More Bad News
June 25th, 2007It’s nice to know the people in overall charge of the school district have themselves been so well educated. It would be horrible if they missed the lessons of appeasement, if they somehow failed to recognize what a mistake standing up to a bully is.
Oh. Wait. This is the school board we’re discussing.
The district has an issue with a group of free staters that are strong in the area, and it shows up in school board. Several members of the board—Neal Moriarty, Dick Bauries, and Dan Connell—are a part of the Monadnock Taxpayers Association, a group which shares the same mentality as the Free State Movement.1
Oh. The libertarian philosophy behind the Free State Project is opposed to anything resembling a state role in education. Actually, they say it best themselves: The creation of a society in which the maximum role of civil government is the protection of life, liberty, and property.2
I wonder whose property they’re interested in protecting?
Never mind. What is shameful is the school board’s handling of the contract dispute. At this point, not only are they failing to offer a contract which would give a raise to 60% of the people in the district, it’s also attempting to force the Union to switch health care providers to Cigna. It’s not exactly a stellar plan.
Force? How can they force a change? After all, this type of thing is done through negotiations.
Apparently not. At the bottom of the 6/5 agenda minutes, the following is written:
MOTION: J. Kenyon MOVED in response to the Union’s position on the health insurance substitution that the Board direct its attorney to file an appropriate action. SECOND: D. Lyman. VOTE: 11.898/0/0/3.102. Motion passes.
Nobody could get an answer about what that motion was. We were left in the dark…until the June 19th meeting, when members of the board and the Taxpayers Association argued that an emergency meeting should be called to make the health care plan switch without the Union’s consent. Apparently, they’re not worried about having a grievance filed, and the board has already filed an unfair labor practice against the Union anyway.
Oh…that’s what that secret motion was all about.
I’m hoping (as I sincerely like and respect some of these people) that this is just an attempt to appease a powerful and well organized minority in the district. On the other hand, I look at the lessons of history, and I wonder what will be left of Checkoslovakia the school when they’re done giving into the agenda of a group that cares more about their property than the education of the next generation.
I’d like to think most members of the board have the best education for the children in mind, and I’d like to think they’re doing their best to work with some people who are determined to end public education. That doesn’t mean they’re taking the right tack. We throw around the idea this nation is a democracy, and it’s a dirty lie—we’re a republic. Board members do not have a duty to do what they’re hearing from a loud minority—they have a duty to govern as best they can. There’s no way engaging in lawsuit after lawsuit with the employees of the district is the way to guarantee the best education possible.
1 The school newspaper ran an interesting article about these organizations, and when I have a chance, I’ll republish it here. However, the main gist is that the same people who set up the Monadnock Taxpayer’s Association’s website are also the same people who set the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers and share the same philosophy as the Free State Project. The worst part about this is according to their entry in Wikipedia, only about 500 free staters exist in the state. They just happen to be very active and willing to shout down everyone around them.
2 People familiar with US history will notice this is the same wording coined by Adam Smith. However, Jefferson intentionally broke with the Locke tradition when he wrote happiness. A well educated man, Jefferson was very aware of happiness as the Greek Eudaimonia, which is not happiness as we tend to think of it. Instead, it’s “human flourishing” or the pursuit of knowledge and learning of the mind. Justice Miller in Butchers’ Union Co. v. Crescent City Co. 111 U.S. 746 (1884) stated, “by which is meant the right to pursue any lawful business or vocation, in any manner not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, which may increase their prosperity or develop their faculties…” Education, in other words, has always been a state value, and the Free State Project turns its back on this. It would be nice if all the people elected to serve on the school board cared about the education delivered in the schools they are charged with supervising.
I’m glad I’m not the only one.
June 30th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
I noticed this:
“…a group that cares more about their property than the education of the next generation.”
This sounds very silly on the face of it. I should think it would be irresponsible to enact government spending that one could not afford, thus jeopardizing one’s ability to pay their own way - i.e., maintain their own property. It’s the responsible thing to do. Are homeowners supposed to go into debt and deprive their own children of food and cothing just so some other person’s kid can have basketball? This is the mentality people are up against.
And this weirdness:
“1 The school newspaper ran an interesting article about these organizations, and when I have a chance, I’ll republish it here. However, the main gist is that the same people who set up the Monadnock Taxpayer’s Association’s website are also the same people who set the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers and share the same philosophy as the Free State Project. The worst part about this is according to their entry in Wikipedia, only about 500 free staters exist in the state. They just happen to be very active and willing to shout down everyone around them.”
