado Asphalt Pavement Association
The harsh winter of 2006-2007 is giving way to a beautiful spring throughout Colorado.
However, the evidence of the winter weather is very noticeable – especially the out cropping of
potholes in parking lots, city streets, and state highways. The prolonged standing moisture of the
winter storms this past December and January and subsequent freeze thaw action have greatly
accelerated damage to our pavements. It is not uncommon for some pavements to be seemingly
okay one day and a candidate for the “Pothole of the Week” the next. The bad news is that many
authorities – facing the squeeze of increased costs and shrinking budgets - have chosen to defer
maintenance and have started down a spiraling path of deteriorating infrastructure and
increasingly costly backlogs of required repairs.
The combination of traffic and water are the primary causes of the pothole problem. Water
erodes the base or underlying material making the pavement unable to withstand the weight of the
traffic. The more water and the higher the traffic levels the sooner the problem. Most authorities
have a very sophisticated approach to managing road improvement dollars and recognize the
benefit of keeping “the good roads good.” However, with inadequate funding, it is difficult to use
the right repair strategy at the right time and authorities are forced more into a worst-first
approach and reacting to the biggest problems –which tend to be the biggest potholes.
Pavements checkered with potholes are typically worn out, beat up, old pavements that need to be
rebuilt from the bottom up. Unfortunately, the costs to rebuild a pavement are much higher than
resurfacing or keeping a good road in good condition. Most authorities, including CDOT, have
found that the cost to rebuild a pavement in poor condition is 5 to 10 times the cost to maintain a
good road in good condition.
As we enter the heart of pothole breeding season and this year could be one of the worst on
record, it is easy to point fingers and question the materials used, the quality of construction, or
the pothole repair practices of maintenance forces. However, we cannot over look the fact that a
primary cause of the pothole problem is a lack of funding. This prevents an aggressive
preventive maintenance program in which authorities can use a “good roads cost less” approach
and where the maintenance forces are not forced to respond to the latest citing of the pothole
crater publicized in the newspaper or discussed on talk radio.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
By Brian Vicente
By Brian Vicente
New Mexico’s legislation stands to improve on Colorado’s law in at least one important way. The New Mexican law charges its state health department with establishing distribution centers These centers will be regulated by the Department of Health and distribute this product in secure, on-site facilities.
This stands in sharp contrast to Colorado’s law Finding safe access to medical marijuana has been an ongoing struggle for patients in Colorado. Since the Left without guidance on how to procure medical marijuana, ill individuals are forced to turn to the black market To help stem prohibition-related violence and foster safe access, the Colorado legislature should take a note from our southern neighbors and enact strict regulations around medical marijuana Brian Vicente is a criminal defense attorney in Denver and the executive director of Sensible Colorado, a medical marijuana advocacy group.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| TrackBack
Raised to be safe with guns
Permission to defend yourself
John and Teresa Heinz Kerry in Denver
Go home illegals
. . but went on to wish Turney had done something different anyway.
Support for Montessori schools lacking
Water wells the cure
Senselessly killed by a bullet
The burdens of illegal invasion
Local control over sex education
Conflict is inevitable, violence is not
Moore op-ed self-serving
Eliminate Discriminatory Rate Factors
Double standards for Imus
The two-crossword Friday
Vote to close Life Skills Center of Denver
Playing pool in Denver
Reading the only sure thing in life
Rutgers team has more class than Imus
Whistling Past the Graveyard
The Family and the Legislature
Smoking ban and property rights
The City Beautiful movement: Then and Now
Professional certification for interior design
Wildlife and the Oil and Gas Commission
Iraq is worth a war
What's not to love? A lot
“Happy Birthday, Thomas Jefferson”
On April 13th every American should pay tribute to one of our greatest Founding Fathers, born that spring day in 1743: Thomas Jefferson. This farmer, scholar, and third U.S. president lovingly carved the government and character of his precious gem, America.
Rep. Merrrifield's views on charters
During my thirty years of teaching, how often I heard business owners complain that they were having difficulty finding employees who could write a clear paragraph describing a billing error or internal problem of some sort. It was worse, of course, when their employees could not properly convey an idea in writing to a potential customer or client.
Colorado Springs mayor's race
The Supreme Court Finds CO2 Guilty as Charged
Jail policies endanger people
History Tells All: Walls Don't Work
Smokers doing nothing illegal
Carol Campbell for Denver City Council
Colorado Springs mayor's race
Right to testify
April is Parkinson's disease awareness month
Have You Been Shocked?
Spring pothole season could be worst ever