President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
July 20, 2008 02:43 AM UTC
43 Comments
It would be a shame to hand Romanoff’s seat to a trojan horse republican who’s chief qualification for office is that he’s taken lots of pictures with quasi celebrities and good looking women at his fundraiser/coctail parties.
I prefer Lois (I was a Tom Russell guy) but I’ll take Liz.
CrazyOkie & Danny,
I normally don’t respond to posts on here attacking Josh and given both of your numerous posts attacking Josh, I am not posting to persuade either of you or to engage in a debate here on Pols as you have made clear your support of Lois and animosity toward Josh over the past 6+ months. That said, for the benefit of any others who may stumble upon this diary, I felt compelled to correct a number of things you have posted in this diary and in a number of previous posts.
I would encourage anybody who is interested in learning about the candidates in their own words to visit each of their websites. Liz & Lois’ sites are linked above and Josh’s can be visited at http://www.HanflingForColorado… where you can read about Josh’s background, his views on the issues and the endorsements from a number of elected Democrats and community leaders who know and are supporting Josh. You can also do a side-by-side comparison of the candidates via PoliticsWest at http://voterguide.politicswest…
Regarding the statement that Josh “appears to have quite a bit of family money.” If he does, I certainly haven’t seen it in this race. Josh has raised a healthy amount which has come from more than 560 individual contributors with an average donation of less than $250 and no single check of over $400.
As to your belief that you “seriously doubt Josh is out campaigning this afternoon,” I can tell everybody with certainty that he was. Josh was out today for 8+hrs as he is every weekend and he is out after work every weekday evening (or at least those that we don’t have campaign events and neighborhood get-togethers).
The comment that Josh’s “chief qualification” are the pictures taken at charity events is one that I’ve seen posted repeatedly and have not, until now, felt the need to reply. It is true that Josh is involved with a number of charities and non-profits in town where there are frequently photographers. Josh’s qualifications however, stem from his 15+ years of work as a small businessman where he has built and/or revitalized a number of businesses, dealing with the real-world challenges of growing a business and meeting payroll through good & bad economic times, always providing healthcare for his employees and finding ways to succeed as small businessman. In the non-profit world, his involvement extends far beyond the work you mention fundraising for dozens of charities. Josh not only sits on the boards of more than a dozen organizations, he is the founder and chair of the Friends of the Denver Fire Department and the Denver Justice Council and serves in senior leadership capacity with a number of other organizations.
I have written on here previously and will say again that I think HD-6 is fortunate to have three great candidates running to succeed Speaker Romanoff. Both Liz & Lois have long records of service and I commend anybody willing to throw themselves into the fire of running for public office. On 90% of the issues, there is little ground between the three candidates. The decision for voters is one of weighing those small differences between the three on the issues and who can be the most effective voice for them in the State House to bring about real progress and change. Liz & Lois each have years of experience with the political process and inside Colorado government. Josh brings a similar amount of experience in the non-profit world and as a small businessman.
As I started by saying, I post infrequently and am not looking to get into a back and forth on Pols, but welcome the chance to speak directly with anybody about my own personal reasons for working with and supporting Josh.
I again extend my invitation to anybody who is interested in learning about Josh from Josh himself to contact him via the website linked above. He would be more than happy to talk or get together to hear your ideas and concerns and to share his. CrazyOkie & Danny, I hope that if Josh does win the primary you’ll accept my invitation to get together so that Josh can hear from you as we head into the general in November.
Berrick Abramson,
Campaign Manager
Hanfling For Colorado HD-6
Did he or did he not give money to Rick O’Donnell three weeks after he became a “democrat?
Those are the political issues
On policy I have seen him at forums and he seems out of his depth, there is little nuance in his “On 90% of the issues, there is little ground between the three candidates.”
As to his business experience, since I am unfamiliar with any of the businesses he has started how about a few simple questions.
1. How many full time employees
2. What is the Gross revenue
3. What is the size of the assets
4. Where did he get the capital for his businesses
5. On the businesses he sold what’s his ROIC
Anybody can call themselves a successful business man. Me, I look at the source of the capital and how successfully it was used. Normally I wouldn’t ask business related questions, but it is what he is claiming qualifies him to be elected.
I think he simply decided he couldn’t win as a Republican, changed his party and started building up endorsements by trading on his philanthropic activities.
