Political activism in schools
Cheri Pierson Yecke couldn't put her partisanship away long enough to head Minnesota's schools, so she went over to the Center of the American Experiment, where conservativism is welcome regardless of the logic behind it. Today, she issued a report that says Minnesota needs tougher laws to prevent school employees from engaging in campaign activities.
Is this really necessary? There is no question that employees paid directly by the state should not use state time or equipment to campaign. But teachers aren't state employees. Furthermore, there isn't much evidence that this is a widespread problem. The oft-quoted (by Republicans) incident where a teacher sent kids home with a DFL flier was an accident. And using e-mail accounts to debate isn't necessarily crossing the line. Yecke also said that she would prefer to ban campaign events in schools, a terrible idea.
If we ban teachers from these activities, how about contractors that get state money? What's the difference? It doesn't appear that teachers have crossed any lines, so let's leave things be.
1 Comments:
Since the majority of public school teacher pay comes from the state and rest is heavily regulated by the state, they are certainly de facto state employees.
But having read the C. P. Yecke report, I largely agree that this is overblown. Her "cures" would be just as problematic. Current law and public opinion are sufficient to handle the outlandish cases.
She does have a point on financial referendums, however. It is difficult to get accurate information on which to make your vote. Pat Harvey, superintendent of St. Paul, says her budget is there for all to see. True, but it runs 386 pages!
A standard 1-5 page summary, much like a shareholder annual report, could be designed and mandated.
Post a Comment
<< Home