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.

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.

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.

Any thoughts on your double standard regarding the school boards and 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.

http://www.montypythonsspamalot.com/

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.