We just knew the teachers unions would try to have the final say in this crucial education reform matter.

    According to Tampabay.com, the Florida Education Association (NEA and AFT) has advised its local representatives not to sign the “memorandums of understanding” that are required for individual school districts to participate in the state’s “Race to the Top” effort.

   How fair is that? An entire school board can vote to have their district participate in “Race to the Top,” but the lack of a single union signature can completely block the effort.

    That probably means some schools will be left out in the cold if Florida wins a federal RTTT grant and money is dispersed to individual districts. If the unions block RTTT participation in enough districts, the state’s grant application could be seriously jeopardized. 

    We at the Education Action Group Foundation believe the people of Florida should tell the unions to stop trying to destroy a very promising reform effort, and stop trying to keep sorely-needed federal dollars from the state’s public schools.

     Teachers unions dominated the K-12 educational landscape throughout the U.S. for decades, and the result was a mediocre system producing students who fell behind their peers in other nations.

     Now reformers want to give our kids a better opportunity, and the unions are threatening to block that effort by refusing to allow their local representatives to sign off.

     If Florida does not receive a “Race to the Top” federal grant, everyone will know who to blame. If the grant comes through, but some districts are prevented from getting a share of it, everyone will know who to blame.

    We’ve heard that the American Federation of Teachers is the more politically saavy of the two major teachers unions. Supposedly its leadership can read the writing on the wall and knows how to pick its battles carefully.

    We’re starting to believe that may be true, following the surprisingly easy ratification of a tough new teachers contract in the Detroit school district.

    By a vote of 3,578 to 2,031, the Detroit Federation of Teachers accepted terms that will force members to surrender $10,000 apiece over 40 pay periods, to help the cash-strapped school district survive. Employees will be refunded when they leave the district.

   A few weeks ago a positive vote on the tenative contract seemed like a remote possibility. Hundreds of DFT members attended a loud protest rally at Cobo Hall, and many teachers seemed unwilling to accept such a major sacrifice.

    But DFT President Keith Johnson, who has always presented himself as more of a radical union leader, helped the process along by telling the membership that the concession was necessary. National AFT officials also went on record praising the contract.

    The union leadership probably recognized that the soil was not fertile for a successful battle in Detroit, home to one of the nation’s worst school districts. Test scores have been low, the dropout rate has been high, and the state was forced to appoint an emergency financial manager to roll heads in the district.

    We’re guessing that everyone, starting with AFT President Randi Weingarten, realized that a quiet settlement  in Detroit was the best public relations move the union could make. Just by coincidence, it will also be good for the district and its students.

    Good call, AFT. Now maybe Detroit Public Schools can get down to the business of educating kids, for a change.

   We know how liberals, particularly those in the education establishment, like to say that Corporate America dictates public policy through campaign contributions.

   A new report, prepared by the Center for Responsive Politics and the National Institute on Money in State Politics, does a good job of dispelling that myth.

   As it turns out, the National Education Association was by far the nation’s biggest political contributor during the 2008 election cycle. The NEA dropped a cool $56.3 million on its list of favored liberal candidates at various levels of government, which was about $12 million more than the runner-up contributor spent.

   The American Federation of Teachers was also busy writing contribution checks, to the tune of $13.8 million. And the two unions joined forces to contribute about $3.3 million to various campaigns in a handful of states.

    What was that again? Our government has been bought and paid for by Corporate America?

    The Education Intelligence Agency summed up the true situation this way: “America’s two teachers unions outspent AT & T, Goldman Sachs, Wal-Mart, Microsoft, General Electric, Chevron, Pfizer, Morgan Stanley, Lockheed Martin, FedEx, Boeing, Merrill Lynch, Exxon Mobil, Lehman Brothers and the Walt Disney Corporation combined.”

    That’s ironic when you consider what the unions got in return for their huge investment. We’re certain they were excited on election night last November, with a Democrat headed to the White House, big Democratic majorities taking over Congress, and Democrats controlling  statehouses across the nation.

     But alas, Democratic officeholders at every level have turned on the unions, despite their generous campaign gifts. The President is demanding Republican-style education reforms through his “Race to the Top” initiative, and state officials across the map are scrambling to cooperate and quality for federal money.

    So I guess we can’t say that the teachers unions are dictating public policy with huge campaign expenditures. They certainly tried, but their pet politicians ate up all the treats, then turned around a bit their masters.

       AFT President Randi Weingarten’s plan to transform American schools into virtual community/political action centers that are deeply involved with issues other than education seems to have caught on at the state level.

    We were afraid of that.

     In October, Weingarten gave an interview suggesting that teachers unions and public schools should become centers for the advocacy of political issues and social reform.

     We shuddered when we heard her say, “We have to do more than simply instruct children seven hours a day.”

    Now Judy Hale, head of the AFT in West Virginia, has published an editorial in the Charleston Gazette, calling for public schools to be transformed into virtual community social service centers, offering child care, a wide array of vocational classes, physical and mental health services and recreation  programs for the whole family to enjoy.

      “Let’s make our schools the focal point for exercise, sports, arts, culture and community service,” Hale writes.

      Granted, Hale’s proposals are a bit less discomforting than Weingarten’s. At least she doesn’t seem to want to use our schools as staging areas for a Marxist revolution. But we still found a few flaws with her argument.

      First of all, many schools around the nation already offer programs like the ones she mentions. And schools are pretty much broke these days, so funding for any new programs would be a real problem for many. And even when schools offer the types of programs she’s advocating, we keep hearing stories about union teachers refusing to participate unless they’re paid accordingly.

      But we’re mostly troubled by the concept of stretching the role of public schools at a time when their primary function – instructing American students – needs to be the absolute focus. Our children are not keeping academic pace with their peers in other countries. That’s the problem that needs to be addressed, before any others.

