Armed school teachers – a warped idea whose time has arrived? Let’s hope not!

As one who follows political debate, one of the realities is that ideas once considered absolutely ludicrous can eventually become a part of law. Which is why people opposing nonsense have to be vigilant and never presume they’ve “won” a fight.

Nonsense image is some peoples' reality

That is the thought popping into my head as I hear the continued debate in the wake of the school shooting in Florida that left 17 dead.

BECAUSE SOME OF the people feeling the need to argue against sensible regulation of firearms are pushing a line of thought that strikes me as blatantly absurd – arming the school teachers.

The premise being that when someone comes into a classroom or other situation in the presence of school children to pose a threat, the teacher can whip out their pistol and kill the s-o-b. Thereby saving children’s lives.

The part that amazes me are those individuals who think this is some new concept – an original idea that must now be imposed for our overall protection.

Which, of course, it isn’t. This idea gets brought up following every incident involving school children; as thought its proponents are hoping we’ll now be inclined to see life in their own loopy way of viewing things.

PERSONALLY, THE FIRST time I ever recall someone suggesting the arming of school children was nearly 30 years ago.

It was following the 1988 incident in the North Shore suburbs involving Laurie Dann, a mentally unstable woman who had her own little rampage that included – at one point – entering an elementary school classroom while armed with a pistol.

The crackpots of three decades ago argued that Dann’s rampage could have been brought to a quicker end if the teacher had been armed and merely shot her dead.

Armed faculty idea as old as Laurie Dann

Actually, the teacher in that particular incident did try to defend her students, and in fact managed to disarm Dann of one of her weapons – which may have lessened the eventual body count (one dead, five wounded). The idea of a gunfight involving a teacher wasn’t necessary.

PERSONALLY, I WISH I hadn’t had to recall the Dann debacle – which later was found to include attempts to poison people across the North Shore. She was a mentally disturbed person in her own right.

Although I wonder if the people who seriously talk about wanting to provide school teachers with firearms are even more twisted.

That includes President Donald J. Trump, who this week said he would want teachers with military or special training backgrounds to be armed and prepared to shoot back in such incidents.

I think all that would accomplish is having even more bullets flying through the air in a crisis situation – and the likelihood that one of the teacher’s stray bullets would wind up taking out a student.

TRUMP TRIES ARGUING that “sicko shooters” would be deterred from attacking school situations because they’re “cowards.”

I’d argue that anybody inclined to bring a firearm into such a situation most likely is mentally unstable and isn’t going to be deterred by anything or anyone. Which means they’re situations where the “cowboy” mentality is the one most likely to cause a situation to escalate into a bloodbath.

TRUMP: Probably thinks he originated idea

But this idea is one that doesn’t seem to want to go away. The knuckleheads amongst the ideologues in our society seem determined to cling to this concept of a pistol-packing school teacher hoping the day comes when they’ll be capable of pushing it through from a fantasy into reality.

Those of us with sense need to maintain a vigilance against the idea; if we’re going to truly maintain a semblance of a safe and sane society.

  -30-

What does it mean that a teachers’ union (allegedly) likes Dillard?

DILLARD: Do teachers really like him?

“Yawn!!!”

That’s about all the reaction I can generate from the word that the Illinois Education Association, whose locals represent schoolteachers throughout the suburbs and rest of the state, is telling its members they should support Kirk Dillard for governor in the upcoming Republican primary election.

IT WAS NEVER a secret that groups representing education interests don’t think much of the gubernatorial candidacy of Bruce Rauner – who is targeting his campaigning to reach out to the kinds of people who like to dump on organized labor any chance they get.

The various unions have said they are interested in trying to knock out Rauner now, so as to not have him gain any strength that might bolster him in the Nov. 4 general election cycle against Gov. Pat Quinn.

So the endorsement by this particular teachers’ union really means nothing more than that they find Dillard – the state senator from Hinsdale who thinks the fact that he was once chief of staff to Gov. Jim Edgar anoints him as the front-runner – less offensive than the other Republican candidates.

Yes, it’s true that the GOP political operatives are thinking that with the lack of a competitive primary fight for governor and other political posts (does anybody think Tio Hardiman can top 10 percent of the vote on March 18?), there may be many voters ideologically leaning toward Democrats who will shift political parties for the primary to cast a vote for Dillard.

I’M JUST NOT convinced that it will be all that many people. Heck, Hardiman could wind up getting more votes than does any Republican gubernatorial candidate from a voter who usually leans Democrat!

 

RAUNER: Labor's Public Enemy No. 1?

I am convinced this is a whole lot of blather. Dillard – whom that Tribune poll earlier this week showed running dead last in the GOP primary for governor – may well be too far down for this to make any difference.