Mr. Berrick, Voo mus anser deese question now! Vee know you not really Party man, but part of problem. Vee know your kind and assign many to Siberia.
Besides you are confusing your dictatorships: Don’t do Russians with a German accent.
What is the deal with the Hebrew reference, are you an anti-semite as well as being anti labor? Funny thing is folks with German accents called Nazi’s also had problems with both jews and organized labor.
The fact that you rush to Hanfling’s defense also speaks poorly about Hanfling.
Danny, Frankly this is why I avoid prolonged back-and-forths on here or any blog. This though I have to respond. As a Jew myself, working for a Jewish candidate who is active in the Jewish community and fighting anti-semitism and defamation, I find your attempt to link Nazi’s, anti-semitism and defense of Josh Hanfling to be beyond classless and basis itself to end this dialog. Should anybody else wish to discuss Josh’s candidacy, please feel free to contact me directly.
For all the faults I percieve of Josh, that is not one of them. I know of Josh’s faith and particular involvement at national Jewish.
Libertad was calling me a communist but immplying I was a Nazi. I find that disgusting.
While I don’t find Libertad’s politics to rise to that level of disgust, his anti labor rants are the only thing he posts on. Why is he rushing to Hanflings defense? Does Hanfling’s politics match Libertad’s anti labor positions?
I know things get said in the heat of typing and appreciate your note. I found th comments offensive as well. No, Josh’s politics certainly do not in any way match Libertad’s from what I’ve read of his posts. Josh may not tow the union line lock-step 100% of the time, but the vast majority of the time he is right there with their goals and with working families. As somebody who does talk to people on both sides of the aisle, Josh spent a lot of time trying to get the backers of 47 to drop it entirely – unfortunately they were too pig-headed about it and now Josh is out vocally against the initiative.
they really didn’t care for us queer folks either
Though it sounds better in the original German.
Those are interesting stats, but isn’t the maximum any one donor can contribute to the primary race for state rep $200, and the aggregate for the primary and general election $400.
Candidates often accept the full $400 during a primary, then have to pay back $200 if they don’t make it to the general.
There are actually some exceptions to the $400. Lois accepted the voluntary limits and can only raise $69k but she can take $600 from any individual. Any of them can take $4,000 from small donor committees which so far only Liz has done (4k from COPIC insurance group).
I appreciate your thoughtful response. I have one question… He seems to be campaigning from the “left” based on all of his issue responses on his website. For someone who was a registered Republican for most of his adult life, I assume that his views have changed recently. How did this dramatic transformation occur?
Thank you CrazyOkie. Please note that I post this as an individual supporter of Josh’s and not officially on his behalf.
I would not say that he is “campaigning from the ‘left'” as much as he is speaking to what he believes and wants to fight for if elected. I can’t tell you what exactly is or was in Josh’s heart or mind over the years, but I can speak with absolute confidence about the man I have come to know and am proud to support. As Josh (and his parents) will tell the story, Josh, like many do, rebelled against his parents when he was young (who were lifelong Dems) growing up – whether it was being a Yankees fan or registering as a republican. When Josh went to college, he studied business – like many in the time, he registered as an R because, at the time, the republicans were doing a great job at the time of convincing people that they were the only party who supported the free market and capitalism. The fact is that for most of his adult life, he has been supporting Democrats, fighting for the very ideals that our party stands for and has been living, acting and investing his own time as a staunch Rocky Mountain Democrat. As he tells it, he never had real cause to change that registration until he wanted to vote for Chris Romer in his primary race. Not withstanding that much delayed change in formal registration, Josh’s beliefs (and the candidates & causes he has supported going back to Salazar’s run for AG and Ritter’s run for D.A.) have been deeply rooted in the Democratic party and ideology.
Danny, as I previously posted, I am more than aware of your hostility toward Josh and your admiration for Tom Russell who began the “Trojan horse” talking points and I have previously addressed a number of the issues you continue to raise. You have made clear your feelings about Josh and it is equally clear that no amount of discussion will alter those so, as I stated previously, I am not going to engage in a debate here or a series of Q&A with you. I respect your support of Lois (and previously of Tom) and we simply disagree on who can best address the challenges we face in Colorado. I have been working to help elect Democrats since I was a teenager drawn into politics to work on Gary Hart’s ’88 campaign, through returning to Colorado a few years ago to manage the home stretch of Bill Winter’s campaign against Tancredo and a dozen others along the way. Among all of the campaigns with which I’ve been involved, I am as proud to stand with Josh as I am any Democrat with whom I’ve worked. I take very seriously the decision to get involved with any campaign and am proud to be supporting Josh Hanfling for HD-6.