Um, the people you mentioned - Moriarty, Bauries, and Connell all have lived here in NH for how long? How many of them are natives? And the CNHT group is the oldest and biggest taxpayer organization in the state, all native, as far as my research shows.
The role of limited government is a concept shared by many individuals.
That said, those individuals and group you mentioned have nothing to do with the other ‘freestate’ website you mentioned that I know of and I am a NH native.
The ’same people’ who set up the websites I wager, is a web design company who has no particular political philosophy and would I’m sure, set up one for you too - for the right price.
June 30th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Hi NH,
Thanks for the response! It’s never good to be preaching to the choir—they’ve already heard the sermon, they probably agree with it, and though they may not countenance everything, they’re probably too polite to point out any holes they see.
I would agree government should have a limited role, and is too often used to solve problems beyond its role. One of my major complaints about the current administration is it is spending too much money—a tax cut in peace-time may be an appropriate act, but one while waging a war is silliness. A government should not spend more than it makes unless in dire need.
On the other hand, I don’t know if cutting funding to the schools is the appropriate action. One of the central roles of the state has been to provide for the common welfare, and education was (and still is) the best way to guarantee an individual’s future good. To bring up children “in the faith” was always a vital task, and to pass along the learning of the people was the primary duty of a parent. Usually this knowledge was religious, (so important that a second set of parents—The god parents—would be designated to help with the task) and before the twentieth century it truly was the community through apprenticeship and the home.
Of course, what an individual needs to know and do is far more than it was a century ago…more than it was twenty years ago. Especially today, (given the need for two working parents) it’s unlikely that an adequate education can be provided…especially for the poorest, who are probably working the longest hours.
It’s the poor who benefit the most from low education costs. Historically, it’s been women who have gained the most in public education. When it wasn’t provided by anyone but the family, the family (except in rare circumstances) didn’t have the resources to educate female children. They didn’t. It’s not the family in danger of starving who need to worry about taxes…it’s unlikely they could afford a home in the first place. (I know I can’t.) It’s the ones in the middle who feel the pinch.
I know when my father was unemployed in the late 80s/early 90s, it was certainly only because education was free that my brother and I were able to go. It was a bit embarrassing to be wearing the same t-shirt every day (we found a box of 25 shirts from the landfill which were new, and made up my entire wardrobe that year) but I was glad I was still able to go to school. A quick look at the world before public education shows many people weren’t so fortunate.
The fault there lies in NH’s way of paying for schools. Local property taxes means that the schools are the only area of control most voters have over their government’s spending. I remember one voter remarking, “I can’t stop the state from building the round-about, and I can’t stop them from doing construction on route 9, but I can stop the school.”
The sad thing is education should be the last thing cut…but NH doesn’t provide that option. So people aim at what they can—the local school—when the real target ought to be the legislators in Concord. Nobody should starve—but many more will suffer without a good education. American hegemony and triumph in the Cold War rests as much on the educational achievements of the generation that fought WWII as it does on its sacrifice on the battlefield. The Montgomery GI bill and the generation it sent to college provided a great deal of what we now take for granted as “America” in this country—including ownership of a home. Before WWII, most Americans could only afford to rent.
For the specific example, I tend, in my heart of hearts, to think too much attention is paid to athletics. The feeling that people would be more upset if we were to cut football than if we were to cut science rubs me raw. At the same time, I think that’s a perception I carry which may not be entirely accurate. What I do know is a mind functions better in a healthy body. I know many students who only care about academics because a passing grade is the ticket to playing the game. I know many coaches (actually, all of them) who have made monsters in the classroom gentlemen and ladies by a few well chosen words.
Are we using a carrot to impel learning? Yes. But I’ll take a student learning, no matter if it’s their intrinsic desire to do so or because they are a star on the field. I think sports are worth the investment if they keep a kid’s mind in school.
As for the second point…well, I have a hard time believing that if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, and looks like a duck that it’s actually a hippo. Jane Aiken has her own libertarian website, is a part of the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers, and set up the Monadnock Taxpayer’s Association’s website. That’s one heck of a coincidence.
I’m certain everything you said about all three of them—and Aiken, and the Free State Project—is a fact. I’m certain I could get Aiken to create a template for me. But although all facts are true, it doesn’t mean it’s the truth. I could tell say I worked yesterday (fact) and that I was at the school (fact) but that doesn’t mean I worked at the school. The truth is a little different. Something smells there.