   We simply wish the teachers unions would concentrate on making sure that the primary task of teaching kids is performed passionately and correctly. That’s priority number one, and if some teachers are more interested in advocating for political causes or becoming community organizers, perhaps they should not be teachers at all.

   The Detroit Federation of Teachers’ upcoming vote on a proposed $10,000 pay deference proposal will show how serious its members are about keeping their sinking school district afloat.

   About a third of the union’s 7,000 members booed and chanted “no” during a meeting at Detroit’s Cobo Center this week over a tentative agreement that asks teachers to take a $250 deduction from their biweekly paychecks over the next two years, starting in January.

   The deferment is part of a three-year tentative deal that would save the district $62.8 million, keep it from filing for bankruptcy, and help minimize job cuts on the horizon. The money will be returned to teachers when they leave the district.

   The deferment is a big request, to be sure, but it will be a true test of whether union members are serious about keeping the district alive, or if the school system is simply an ATM for the DFT.

   But judging by the outcry at Cobo Sunday, getting enough “yes” votes over the next two weeks won’t be easy.

   It appears that teachers either don’t appreciate the gravity of DPS’s financial situation or don’t care. Many who attended the two-hour meeting dismissed talks of bankruptcy –  which would essentially crush the union  - as scare tactics.

   “It’s intimidation,” Cassandra Davis, a speech therapist, told the Detroit Free Press.

     We believe Ms. Davis, and others pledging to vote against the agreement, need to sit up straight and pay attention.

   The district reported a $219-million budget shortfall this summer and DFT Executive Vice President Mark O’Keefe told the Detroit Free Press that the true deficit is more than twice that figure. It is by far the biggest deficit for any school in the state.

   Even the union’s top brass finally are seeing the big picture.

   “I understand nobody ever likes to have to give up something, but, ladies and gentlemen, here is the reality of our existence,” the Free Press quoted DFT President Keith Johnson as saying.

   We are encouraged that Robert Bobb, the state-appointed emergency financial manager for DPS, is making some headway by proposing tangible, reasonable compromises that could pull the district out of the red.

   It remains to be seen whether the union is willing to work with him, or sit by and allow its cash cow to die.

Undeterred by stubbornly high unemployment rates, and a stimulus plan that has fallen flat, talk of a second stimulus package is growing louder.  But to shed the unsuccessful “stimulus” moniker, Democrats and government labor unions have adopted a “jobs plan.”

Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist who’s never seen a government expenditure he didn’t like, today points to a “study” by the Economic Policy Institute, which alleges spending $40 billion over 3 years could create about a million “public-service” jobs.

In other words, Krugman and EPI would see fit to simply create government jobs, instead of trying to help the private sector.  That makes sense, given who supports EPI.

The Service Employees International Union, the American Federation of Teachers, and the National Education Association have kicked in nearly $2 million in their members’ dues dollars over the last couple years to fund EPI’s research, according to financial reports filed with the federal government and found at ACORNcracked.com and AFTexposed.com.

That’s funny, they’re all government employee unions.  And they funded a study calling for government jobs to be created.

And Krugman takes EPI at face value.

What is the bigger lesson here, Krugman’s penchant for being a shill for proponents of bigger government or EPI producing “research” that will benefit its funders?  Both are an unpleasant reality for them.

If the Obama administration and liberals in general were interested in actually helping the economy, they would promote solutions based on free-market principles.  Instead, growing government is their solution to the problem.

Isn’t it telling that both SEIU and AFT attended the Obama jobs summit, according to Fox News.

But back to Krugman.  He admits creating a million government jobs would have consequences:

All of this would cost money, probably several hundred billion dollars, and raise the budget deficit in the short run. But this has to be weighed against the high cost of inaction in the face of a social and economic emergency.

But as White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”  And sadly, the solution is invariably bigger government.

    AFT President Randi Weingarten may have inadvertantly put her finger on one of the major problems with public education today.

    During an Oct. 28  forum at the Center for American Progress, Weingarten told the assembled panel that teachers unions, along with the general labor movement and the nation’s public schools, should be agents for social justice. She said “we have to do more than simply instruct children seven hours a day” and that “community schools should be the hub of the community.”

    We suppose she means that our public schools, and the people who teach in them, should be actively engaged in political issues that have little or nothing to do with education –  like abortion, gay marriage and the sort.  That’s all fine and good, to a point. We live in a free society, where labor unions and their members can spout off about anything, just like the rest of us.

   But in their zeal to use our schools as agents for social justice, we hope Weingarten and friends don’t forget that schools exist, first and foremost, to teach children. We hope AFT teachers put most of their energy into those seven hours a day when they are supposed to be instructing kids.

    Test scores in recent years tell us that American students are falling behind their peers in many countries, particularly in the crucial areas of science and math. Perhaps if the AFT, one the largest and most powerful education organizations in the nation, focused more on that problem, rather than the redistribution of American wealth or the constitutional rights of transvestites, teachers and student performance would improve.

    Send the right message to your members, Randi. Tell them their first priority is the academic development and improvement of their students. If the union is so concerned about creating a level social playing field for minority kids, as you claim, then you should focus on helping those kids succeed in school, so they can graduate and successfully make their way in the world.

   Your way doesn’t seem to be working. While the AFT has supposedly been focused on social justice for the poor and minorities, it has continued to represent teachers, and fervently resist reform efforts,  in three of the worst school districts in the nation - Detroit, Washington D.C. and New York, all of which have heavy concentrations of minority students.  The dropout rate in those districts is huge, so thousands of children never get the chance to improve and ”join the middle class,” as Weingarten put it.   

   The AFT should give those kids a real helping hand by assisting in the reform of their schools, so they can get a quality education, or offering them access to alternative schools that are focused on learning.