As to Danny’s question about the donation to O’Donnell (which was absolutely something I wanted/needed an explanation of myself), as I have previously replied when you have brought this up on Pols, a good friend of Josh’s (who is a very well known Democratic activist in Colorado) was dating O’Donnell at the time and asked Josh, as a personal favor, to donate to an event she was doing and Josh did. I wish he hadn’t, but knowing Josh as I have come to over the past few years, I will not watch him be attacked or assailed and it be suggested that donation reflects his core beliefs just as I would not attack Liz for having worked as a staffer for a Republican in the State Senate or Lois for the times she describes having reached across the aisle. Josh’s record over the years shows where his heart lies – his other contributions include to Feeley, Lautenberg, Shriver, Strickland, Durbin, McFayden, Joe Rice, Buffie McFayden, Jill Conrad, Karen Middleton, Ken Gordon, Bill Ritter, Ken Salazar and a number of other Dems here in Colorado and around the country.
Thanks for the explaination (again).
You didn’t explain about his business experience. I heard somewhere that his first company went bankrupt to avoid a paying a lawsuit. Is this true?
If so that’s exactly the kind of fresh ideas from business experience we need to bring to a government in fiscal crisis (that’s sarcasm).
Danny, I’m not aware at all of the situation you suggest that you “heard somewhere” about and I did a fair amount of “internal oppo” research on Josh before coming on board (as I do with any candidate) and found nothing of the sort nor am I aware of anything whatsoever like that. The first business he started was a wood recycling company he started in college that grew to have first year revenues of over $1mill, 9 employees and no BK or legal issues that I found in any records. He has been involved with a number of businesses since then (see the About Josh on his website). If you’d like to e-mail me, I’d be happy to get in touch to discuss Josh’s business experience and/or to set up a time for you and Josh to get together to address any questions you have.
As an HD-6 Dem voter, I have to say that I find Hanfling’s videos mocking two characters, who are clearly Liz and Lois, pretty condescending. I’ve been unimpressed with Hanfling’s grasp of the issues all year, and these videos aren’t helping.
I respect the fact that both women in this race understand the issues and the process, and I’d rather have Hanfling talk about why Democrats would like his ambiguous “fresh ideas,” or have him elaborate on the way that he’d magically dissolve our fiscal mess by “untying the knot.” I like his YourHub.com piece on SAFE, but Lois is out gathering petition signatures for that campaign. I don’t see how that matches up with his portrayal of her wanting to study the budget problems rather than taking action. Nor do I understand what about Liz indicates that she’d run in place.
I’ve gotten polled twice on HD-6 in the past week. I can only guess which candidate can afford that.
I share your concern, CrazyOkie.
DonkeyEars, I’m sorry you find the videos “condescending” as that was not the intention. In fact, those videos were scripted in response to much of the rhetoric during the presidential primary (see http://www.hanflingforcolorado… which has the release about the most recent video) and the casting was a result of talent availability. The videos were simply intended to underscore the difference that there are two candidates running with a primary theme of their experience in government, while Josh is running on being the candidate who brings an “outside government” and “new” perspective much as the candidate who was not running based on years of experience in government.
The YourHub piece you reference is a re-print of a guest editorial Josh authored a week before Romanoff announced he would be collecting signatures for SAFE. I know Josh (and several of his supporters) have also been collecting signatures for SAFE and believe Liz is as well and all three candidates have come out in favor of SAFE. As a point of fact, prior to SAFE, Lois was advocating (as is still on her site) a “multi-faceted, multi-year project” to address TABOR et al, not a one-step fix as SAFE offers and Liz had not been focusing on the issue or included it on her website at all.
Thanks for sharing your perspective, Berrick.
Josh’s support of SAFE throughout the process is certainly appreciated, and I realize that all candidates in this race support it.
