Educrats In Spamelot
At some point, you’d think South Carolina educrats would realize that they’re not supposed to use taxpayer time, equipment or other resources to advance political agendas.
After all, taxpayers provide these people with billions of dollars worth of resources to run our school system, not to organize political rallies or lobby the legislature.
Put another way, if these “school administrators” want to bombard lawmakers – oh, and the teachers whose jobs they keep putting on the chopping block – with misinformation, they should do so on their own time using their own computers and emails.
But that lesson/ law has never been learned/ enforced in South Carolina, where government (particularly our public education system) exists exclusively to perpetuate its own abysmal performance.
Oh, and also to attack any idea that actually tries to fix things.
Take the latest taxpayer funded e-blast from Spartanburg (S.C.) Superintendent Jim Ray, sent to over a thousand school administrators:
The South Carolina Educational Opportunity Act is the latest scheme by anti-public school groups to divert dwindling resources from K-12 public schools to private and home schools …
Yadda, yadda, yadda …
The email, which only gets more biased from there, includes a list of talking points for educrats to assail the “vouchers” included in the parental choice proposal – even though there are no vouchers included the parental choice proposal.
Educrats are asked to call the plan “unconscionable,” “unaffordable,” “unaccountable,” and “unproven.”
In fact, in one district, they were specifically told to do so.
Robert Hellams, an assistant principal in Sumter, S.C., received Ray’s “talking points” and forwarded them to hundreds of employees from his work address with the following instructions:
“Please review the attachment and contact your state senator regarding this bill. Its approval would not be in the best interest of public education. Ask your senator to vote against this bill.”
Yup.
Those are your tax dollars hard at work … instructing people to lobby the General Assembly.
Over the last few weeks, lawmakers have heard from literally thousands of parents who are sick and tired of the only choice they have being between one failing school and another.
Obviously, the status quo is afraid that some lawmakers are being convinced by this outpouring of frustration, which is why they felt the need to gin up some “responses.”
But that’s just our point – we pay these people handsomely (Ray, for example, makes $150,000 a year – with at least $20,000 in mileage and travel expenses on top of that).
We give them computers.
We provide them with offices.
We hook them up with email accounts.
We send them to lavish conferences and put them up in expensive hotels.
In Ray’s case, we even covered his Rotary Club dues.
But we do all that so they can teach our children – not blast out educrat spam like this drivel.
Superintendent Ray has every right to oppose parental choice. He can even do so by spreading false and misleading information, if he so chooses.
He has no right, however, to do any of that on your dime.
In fact, why not email him and tell him “Stop Spamming On My Dime …”
Oh, and while you’re at it, it would seem you have the right to contact all the educrats he spammed … in which case we figured you might want their email addresses, too.
After all, you’re paying for them.
WEB EXTRA
Comments
By GnuBerry on May 6th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
You seem obsessed with vouchers.
By GGIH on May 6th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
I might buy that argument, had you yourself not shilled, in politics and policy, for your former boss, using a state-funded computer, while you were paid by the state. It’s not different, Willie.
By GGIH on May 6th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Which leads to the question — where are you gonna draw the line? Jim DeMint’s press secretary (and everybody else who works for him) is paid by the federal government to aggressively promote his (really crazy right-wing extremist) ideology. Graham’s staff are paid by the federal government to promote policies you also don’t believe in. And it’s a pretty safe bet they all use their federally funded computer equipment to do it.
Superintendents like Jim Ray are hired by elected representatives of the public — just like DeMint’s press secretary. And it’s policy he’s talking about, not politics.
Even if it were, though — I’d be willing to bet that you did more than a little politicking on your boss’s behalf while you were on state salary. Did you editorialize against it then?
By fitsnews on May 6th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
GGIH-
Sic was a press secretary to a governor, who was elected to advance an agenda.
These administrators are hired by elected officials to run our schools.
You are comparing apples to zebras.
-FITS
By fitsnews on May 6th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
GGIH-
Again. Elected officials run on agendas. They make policy.
School superintendents are appointed to implement policy, not make it.
Like we said, apples to zebras.
-FITS
By GGIH on May 6th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Right, right. You remind me of my husband. It’s always different when HE does it.
But your reasoning makes no sense.