And I really believe much of the vote influenced by organized labor interests is going to remain in line with its usual thought process.

So yes, I believe that Rauner’s camp is being absurd with its own attacks on Dillard – whom he is trying to lambast for having anything to do with labor unions in any form.

AS RAUNER POINTED out in a statement he released Friday, Dillard has received campaign contributions in excess of $500,000 from unions that deal with state government during his time as an elected official.



QUINN: Will labor come back to Pat?

Considering, however, that Dillard has been in elected office since 1995, that means a half million dollars during a nearly two-decade period. Which really isn’t that much – particularly since most of that sum came specifically for Dillard’s failed 2010 bid for governor.

It comes across less as an attack against Dillard and more like a whine by Rauner that he’s not the one who’s getting the money – and that someone would dare to differ with him!

That’s what happens when one flaunts their own money about for a political campaign and makes it clear they’re going to be immune to the thoughts of certain parts of the political spectrum. You gain an enemy on Election Day.

BESIDES, I THINK that when the general election comes about, many of the people who cross over to Dillard will wind up coming back to Quinn. This may well be just another reason why whoever does win the Republican primary will wind up too bloodied to wage a serious fight against Quinn.

Who’s going to be well-rested and flush with campaign cash!

This could wind up being the photographic negative image of the 1994 election cycle – where Dawn Clark Netsch blew her financial wad to win a gubernatorial primary, and Edgar wound up tagging her right away with a negative image – one that she didn’t have enough money on hand to counter.

Rauner won’t be that broke on March 19. But Quinn will launch his political attack probably at 12:01 a.m. that very day! Which may sound mean-spirited. Then again, who really roots for the rich guy to prevail on Election Day?

  -30-

FREHRICHS: The IFT-preferred pol

EDITOR’S NOTE: For what it’s worth, the Illinois Federation of Teachers (which includes the outspoken Chicago Teachers Union) isn’t backing anybody for governor on March 18. In fact, the only statewide election endorsement they have made is for Michael Frehrichs, the Democrat running unopposed for state treasurer. Which may be a bigger yawn than the IEA backing Dillard.

It might be, it could be …

JACKSON: Losing his chance to mediate?

As I write this commentary Thursday afternoon, it appeared that the strike by the Chicago Teachers Union will only shutter the public schools for a week.

The teachers’ union’s House of Delegates is scheduled to meet Friday afternoon, giving some 700-plus delegates a chance to take a vote in support of a deal that would bring the strike to an end.

CLASSES COULD BE back in session come Monday. This strike could be the unofficial last week of summer break – one that came one week after classes officially began for the bulk of students in the Chicago Public Schools.

All of which strikes me as a “victory,” of sorts, for the union. They made their point that they could shutter the schools if they so wished. And classes will resume before public opinion can shift so drastically against the teachers union that they would start to feel serious backlash as a result of causing parents to be inconvenienced in finding a place for their kids to spend the day.

Which is kind of a shame because it creates the perception that the Chicago Public Schools are little more than a babysitting service. Certainly not a place that one  would send their child to in order to reinforce the intellectual skills they will need in order to have a chance to succeed in life.

But if it means that Rahm Emanuel has been smacked back a bit and that someone was capable of standing up to him, then perhaps that is good. Perhaps we shouldn’t be thinking of our government officials as invincible.

BECAUSE IT SEEMS that the only people who have been backing the mayor this week are those individuals with ideological hang-ups inclined to make them want to say “No!” anytime anyone associated with a labor union says anything.

I was somewhat amazed at the polls that showed a majority of actual people willing to support the teachers in their political fight with the school administration (which was being guided by Emanuel and other city officials).

Then again, it shouldn’t be shocking to learn that those ideologues don’t really represent the attitudes of the public, and that the only real reason they get so much attention is the volume of their voices. Does anybody really care what Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney thinks about a Chicago labor dispute?

He who shouts the loudest can’t be ignored – no matter how nonsensical their rhetoric truly is!

OF COURSE, I’M cadging my bets in writing this commentary because I’m fully aware of how something can always derail a deal at the last minute.

Even teachers union President Karen Lewis was saying that on a scale of 1 through 10, the chance of a contract agreement was a “nine.” Perhaps we all ought to be saying a prayer to whatever divine presence one prefers to believe in that the “1” doesn’t suddenly become a reality and cause picket lines to run into next week.

It really would be preferable if “the kids” were to go back to class come Monday. Some of them really can’t afford any distraction if they’re to have a chance to learn anything.

Besides, if it turns out that the strike is not settled, we may well have to turn to the Rev. Jesse Jackson for help.