The budget is my number one issue because of the ramifications for P-12 and higher education, and I guess I’m still with Lois on the “multi-year, multi-faceted project” issue. It’s a frustrating reality, but I believe it is the reality. Whether it’s the “bold and elegant” SAFE (which leaves Gallagher to be dealt with), the speaker’s earlier concept of temporarily lifting the single-subject rule (which would’ve taken two ballot measures over two or three years), or any other process I can imagine, I think untying the knot is inherently a multi-faceted project that almost certainly requires a couple of years. This is a bit of a moot point while we all work on SAFE, but I don’t fault Lois for continuing to suggest that there’s work to be done with Gallagher, at least.
Thanks again for your responses here. Your willingness to participate has brought out some questions and criticism, but I appreciate your perspective. I’ll disclose that I was a conflicted Lois supporter through the caucus process. Since Josh went the petition route, I’m now deciding now what to make of him and making sure I’ve heard you out.
I can see how some people could think they were too much but I thought the ads were hilarious. Then again I was counting the days until Hillary would just go away and the HD6 race always seemed to have a little Experience vs Change theme just like Obama and Clinton. Josh should probably stay away from acting though. My favorite is the 3am spoof – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v… Reminds me of any time somebody calls me before 8am!
So good to stop by tonight and see our party has the Circular Firing Squad going strong. I’m not in HD6 thank God but have been watching this race closely because of the seat’s historic significance in Colorado and how hotly contested it is. My girlfriend is in that district and gets all 3 candidates mail so we’ve talked a lot about it. I began very skeptical of Hanfling, expected Court to be the frontrunner and was looking for some real solid policy out of Adams. I’ve come around to believe they all have their flaws but would all be solid legislators and Hanfling seems to actually have some pretty good ideas on education and energy while Court seems to be the biggest voice for single payer health.
Court: Clearly the most experience with pushing candidates or policy but other than the single payer, not much for specific policy plans. Probably knows a lot of people at the capitol but I hear mixed things about how well she works with others. Running big on not taking PAC money which is notable in the race except that Romanoff took plenty of it and I’m not sure what’s so different about touting PAC or special interest endorsements but not taking $400 from them.
Adams: Probably the most experienced with the legislative process from years with the legislative council. Knows how to look at bills and understands the process probably the best. Past PTA president which can’t be fun dealing with all that involves. Policy-wise not so in-depth staying with “education is good” “keep your carbon footprint small” and “I really know how it all works”
Hanfling: Curse his very soul he dared see the light and became a Democrat and we can’t have new people in our Party! Oh and he once gave money to a Republican so we don’t care about everything else he’s done for Democrats. Apparently not the best performance at debates or forums. Reading his mail and his website seems to actually have the most depth to his policy positions and specifics that he wants to do in office. Question is does he know what it takes to turn those ideas into actual legislation?
All 3 have some flaws but all seem like they’d do a good job. Occurs to me that if Court or Hanfling lose neither one of them is going to go away or stop being involved. Adams no clue about but probably fades back into the PTA or works as a staffer on the hill. In any case, it would seem whoever loses is probably going to want to work with whoever does win so maybe, just maybe, everybody should try to focus on the issues instead of personal attacks and circular firing squad.
I know Josh, and trust me, he’s not a Republican Trojan Horse. He’s saying things in personal conversations like “take our country back” and other gibberish that I hear you lunatics spout daily (and I say that with love, trust me). He was the only Republican in a family of Democrat activists, and now has gone back to the fold that he apparently feels he belongs in.
What happened to the “big tent”? I have to tell you that when I hear anyone grousing about ‘hyper partisanship’ on this blog in the future I’m going to laugh even harder than I already do. Pot, meet kettle. Here’s a former Republican who’s raised $100k for a Democrat campaign. He’s ‘seen the light’ (snicker) and you guys are still attacking him about his past political views, which he now says he regrets.
I also am pretty disgusted at the belittling of his community work. I get the feeling that many of you define community service as calling people Nazis on the internet. Josh is completely driven by doing things for others. Public office isn’t a vocation for him, as it seems to be for so many around here.
I’m not in his district, and I’d vote for the Republican running against him (if there is one, which I doubt) in a general, but many of you are proving the point that partisan idiotic Dems are exactly like partisan idiotic Republicans.
The door should always be held open to RINO refugees fleeing the persecution by the right wing nuts.
Anyone know if Bill Kaufman, Marcy Morrison, or Dottie Wham formally joined the Donkey Party?
beat them to it.
