November 30, 2007
This Week’s Top 5 / Bottom 5
After a one week, holiday hiatus, there are plenty of things to recognize in this week's installment of North Carolina's best and worst performances from the world of policy and politics.
The Tops
1. Governor Mike Easley - It took him a little while, but the Guv deserves major kudos for standing up for immigrant kids:
Here's my position. The people we are talking about were brought here as babies and young children through no fault of their own. They distinguished themselves throughout our K-12 (public school) system. Now, I'm not willing to grind my heel in their faces and slam the door on them. The Community College System has to be open to them in order for them to be productive members of our society and help North Carolina and America compete in the world economy.
2. The state Community College System itself – It's not entirely clear who made the decision, but the policy of admitting undocumented kids into state community colleges is the right thing to do. As Chris Fitzsimon put it the other day:
The children have no say where they live. They didn't decide to come to the United States. Their parents brought them here in the pursuit of a better life and with the hope that at some point sanity would prevail and elected officials would develop a comprehensive approach to immigration that would streamline the citizenship process, and provide an ultimate path to citizenship for the 12 million people currently here without documentation.
But this isn't about buildings or money. It is about finding another way to continue the demonization of immigrants to keep a divisive issue alive for the 2008 elections, this time by attacking children who are working hard everyday to learn about their adopted country and improve their chances of succeeding where they live.
3. Columnist and author, Prof. Paul Krugman – One of the nation's strongest and most consistently accurate progressive voices comes to North Carolina and tells it like it is (see Steve Turner's post below). If the local market fundamentalists are rising to the defense of their corporate masters by attacking him for decrying the nation's growing inequality, you know he must be saying something right.
4. Former Supreme Court Justice I. Beverly Lake, Jr. – The conservative former Supreme Court Chief Justice follows up on his work to establish North Carolina's Innocence Commission by taking on the cause of Lee Wayne Hunt – a man who has spent the last two decades in jail on a murder conviction obtained in large measure on a long discredited type of scientific testimony.
5. The Charlotte Area Transit System -The new Lynx Blue Line Train is officially unveiled and incorporated into the Charlotte transportation landscape. Let's hope it's only just the start.
The Bottoms
5. State Senator Fred Smith – The Republican gubernatorial wannabe purports to be cautious about corporate subsidies/giveaways, but then touts the outrageous 1999 handout to R.J. Reynolds (in which the cigarette giant was paid $136 million to save some of its jobs in Winston-Salem) as an example to be emulated. And see Adam Searing's post below for his failure to keep up to date on the health care debate.
4. The 21st Century Transportation Committee – The group's second meeting this week turned out better than the first (the one in which chairman Brad Wilson of Blue Cross/Blue Shield summarily dismissed the idea of alternatives to more roads), but it still appears to be mostly a paver's paradise.
3. The "Blue Ribbon" Charter School Commission - Talk about starting with your conclusion and then working backwards to justify it. Recently, the Commission indicated it would recommend lifting the state cap on the number of charter schools. In June at the group's first meeting, Commission chair Dr. Michael Fedewa (a man who runs parochial schools for a living) said there is "no need for a cap."
1 and 2. ALIPAC, Civitas, Congresswoman Sue Myrick, State Senator Richard Stevens, all five major gubernatorial candidates and an array of spineless and/or mean spirited public figures – For their wimpy and/or opportunistic immigrant bashing around the issue of letting a handful of kids get an education in our community college system. Special demerits to normally progressive candidates Richard Moore and Beverly Perdue for jumping on the bandwagon.
Search
Previous Posts
- What people hear when they go to the hospital
- Wisdom from the Wizard of Id
- Ah…”choice” and “neighborhood schools”…
- 10.2.10 March on Washington
view full archive » subscribe to feed
Web Links
- BlueNC
- Capital Beat (Greensboro News-Record)
- Deathwatch (Death penalty updates)
- Democracy NC's Link of the Day
- Equality NC blog
- Exile on Jones Street
- Health Policy Hub (The Community Catalyst Blog)
- Independent Weekly Blogs
- Isaac Hunter’s Tavern (WUNC Radio)
- Leftyblogs
- NC Conservation Network Blog
- North Carolina Economics
- Off the Charts (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities)
- Orange Politics
- Pam's House Blend
- Policy Points (South by North Strategies)
- Public Policy Polling
- Say Ahhh!
- Scrutiny Hooligans
- Stop NCAR (Realtor’s Assn. watchdog)
- The Arc of North Carolina Policy Blog
- The People’s Business (Fayetteville Observer)
- This Old State (Charlotte Observer)
- Under the Dome (News & Observer)
- Watauga Watch
9 Comments Add yours »
Kudos. Good list . . . and glad to see you’re sticking with it.