FOR JACKSON ON Wednesday offered his services to mediate between the schools and the union in hopes of bringing the two sides together.

The man who has mediated in the Middle East and brought hostages back home to the United States would certainly gain an over-bloated ego if he were to gain any significant role in settling this labor dispute.

And just think of the blow to Emanuel's ego if he were to get upstaged by the Rev. Jackson?

  -30-

EDITOR'S NOTE: The headline is a take-off on long-time baseball broadcaster Harry Caray's home-run call. I'm holding off on the "it is" until I learn of an actual vote.

Rahm-bo tactics, not school talk, is what has teachers upset about extension

In theory, Mayor Rahm Emanuel is being rational and reasonable in his talk of wanting to extend the length of the school day in the Chicago Public Schools system.

EMANUEL: Tough talk ticks off teachers



A little more class time and a few more school days isn’t an unreasonable request. The idea of a school day that starts at 8 a.m. and ends at 3:30 p.m. – about 90 minutes per day more than what is currently being offered – is not a radical concept.

YET I CAN fully appreciate why school teachers are offended these days and are talking about the need for additional compensation if they’re going to be expected to do more work.

It’s because we’re getting Rahm-bo at work. Meaning, that persona Emanuel developed as a ranking advisor in the Bill Clinton White House and as chief of staff under President Barack Obama.

The tough-talking, hard-nosed guy who would engage in hard-core politics and pressure others into accepting his way.

This is the guy who got health care reform passed despite a vocal Republican opposition that was determined to do whatever it could to thwart it (and now openly talks about the day when they can try to repeal it – no matter what benefits it provides for our society).

EMANUEL IS NO longer taking on the House Republican caucus. Now, he has the Chicago Teachers Union in his sights.

Which is why he’s spewing the rhetoric meant to make schoolteachers think they ought to be grateful to be employed in any fashion. That might get the anti-union types off his back for a bit. But it’s not going to win over those people who aren’t interested in playing partisan politics – and actually have education issues on their minds.

They are taking it poorly. Just last week, Chicago Teachers Union head Karen Lewis was in the East Side neighborhood with a lot of those Wisconsin labor leaders who led those nationally-covered protests at the Statehouse in Madison, Wis.

Emanuel’s name got taken in vain on many an occasion – and his actions were compared negatively to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels – both of whom tried their own tactics this spring to try to take down their own teachers unions and their collective bargaining rights.

THAT’S GREAT COMPANY he’s putting himself into. And there is a touch of truth in the teacher retort that it wasn't their $40,000 pensions that put the Chicago Public Schools in financial distress.

But then again, there are those people who take an interest in immigration reform and the distinct lack of interest that the Obama Administration showed in the issue during the Emanuel years, and we start to wonder if Emanuel has some sort of hang-up against the people who theoretically are supposed to be his allies.

Because the opposition is those people who are disgusted with Emanuel because he succeeds even though he has ties to Clinton and Obama – and ought to be tainted beyond redemption if their view of the world were to prevail.

It just seems to me that Emanuel is going out of his way to tick off the people among the school teachers who ought to be his biggest supporters – and also are the ones who deal with the daily reality of what is wrong with the public schools system in this city.

IT’S NOT GOING to be pretty. It certainly wasn’t on Tuesday – which was the first day of school within the Chicago Public Schools system.

Emanuel made a point of offering “incentives” to the administration of every single public school in Chicago, provided they accepted his desire for a longer school day.

The Chicago Tribune reported that Emanuel offered schools $150,000 and individual teachers a $1,250 raise – if they shifted to a longer school day beginning now. If they make the shift in January, the schools would get $75,000, and the teacher raises would only be $800.

Realize that the $1,250 and $800 raises are for the entire school year. That ain’t much. The 2 percent boost can be seen as about an extra $40 per week.

FOR EMANUEL TO try to portray these boosts as something significant that the teachers should be thankful for is as pompous and arrogant a stance as the anti-labor activists like to think the unions themselves are making.

If this has become a fight of arrogance versus arrogance, then this is a political battle that will become incredibly ugly. Even though I don’t sense a strike anytime soon, I can’t help but wonder if this is going to be the trigger that will result in future incidents that will pile up – one on top of the other – until teachers feel they have no choice but to walk.

Would Emanuel be the type of mayor who would have his appointees who run the Chicago Public Schools try to impose scab school teachers in such an event? That would be a unique condition. I hope it never gets close to being that outrageous.

Because it already has become ridiculous enough. Like I wrote earlier, the demands themselves aren’t unreasonable.

KEEP IN MIND that Tuesday was the first day of school in the Chicago Public Schools system – which by tradition waits until after Labor Day to start classes.