I do not begrudge his philanthropic work (although it does seem to be mainly throwing parties)–I wiil say that it does not apply to policy. Noboby disagrees with charity work, everyone disagrees on policy work.
My understanding is that Josh changed parties after talking to a political consultant: less about coming home to his roots than political calculation.
Finally.
It was Libertad who began the the Nazi compaison by confusing communism and German Nazism and if you recall I compared no one to a Nazi or communist and merely pointed out that Nazi’s hated trade unionists (libertad’s punching bag) along with hebrews.
It was most certainly not after talking to a political consultant. Unfortunately for Josh, he really believes in silly fairytales like universal health coverage and AGW.
So what? She’ll be a freshman legislator next year and the Governor’s office has already punted on health care reform preferring to wait for a (hopeful) Obama win and a federal fix.
What are her positions on insurance reform? That’s the relevant question for a state House candidate.
I wish Russell had stayed in this race.
Steve and Dwyer,
It’s nice to be remembered. Thanks.
I wanted to fill in a little more information as to why I had to get out of this race. In addition to being a law professor, I practice a little bit of law. This summer, I had three trials over a six week period. One was a two-week trial, and the others were back-to-back one-week trials. There was just a two-week space between them. Preparing for these cases and then trying them fully consumed 8 weeks of time in May and June.
Back in March-when I knew the cases would not settle–I did the math. I added up the doors that I would want to knock on and took into account that I’d be out of action politically for eight weeks. I did not see a way to do the work I needed to do to stay in the race.
Another huge element in my decision, of course, was a projection what the District would look like in July. I concede that it would be gratifying to my ego to see “Vote Tom Russell” signs all around. However, I think that I was correct in predicting that if I were still in the race with Lois and Liz, then that would make a victory for another candidate more likely.
I loved being on the doors. Knocking on doors is what I miss most about being a candidate. Over the past few weeks, I have enjoyed myself by knocking on doors in tandem with Lois Court. I’m supporting her candidacy with my time and effort because I think she’s the best choice for District 6 and also for the state.
Cheers,
Tom Russell
trussell@law.du.edu
Real dilemma….Liz and Lois both come out of Denver Public School politics…good for the girls, bad for the kids…..I don’t see a choice…
I wish Russell had stayed in too….
I knew Liz Adams when she worked for Senator Ken Kester and other Republicans. Not the usual Denver Democratic primary field.
The first thing I look at is did the candidate attempt to go through the party nomination process. Josh Hanfling did not.
Liz and Lois both went the assembly route. Tom Russell did as well but did not make the ballot. If he THEN had petitioned after trying the party path, I would still consider him.
Lois and Liz both have a good grasp on the issues, Josh unimpressed me here as well in candidate forums.
Lois and Liz have worked hard for Democrats and the causes we support for years. Josh has only been a Dem for this election cycle.
So in my mind Josh is simply not an option for this district. I would be happy with either Lois or Liz but since I can only vote for one it was Liz (I already sent my ballot back).
I can respect your opinion on the caucus. I know some people who feel the same way. My experience at the few caucuses I’ve gone to is that they tend to be the hard-core activists in the party and not completely representative of the overall party. Should they be the only ones deciding the nominees because they’re the only ones who show up to get involved? Sure they are the ones who are there but I think the more people that participate in selecting the nominee the more democratic it is. Here in Colorado there are two paths to the ballot. The caucus that Adams and Court did and the petition route Hanfling went. I’ve done petitions for other campaigns and it’s not an easy thing. Hanfling probably had to go meet more people that way than if he’d gone caucus. With who usually goes to caucuses, I don’t see how he could have gotten on that way and I was impressed Adams trounced Court with all of Court’s ties to the activists in the area. If you won’t vote for somebody who petitions that would have ruled out Udall the first time and Romer for state senator and Morrissey when he first ran for district attorney. It’s your right to have whatever criteria you do but I think we’ve got three good people in office who petitioned. If Josh didn’t impress you in the forums and that was your reason for voting for Liz, that seems legit. But saying Lois and Liz have worked hard for Dems and our causes but Josh hasn’t isn’t exactly true. Take a look at his bio on his website. If you don’t take his word, read the quotes he has from a ton of Dems about what he’s done.