On Community College admissions of undocumented immigrants- this is a bad policy for a couple of reasons. One: Immigration policy is a Federal issue and we should not be lessening the pressure on the Feds’ responsibilities that they have shirked by passing piecemeal measures on the state or local level. This only aids and abets their failure to take a stand and do their jobs (the sniveling weasels). To pass piecemeal policies acts as a steam release valve and takes the heat off the Congress to take a stand on the exploitation of undocumented workers and stop the practice altogether–but that might upset the business community wouldn’t it? Sometimes things have to get a lot worse before they get better. The only humanitarian thing to do is to stop the exploitation. Period. Give them rights and fair pay or don’t–but half -arsed measures only make the situation worse.
Second: to justify the practical impact of this decision by saying that only a small number of undocumented immigrants will be able to access this opportunity because of the out-of-state tuition hurdle is not only a chicken way of softening the blow for those who oppose undocumented immigrants in our country but is also discriminatory–not based on immigration status but on economic class. So WEALTHY undocumented immigrants get to access higher education but poor ones don’t ? Well, that’s just a damn warm fuzzy Hallmark Moment, ain’t it?
In response to DEFuning – We all have a right to education. Colleges should not base their acceptance criteria on whether or not our government has solved their immigration issue. Whether schools accept those who are undocumented or not will not pressure the federal government to respond. This isn’t a piecemeal immigration policy. This is simply allowing those qualified to continue their education. I don’t see who is harmed by this measure. Denying rights to people will not stop the exploitation.
Peace, when you say “We all have a right to education” who exactly do you mean when you say “we” and how do you define a “right to education”?
If by we, you mean Americans citizens then that would mean illegal immigrants do not belong to this group. If you mean anyone who manages to sneak onto US soil, does that mean terrorists have a “right to education” if they make it across our borders? If you mean all human beings, then shouldn’t we just get rid of all borders and allow everyone on earth to come and go on our college campuses? Do we get rid of the system of in-state and out-of-state tuition in this case?
If by “right of education” you mean that education is something that people who have the means to access it should not be denied, then that isn’t really a right is it? That is would be describing a privilege. If on the other hand you mean that it is a right in the sense that anyone who wants to participate should be guaranteed the opportunity, that creates a whole series of problems.
For one, it is generally considered to be the case that a person needs at least a 100 IQ to be successful in an undergraduate program, at least a 110 to be successful in a graduate program, and at least 130 IQ to be successful in a doctorate program. Since 100 IQ is the median and IQ is represented by a bell curve, 1/2 of the sample of any given population are considered mentally incapable of completing an undergraduate degree
So if “We all have a right to education”, shouldn’t we lower the standards to the point that even folks with an IQ of 30 could successfully complete our undergraduate and post-graduate degree programs? But what about the poor soul with an IQ of 28? :-(
If we don’t lower the standard, then we are acknowledging the fact that about 1/2 of the population are mentally incapable of completing college. When only 1/2 of the population can participate, that is hardly a right…
Pirate, weren’t you just yesterday saying something about “teach a man to fish?”
I understand if your ideas are based on simply looking out for what is best for you. However, if you are trying to make a point about what’s good and just, your statements seem self-contradictory.
Pirate…I lost 3 points off my IQ just reading your comment…
Your theory of minimal IQ needed to succeed in college is self-evidently flawed…being that you are an ECU Pirate.
Jerimee, you don’t need a college degree to learn how to fish (ie. technical/job training). I just so happen to believe that we need to increase access to this sort of training. I agree with Martin Lancaster and the Gov that we should not deny access to higher education for illegals, for instance.
The purpose of my post here is to make the point that higher education, however, is not a right. Anyone who has ever taken a political theory class can explain this to you in about two minutes. My comments about minimum IQ is only to make the point that a large portion of any given population are necessarily excluded from higher education. You can’t call something a “right” under these circumstances.
As far as my IQ goes, sturner, lets just say that according to my GRE scores for the graduate school I am attending, I scored in the top 99th percentile. I’ll let you do the math since you are so much more intelligent than I am. As far as ECU’s reputation for having low standards of admission for the undergraduate programs, I agree completely. ECU is far more concerned with quanity than quality. This is one of the reasons I have such a strong opinion about this whole notion that higher education is a “right”.
Um…pirate that was not actually my point, but thanks for the information anyway.
I hope your advisor does not read our blog.
Glad you scored in the “top 99th percentile” and not the bottom 99th percentile. I’ll let you do the math. It’s more fun that way.
NCSU can teach you how to fish