It doesn’t really even matter.1 The 1991 Halloween Nor’easter was three different storm systems coming together to create a disaster—the “perfect storm.” Was it winter, length of the supply lines, or Russian determination to resist which stopped Napoleon in 1812? It doesn’t really even matter. If they’re natives who share the views, members who already lived in the state, or just, as you said, individuals who share a concept of limited government, it remains a collection of individuals who have come together in order to push an agenda. I just don’t think it’s an agenda that has as its goal the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.
Of course, one’s welcome to subscribe to that agenda (if you do). I appreciate your views and taking the time to share them. Welcome to the conversation!
Best,
RJH
1 A trifle strong a statement. I don’t know the nature of the relationship, even if there is a formal one, but there’s a harmony of souls if nothing else.
July 1st, 2007 at 7:40 am
Note: I sent a copy of my comment via email. This was the response, and I did want to keep the conversation public—which is the point of a blog—RJH
This email is too long to go through, but I can tell you that I know someone who knows the person who made the school group website and he said she does websites for her second ‘career’. He saw the article in the Keene paper trashing people.
Do you know what he said her first career was? He said, she was a school teacher for about 40 years.
Also, she is not a libertarian that he knows of, but a card carrying Republican as listed on the voter list, never anything else…and who is still working for a living I imagine even at her old age.
So to bring the innocent ‘webmaster’ of a website into it and trash them is not very Christian, do you think?
I think she is a widow to boot..so she is an older woman…
NOW don’t you feel bad? I would.
Yes all money should be under local control. If the people don’t want to pay for things for the school, they have the right. What happens when people vote to build schools that cost $80M and drive the residents out because their taxes go up $3K in a shot? The same could be said for that — not fair.
What about people who never had any kids but have paid millions into the system?
Soviet style education is not the answer. Get rid of the bureaucrats, that might help.
July 1st, 2007 at 7:40 am
Again, thanks for the response NH. I appreciate your time. There’s no doubt that funding the schools is one of the most difficult and tangled items the average citizen will need to unravel. It takes a great deal of research and understanding to really come to anything resembling an understanding—I know there are things I’m still learning.
It’s all good.
I certainly don’t think I was “trashing” anyone—however in all public discourse, it’s very easy to have the tone become more raucous than intended. I think some of the debate shows on the major news networks do a good job of showing how quickly conversation can become a shouting match. Certainly it’s not my intention.
Even so, I don’t think I feel the need to retract anything. Looking at her website right now, Ron Paul has the banner ad. Google Ron Paul’s name, and the second link says it all:
So…no matter what she may be registered as, her leanings are clearly towards that side of the political spectrum…which is fine. It’s a free country. But let’s not pretend something is what it is not.
The last few points I’m not sure I understand. On one hand, the argument seems to be that what the local people wish they should get, “Yes all money should be under local control. If the people don’t want to pay for things for the school, they have the right.” On the other hand, that statement seems to be contradicted by the very next statement, “What happens when people vote to build schools that cost $80M and drive the residents out because their taxes go up $3K in a shot?”
I’m not sure who these different people are—wouldn’t the residents be the people voting for or against, and thus the resulting tax increase? Arguing individuals get to drop out of public decisions they do not agree with is fallacy—the South tried that argument in 1860.
The simple fact is all of us sacrifice some of our freedom by becoming a part of society. True liberty is impossible while still remaining a member of the community. We agree to remain subject to the laws of the state, and to make sacrifices for it. Is it a sacrifice for someone with no children to pay for education? Yes. Is it unfair. No—at least, if it’s unfair it’s in the same way some Americans are fighting in miserable conditions for their country while others stay home and continue to live their lives as they would normally. As individuals, we must do some things we would rather not in order to be a part of society.1
As far as bureaucracy…well, there’s certainly an issue when there are too many chiefs and not enough indians. However, the opposite is also true. I’d need to do some research before I was willing to say if there is an issue with too much management.
America does have a different ethos in education than almost any other nation in the world. Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada, and almost every nation I can think of controls education from what we would call the Federal level. Over the last century, we’ve left it almost entirely in the hands of towns and cities. However, the State is the local level as far as the Constitution is concerned.
If you want to rail against No Child Left Behind, however, I’ll get on that bus with you. Thanks again for your input!