I don’t live in the district but the more I talk to people down there if I did it would be a toss-up between Adams and Hanfling. My girlfriend says a few of her neighbors met Hanfling recently and were impressed with how passionate he came across and that he seemed to really know the issues so maybe he’s better one on one than at the forums. I also have friends who are really impressed with Adams and say she has the relationships at the capitol to be able to get things done. Far as I can tell Adams has experience but not many specific ideas or plans. Hanfling has some ideas that I could get excited about getting behind but doesn’t have any legislative experience. Court just comes across like she thinks she’s entitled to it and kind of shrill. Her closeness with Russell is the nail in the coffin for me. If you lived in Boulder and were a student when he was up here, you’d know exactly what I mean. Somebody degraded the talk into Germans with accents – Russell had his own brigade up here trying to run off students in the name of property values and the neighborhood he thought he’d change it into to fit him. If I were Court I’d stay as far away from that guy as possible if she wants to earn the votes of anybody who went to C.U. in the last 5-10yrs.
Liz Adams can bring countless energy, enthusiasm, and optimism to this office. She has been out walking door-to-door every weekend, all weekend, making connections with the people in her district. She has a wonderful relationship with her husband, children, friends, colleagues, and neighbors. She makes people feel comfortable and she listens. I am a teacher and I feel that out of all three democratic candidates running in HD6, Liz is the candidate that will work WITH teachers to help improve the educational system here in Colorado. She is closely connected to the schools because she has two school-age children. She has also served as PTA president at Steele Elementary. I feel that she truly understands what it is like for teachers and students in the public schools. I know that she wants to improve the system in a collaborative way that will be fair and equitable for all who are involved. I strongly believe Liz is the right choice for this district and I hope others will agree.
Their first priority is absolute job security for teachers. And as the teacher is the single biggest determiner of a student’s success, that means we continue with crappy teachers and failing schools.
We won’t be fixing the schools until we can fire that poorly performing teachers.
You don’t think the student might be the keystone of his or her own success?
I come from a long line of teachers. I’ve been a teacher.
And I’m telling you that more and more, it’s garbage in, garbage out. Kids come into school entirely unprepared to learn. They exhibit behavior problems left and right, the parents don’t give a damn, and in fact come screaming to the principal if their kids are corrected in any way because they think their kids can do no wrong.
People are much happier blaming the system than they are taking responsibility for the upbringing of their rotten little demon spawn.
I got out of the profession after a short time in it because I quickly got sick of being the bad guy all the time. Job security was not on my horizon in the least. They begged me to stay, in fact. I couldn’t get out of there fast enough.
The problem with education is not teachers wanting job security. It’s incompetent administration, absent or clueless parents, unprepared students, and people who don’t know what the hell they are talking about prescribing fixes in search of problems rather than the other way around.
The unions are absolutely a horrible detriment to the kids at this point – preserving their own power, but it’s not because of protecting the teachers.
About 90% of the DPS teachers I know are heroes.
There is an inability to remove disruptive kids, and the bilingual education has shown itself to be an incredible failure. Nobody is learning in DPS and the CEA’s answer is to stop testing? Get real.
English immersion, dissolve the CEA and start it over – nobody who was a union officer is eligible to be part of leadership. Boot disruptive students for good. You’d see incredible progress in 18 months.
I know, I’m dreaming. Instead of that, I’ll take vouchers. Start with kids 125% of the poverty level and below.
Google Arrupe Jesuit School if you don’t believe me. Same kids, same neighborhoods, 100% graduation rate. Kiss it, Merrifield, you fucking disgrace.
The school district can fire the lowest performing 5% of the teachers, and in return they boot out the most disruptive 5% of the students. That might give each side enough that they would go for it.
But it’s not Garbage In, Garbage Out. Some kids require less effort than others but up here in Boulder where you have very involved parents, it still requires a foot up the kids butt to get them to be successful. It works best when it’s the parents and the teachers both doing it.
And I’m sick of the teachers who don’t know their subject (7th grade math teacher who didn’t know that the Pythagorean theorem was for right triangles only), who water down the work so no kids have trouble (a 5th grade teacher giving spelling lists with dog & cat on it), who don’t read the papers kids turn in. So please don’t claim that crappy teachers are not part of the problem – they’re a giant part.
You are going to need to change your signature!
🙂
Some folks could go from being represented by Ken Gordon and Andrew Romanoff to Joyce Foster and Josh Hanfling.
Yeah term limits (snark).