Local boards are elected to advance agendas. They run on agendas and they make policy — hell, they could vote to fund vouchers for kids to attend private schools, if they wanted to.
Superintendents are hired to carry out their will — like you were, or DeMint’s staff is. All paid by the taxpayers, all accountable to their elected bosses.
By Andy on May 6th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
It is Spamalot, not Spamelot.
http://www.montypythonsspamalot.com/
By baker on May 6th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Two things:
Will — I actually buy your distinction between elected officials and hired administrators. But why, then, did you rank on the School Boards Association (OK, it was your “friends” at “The Voice,” but you touted their post)? School boards are elected, just like the governor.
You seem to subscribe to an illogical double standard.
And this doesn’t even get into the fact that the SCRG column you linked claimed that the SCEA gets public money — apparently, because teachers are public employees their wages equate to “public money.” Simply bizarre.
Finally, while there is a distinction between superintendents and the governor or school boards, I think you’re wrong in your complaint here. It is simply absurd to think that school superintendents shouldn’t voice an opinion in their professional capacity — meaning that work computers and e-mail systems can be used — on issues affecting public education. And the “education opportunity act” is something that could have a huge impact on public education. You say the impact will be happy and rosy; others say it won’t.
Either way, it’s entirely reasonable for public school administrators to weigh in. What if the state legislature was considering requiring schools to go to a four-day week to save money — superintendents shouldn’t be allowed to send out an e-mail at work expressing an opinion on the plan? What if the legislature was considering adding a 13th grade — superintendents shouldn’t be allowed to send out a message from their office discussing the pros and cons?
Will, your complaint here is off-base.
By baker on May 6th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
So, Will, honestly….are you still contending that Jim Ray has “no right” to express his professional opinion, using time at work or work equipment, on pending legislation affecting affecting public education?
Any thoughts on your double standard regarding the school boards and the governor?
By Brocephus on May 6th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
what a will wants/ what a will needs/ whatever makes will happy/
By BIN News Editorial Staff on May 6th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
sic(k) willie, he was not advancing an agenda.
He was protecting us from Darth-Howie’s evil voucher scam and from the carpetbugger voucher clowns who are paid brazillions to bloviate.
Darth-Howie’s voucher scam is the Dark Side of the Farce. But, S.C. has risen to the challenge and defeated that evil farce over and over.
Vouchers are dead in S.C. Period. Just ask Jake. If you have the nerve.
BIN News Editorial Staff
Flair and Balanced
The only mistake he made was not using the bcc feature in email.
By South Carolina Parents Invovled in Education on May 7th, 2009 at 9:03 am
BIN News – This high-paid administrator didn’t make a mistake. It was pure arrogance. He doesn’t care about violating the law.
The law prohibits using government-funded equipment and facilities to affect the outcome of elections or legislation. Obviously administrators like Ray, who are fully aware of the law and cite it when it suits their agenda, think they are above the law. Not to mention being above reproach as demonstrated by their onging, intentional lies about school choice proposals.
Administrators and their high-paid lobbyists need to quit pitting school teachers against parents. I pray that teachers will make inquiries into school choice legislation before blindly believing the bureacracy’s propaganda. Some teachers have already done so and support choice for parents. They understand the value of focusing on what is the best interest of students rather than continuing to defend a failing system that only serves those at the very top – like Dr. Ray.
By Jack on May 7th, 2009 at 11:34 am
You guys amaze me. How would you like it if your boss, or the bosses boss or the Chairman sent out emails to each and every employee in your company editorializing on political issues and directing you how to vote. Better yet what if they took money from your paycheck to pay for the “communications”, and took positions which you did not support?
Public sector service employees by choosing the relative security and rich benefits inherent in those positions implicitly agree to the prohibition against using other government assets for political purposes while on the clock. They can use their own assets and time to promote political positions, but as a taxpayer, and thereby their employer, I will insist that they refrain from using my money and assets to further their personal political agenda. They should also be free from intimidation by their superiors on political issues.
Political appointees serve at the pleasure of their boss, and ultimately the voters. Their jobs are to help set and promote the boss’s agenda.
By baker on May 7th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
And, Jack, if the superintendents’ “boss” — being, directly, their democratically elected school board — agrees with what messages they’re sending out…..?
Trackbacks