What will the NEA think of me?

Before I mail my congressional candidate questionnaire back to the National Education Association, I thought I would share with my interested supporters and readers a few of my replies to the teachers union’s questions.

1. a. NEA supports federal legislation that would close achievement gaps, including by requiring states to submit, as a condition for receiving Title I funds, plans describing the steps they will take to remedy identified disparities in educational tools, services, opportunities, and resources among districts and schools.

Do you support or oppose NEA’s position? Support ___ Oppose _x_

If you oppose NEA’s position, please explain

“I oppose No Child Left Behind because it has served to further mire state and local education systems with even more federal bureaucracy. Federal education mandates do not work.”

My replies for the next few so-called questions echoed the same message as my conclusion to answering question “1. a.” I used this same message so frequently that about halfway through the questionnaire I became thoroughly disgusted with the slanted nature of each interrogative, as evidenced in this response:

2. b. NEA supports mandatory full funding for special education (IDEA [Individuals with Disabilities Education Act]).

Do you support or oppose NEA’s position? Support ___ Oppose _x_

If you oppose NEA’s position, please explain

“Education is a state and local issue. You guessed it: no federal mandates.”

3. NEA supports restoring the purchasing power of the maximum Pell Grant so that it keeps pace with increases in tuition costs.

Do you support or oppose NEA’s position? Support _x_ Oppose ___

Although I did not mark “Oppose” for my answer, I felt inclined to add comments anyway: “The problem is the Department of Education has squandered so much on wasteful, failed policies that money will not be available for proper Pell funding until the U.S.D.O.E. is brought under control and eliminated.”

Then, Question 4 nonsensically meandered the questionnaire into health care reform. In case you hadn’t guessed, I checked “Oppose” to both questions presented on the issue, adding in the comment sections:

“The NEA ought to endorse repealing the so-called Health Care Reform Act, thus eliminating the perceived need for any form of tax exclusions;”

and,

“The public option is a gateway to socialized medicine.
“None of this has anything to do with education.”

I oppose the NEA’s position on charter schools, telling them, “This is a state and local issue. Federal standards and policies will only water-down the quality of education in the same manner as public schools.”

Additionally, my stance on private school vouchers and tuition tax subsidies differs from the NEA’s: “The parents’ money should follow where the students go.”

And then the NEA wanted to know my thoughts on Social Security and protecting pension plans. Although – to be fair – they do oppose mandatory Social Security coverage for public employees. I agreed with them on that point.

But, I followed that with this reply to their pensions question: “America can no longer afford defined pension plans for public employees. We need to transition to a contribution-based retirement plan.”

And then, things get really entertaining. Question 9 was titled, “Protect Workers’ Rights to Unionize”. The full policy statement reads as follows:

The National Education Association advances the education profession by advancing the economic interests, protecting the job security, improving the terms and conditions of employment, and securing the right to bargain collectively for all education employees. NEA believes that attaining and exercising collective bargaining rights are essential to the promotion of the needs of students and education employees.

NEA supports legislation making it significantly easier for private sector workers to unionize and providing protection against discrimination or intimidation for workers who exercise their right to organize.

Question

NEA supports legislation making it significantly easier for private sector workers to unionize.

Do you support or oppose NEA’s position? Support ___ Oppose _x_

By now I could not contain myself and unleashed the following statement in the comments section. “Private sector unionization has nothing to do with education. When America’s unions acknowledge and address violent intimidation tactics such as we’ve witnessed with SEIU, then we can have an honest conversation about intimidation.”

This was followed by a question stating the “NEA supports a $40,000 starting salary for pre-K-12 teachers” as well as a so-called living wage for education support professionals. I checked “Oppose” and added this: “Public employee wages and salaries are grossly outpacing the private sector. Taxpayers can not afford this anymore.”

After telling the NEA on more time, in Question 11, that education is a state issue, I was met with the questionnaire’s finale: “Please describe your top five priorities for public education and how they contribute to ensuring all students attend a great public school.”

So, in true Don Kissick fashion I gave the NEA my five priorities for public education.

1. Getting the federal government out of our schools.

2. Getting the federal government out of our schools.

3. Getting the federal government out of our schools.

4. Getting the federal government out of our schools.

5. Putting an end to the U.S. Dept. of Education once and for all.

So, what do you think the NEA will think of me?