Politicizing our schools
While I agree with columnist Jamelle Bouie (“What the Republican push for ‘parents’ rights’ is really about”) that the Republican push for parents’ rights has ulterior motives other than truly protecting parents’ rights, I disagree that the point of the movement is to “weaken support for teachers and public schools and to siphon resources from public schools to private ones.”
Republicans, like Democrats, want to win elections. In an evenly divided nation, with Republicans dominating rural voters and Democrats urban ones, elections are won in the suburbs where an empowered woman electorate determines the outcome. Not only do women make up 51% of our population, they outperform their male counterparts every year based on high school, college and professional degree attainment, a key determinant of voter turnout.
For decades, Democrats had a vast majority of these suburban moms believing that they could deliver stronger schools than their Republican counterparts because the teachers they conferenced with on their child’s progress belonged to the teachers unions that loyally support Democratic candidates and dominate politics surrounding local elections, especially those involving school board races and educational expenditures.
The pandemic and the shutting down of most urban schools in this country at the expense of the children, as documented by a growing mountain of research, have created an opportunity for Republicans to encourage suburban moms to rethink their faith in the Democratic Party on educational issues.
The movement of districts away from standardized tests and meaningful means of accountability in the name of “equity” has only thrown gas on this fire and empowered the Republicans pushing the parents’ rights argument even more.
It’s too bad both parties are politicizing our schools at the expense of our most cherished resource: our children.
Roger Stippel, Star Prairie, Wis.
And they want more money?
It is insane that the head of the House Transportation Committee, Frank Hornstein, has the nerve to speak of a tax increase for transportation including but not limited to the failed Metro Transit System. We have a budget surplus of over $17 billion! They want more money. Incredible.
He throws out a bone advising that we should fine the miscreants that make riding the bus or train dirty and dangerous. Have fun collecting the fines. We cannot even collect the fares. The bums belong in jail. Something in our system is terribly broken.
Tom Bates, St. Paul
Slush Paul
The other night, as professional musicians, my wife and I played a fine gig at our favorite pub in her hometown, White Bear Lake. It was wonderful to be in a city with safe,dry streets. They actually use property tax collected to plow the snow from their streets. We joyously missed those demolition derby pothole$ too! Who knew plowing could cut down the destructive freeze-thaw-freeze cycle, as well as auto accidents, and human tumbles?
Living in Slush Paul these last three of four years has been very taxing. But there has been plenty of ice to sooth the wounds.
Mark E. Adams-Westin, St. Paul
Soros did it
George Soros has become the target of a political version of the Kevin Bacon Game for the GOP. Republicans are somehow able to connect Soros’ name to practically anyone.
Joe Danko, North St Paul
Spend our money on the main thing
I was sitting in my home, without power after our most recent storm, when a Facebook posting by Xcel Energy was brought to my attention. The posting read, “Today we celebrate International Transgender Pride Alliance Day of Visibility.” I would have preferred celebrating the rapid return of power to my home. I didn’t care if the people fixing the outage were Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Hispanic, Irish, Black, Asian, Man, Woman, Gay, Lesbian, Heterosexual, Transgender or Cisgender (I apologize to the thousands of other groups excluded here due to space limitations). I’d rather they save the money they spend on the department responsible for social messaging and invest that money into the safe, efficient supply of reliable power to their customers.
Similarly, while watching a recent Minnesota Wild hockey game, I was struck by how many times Xcel Energy advertised about going carbon free. I wonder how much that advertising campaign costs (not to mention the fee tied to naming rights for the arena). I trust the management of the organization is best suited to define the optimal mix of energy sources they employ, but even if I didn’t, I have no choice where to buy power. Xcel has a monopoly. Why are they investing precious resources advertising to a customer base that has no alternative but to purchase their product? The water department doesn’t advertise about where they source water. We don’t have an arena named after the sewer department. Every dollar they spend on advertising, or on naming rights for an arena, means additional dollars collected from us in the form of our monthly energy bill.
If the leadership of the organization wishes to contribute to the cause of combating climate change, or celebrating transgender pride, they should do so with their own personal money. The cost of virtue signaling should come from your own pocket, not from the pockets of your customers.
John Conway, Mendota Heights