Best,
RJH
1 This is even making the false assumption that society as a whole does not benefit from a well educated populace. Every individual benefits from state mandated drivers education programs—I wouldn’t want to be on the road without them. Likewise, I benefit from well educated individuals every-time I use a search engine online. Most of that material was placed there by private citizens using skills they were taught in school. The people who pay “millions” (assuming property taxes at
$500$5,000 a year, even after a hundred years this is only $500,000 out of an individual’s pocket, so this is hyperbole) into the system are paid back well.July 7th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Note: I sent a copy of my comment via email. This was the response, and I did want to keep the conversation public—which is the point of a blog—RJH
OK, Paul is a GOP candidate actually. But, even so, how does the webmaster’s choice of candidate make the MSTA ‘libertarians’? It’s a stretch. Has the MSTA stated their political leanings? Usually a group doesn’t do that, since everyone in the group is not the same. The CNHT group also is non-partisan. They don’t even endorse candidates.
What I’m saying is, we don’t always like how the vote goes and right now it doesn’t sound like it went in your favor. But that may not always be true.
That had to have been a typo, yes? There is no such thing as $500 a year property taxes. That is what it might cost per MONTH. The average home in NH has property taxes of $7,000/year… I pay about $10,000 in addition to federal taxes and it does add up to the millions, for me anyway. We don’t need a state income tax on top of that!
July 7th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Hi NH,
Again, I want to thank you for taking the time to express your thoughts. I firmly believe communities only work when there’s communication, and it’s always tedious to write. You’ve taken a great deal on your time to write your thoughts and I appreciate that.
We’re getting lost between what is said and what is meant. I can “neutralize” the “target” by “engaging” with it all I want…but the real truth is I’m shooting at someone until he’s killed. Ron Paul may be running on the Republican ticket, but his views and ideology mark him as much closer to a libertarian. He ran as a Libertarian in 1988 and his views haven’t changed much:
The Monadnock Taxpayers Association has never, to my knowledge, stated a political viewpoint. Why would they? It would do nothing but harm them. If they came out as Democrats then Republicans would snub them, and much the same in reverse. They have no need to do so, and by remaining “non-partisan” they can appear much more mainstream. Much the same for the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers can be said—though to say they do not endorse candidates is a bit of a stretch. They certainly make very clear which ones pledge not to raise taxes via their “pledge”.
If it looks like a duck…
I’m actually really okay with votes not going in my favor. What I’m not is with people distorting the truth and the positions in order to save money. If privatization would work better for schooling children then it’s something to look at—but I haven’t seen any evidence it is, and suggesting the private market will solve all problems is foolish. It may, or it may not, solve some of the issues in education. But I don’t see it happening…a quick look at two local private schools show tuition (for day students) of $26,900 and $22,550. That’s more than twice what you’re paying for property taxes.
I think we could also contract out Iraq to mercenaries, but I don’t think it’s a good idea. There are some duties for the state.
You’re right about the $500 being a typo. I did mean $5,000, which is about what the house I’m looking at is going for. (I’m also contemplating moving in with another couple, as there’s no way I can afford the house on my own.) However, there’s no doubt that $10,000 is a great deal of money—nobody is going to argue that! It’s more than a quarter of my salary. At the same time, the issue isn’t the school, it’s how NH pays for education. Property taxes are a lousy way of doing it.
But lashing out at the school just guarantees the ones who cannot pay to get a good education will definitely not be able to do so.
But here’s my thing. If you live in Troy, which in 2005 had a $24.88 total tax rate per $1,000 of value, then you live in a home valued at $401,929 dollars to pay $10,000 a year (X/1000x$23.85=$10,000). To even afford a home like that implies you have a great deal of money—it’s more than twice what I could afford with another family moving in. Likewise, your assertion that the “average” home in NH has property taxes of $7000 a year I want to see backed up…a tax rate like that would be a $300,000 home in Swanzey. I grew up in a $142,000 home and never had a complaint. Exactly who is being represented by an individual living in a $400,000 home? Is it really the average for a community where the average weekly wage is less than $500?
Again, I appreciate the time you’re taking. Conversation is critical! And feel free to correct figures—not an area I’m expert in. Although I do appreciate citing sources.
July 7th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Note: I sent a copy of my comment via email. This was the response, and I did want to keep the conversation public—which is the point of a blog—RJH
And RJH said:
“Quack! Quack!” Ardent nationalism, belief in a central overwhelming authoritarian power, militarism and opposition to political liberalism make one a fascist, no matter what one calls oneself. I can make the same judgment about the Monadnock Taxpayers Association being libertarians.
August 11th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
[...] mentioned Jane Aiken before, as a member of the Free State Project and an individual opposed to Public Education—who also [...]