Their suburban counterparts and the city’s private schools, many of whom are routinely outperforming the city public school students, have already been in class for two to three weeks – depending on which school district is involved.

It’s too bad that the mayoral arrogance covers up the truth of that statement.

  -30-

Freaky week for Chicago Public Schools

All within the confines of a single business day, the Chicago Public Schools learned earlier this week they were the losers in a legal dispute against their teachers union, while also having to engage in totalitarian tactics against parents who want to think of themselves as trying to preserve their neighborhood school.

In short, the public schools system had a freaky Monday.

IT WAS ON that day that a U.S. District Judge ruled that the school district blew it when they tried to lay off more than 700 teachers – all of whom had been with the schools long enough to qualify for that unique educational job protection known as tenure.

The Chicago Public Schools had laid off 1,300 teachers, about 700 of whom had tenure – which should have protected their jobs from such cuts. School officials have said the district’s financial situation is so severe that the cuts are necessary.

U.S. District Judge David Coar disagreed. His ruling gives the schools 30 days to work with the Chicago Teachers Union to come up with a process by which those tenured teachers can be rehired.

Although it should be noted that the Chicago Tribune reports that the schools had managed to find ways to rehire some of those teachers – even before the federal court ruling. Of the tenured teachers who had lost their jobs, 417 of them had already been rehired for different jobs within the Chicago Public Schools system.

OF COURSE, THAT is not stopping the school district from considering an appeal of Coar’s ruling. It’s not like they don’t want the tenured teachers back. They don’t want a court ruling that says they did something wrong. They want to be able to portray any re-hires as something they’re doing from the goodness of their collective heart – not because they have to.

This seems to be a procedural question. Attorneys for the teachers union have argued that the problem lies with the way the school district handled the layoffs. They were just dumped. There were no hearings that theoretically would give them a chance to argue the merits of keeping them on the payroll. There was no “due process.”

There also were questions over severance pay, which public schools officials argued was not necessary in this case because the cuts were being made for economic reasons.

There also was the fact that Chicago Public Schools officials had argued that some of the layoffs were due to bad performance on the job, although it was never made clear which teachers were being let go for job flaws and which for budgetary reasons.

COAR, WHO HEARD arguments last month from attorneys for both sides, issued his ruling in favor of the teachers union earlier this week, and included a segment in his written ruling saying that many of the teachers who were let go from their jobs actually had never received unsatisfactory reviews of their on-the-job performance.

It would be nice if this could be settled within the next few weeks. But this is likely to be an issue that will linger in the courts for far too long, and likely will increase the amount of tension that exists within the administration of the Chicago Public Schools.

I’d like to think it was not that “tension” being put on display when schools officials gave the order to cut off heat to the field house of an old school building in the Pilsen neighborhood that is being occupied these days by area residents.

Whittier Elementary School, near Wolcott and 23^rd streets, has been the site of a sit-in since mid-September. People want the field house structure preserved and converted into a library. School officials say they don’t have the money to do anything with the structure – except tear it down.

WHICH THEY ARGUE is necessary on the grounds that the structure is no longer safe. They argue the land could then be turned into a park or some other form of “green space” that area children would be able to use.

The same school officials who that day had lost in court against their teachers claim they’re not being vindictive against the parents who are refusing to leave the field house. They say having Peoples Gas cut off the heat is a precautionary measure so that inspectors can make one last inspection of the structure before they begin demolition.

But the Chicago Sun-Times reports that the parents in the building see this as an attempt to freeze them out – particularly since the overnight temperatures were dropping to as low as the mid-40 degrees.

For what it is worth, there haven’t been individuals holed up in the old field house every single moment since the sit-in began on Sept. 15. The parents are working in shifts, giving each other relief while ensuring that someone is in the building at all times so as to create an obstacle – should someone actually try to proceed with demolition,.

THOSE PEOPLE ARE managing to cope with the autumn temperatures by using electric heaters – which has me concerned more than anything else because I, as a reporter-type person, have written (and heard) way too many stories throughout the years of people suffering carbon-monoxide poisoning or of fires starting because of heater accidents. I only hope this sit-in situation does not take on tragic overtones.

But I do get my chuckle over the studies that have been done of the field house’s structural integrity. The Chicago Public Schools has an engineering firm that says the building must come down, while the parents came up with their own engineering study that says the roof could be rebuilt to allow the structure to survive.

So how does 25^th Ward Alderman Danny Solis respond to this? Perhaps with the ultimate political solution.

He wants to hire a third engineering firm to study the structure – thereby adding to the amount of time in which this field house remains an issue, which might ultimately make losing in the federal courts the least of the problems experienced this week by the Chicago Public Schools.

  -30-