Saturday, June 23, 2007

Arizona Budget Department of Education

An examination of the Arizona State Budget portion of the Department of Education revealed many good points and a few items that perhaps need illumination.

Increasing the base level funding by 3% seems a bit excessive when perhaps others must economize. $46,000,000 more payments to the schools must be accompanied by proven cost saving measures. Why raise the percentage rather than just award a one time bailout with mandated cost cutting?

An increase of 2% in the transportation funding amounts per route mile encourages the profligate use of expensive fuel resources. The transporting of children miles from their homes to attend a large school may be no longer cost effective when insurance and vehicle expenses plus an increase in fuel prices affect the bottom line. Granting the schools a 2% raise in transportation funding does nothing to encourage conservation of our monetary or fuel resources.

Research on small schools shows less discipline problems and other social benefits, while internet studies allow bright students to pursue their interests from world class instructors. Times have changed and our technology allows us to use different solutions than were previously available. Local small schools would relieve the state of huge transportation bills.

I would hope that the budget encourages conservation. Excess utilities also does nothing to encourage conservation, while the average citizen is being hit with increasing utility costs, the public schools get a raise.

I do not know the details of the funded e-learning program, but research in that area seems appropriate.


Dorothy Prater Niemi Ed.D. NAU 1995

Thursday, June 14, 2007

War Mongering

I see that war rhetoric is popular with the journalists, rather than the reasoned review of the possibilities of peace talks among adversaries in the region east of Europe yet west of China. Emphasis on war talk and downplaying the coming meeting of the minds is irresponsible.

Mr. Lieberman is openly calling for opening another front. What stupidity when the troop levels are now called insufficient for the present ambitions. Is this man representing the needs of the United States of America?

The cost of this two pronged war is astronomical in both human and economic terms. This course cannot be continued. When US casualty numbers are reported, perhaps the Iraqi casualties should also be shown, be they generated by civil war or our raids.

Let me create a scenario.

Mexico and Canada have been invaded by a great power hostile to us. Do we sit by or try and help those opposing the occupation? We might ready ourselves for war, in the face of warlike rhetoric and threats made by another near neighbor. Of course we act to protect ourselves. Anybody would. Mr. Ron Paul is correct. Walk a mile in my shoes.

So Iran is interested in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course we need to talk to Iran. And we do not need warmongers to succeed in setting off yet another Mideast war before the talks occur. Why do they not want the talks to succeed? Who is profiting by this war? Can we afford to waste these petroleum resources? How much in debt are we as a result of this war?

I do not understand why the fools did that 911 death dealing. More war mongering. We have the world we have. We must deal with the coming problems and take a long term view of the survival needs of our world community without decimating our living environment.

Our leaders are wasting time and resources to secure petroleum supplies that may run out before we can pay for the war. If the appointment of Navy to control what has been a ground war presages attacks from the sea, then perhaps the war mongers are at work. Protecting the international shipping lanes is legitimate: opening another war is not.

I think that all societies should reevaluate war mongering. Perhaps other leaders with new ideas for solving the problems will come to the forefront.

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

Immigration has been a reality since 50,000 years ago when Homo sapiens migrated to all corners of the world long before the concepts of partitioning and ownership grew out of territoriality morphed into land deeds. Migration is the history of our species.

Migration as a population relief valve has settled the world with humans but under present conditions any new migrations will be greeted by existing populations who may or may not be happy to see the newcomers. The arrival of significant numbers of a new cultural system brings change to the cultural totality through time. Recognition of enculturation mechanisms in a society is imperative. It should be remembered that the meeting of cultures has resulted in cultural blooms in art and innovation but has also produced gang activity in this country as evidenced by relationship between immigration and gang crime.

The superposition of nations over the natural migration patterns did not change the patterns. Control of the movement of peoples is a function of overpopulation as is war. War over resources also drains off excess population in the absence of somewhere to migrate.

So what does all this have to do with illegal immigration into the USA, the last human frontier on Earth?

Mexico was settled by Europeans rather earlier than the northern English colonies and already had significant Indian populations who had extensive trade routes throughout North America. Human populations prospered in Mexico as the native populations combined native and imported foods, improved agriculture and gained the metalworking technology of the Europeans. Agricultural success equaled population growth, thus setting the stage for modern migrations from Mexico to the north, where lower population densities and modern technology had created work.

Mexico’s birthrate outstrips the ability of their economy to produce well paying jobs, so the unemployed or underemployed take their chances and migrate to the USA to find work. Most of them find employment and work hard to improve their prospects while enrolling their children in our schools. These children are no longer ethnic Mexicans: they become acculturated to the USA and they become ours, illegal or not. This is an actuality, not a legal opinion. I have taught these children.

As for rounding up our friends and neighbors, I say that this is impossibility. It is simply not civilized to round people up, impound them, transport them to the border and dump them in Mexico. Then the Mexican government can deal with 12,000,000 economic refugees, feed and house them, take care of the sewage and crime problems and of course establish hostile camps all along our border. This would create an atmosphere of hatred and would encourage the development of anti-USA terrorism. It would be much better to integrate these people into our structure, put pressure on Mexico to prevent immigration and better distribute the wealth of their country and close the border to more illegal immigration through better interdiction along the border. Policies of providing free birth control needs and the education of women should be established in Mexico, along with economic incentives to restrict births. Estimates say that Mexico is exporting 500,000 people a year to the USA, a convenient pop off valve for excessive breeding. This unspoken policy on the part of the Mexican honchos has also resulted in billions of USA dollars exported to Mexico through these citizens working in the USA.

We are now at peace. Stirring up trouble is unnecessary. There is a peaceful solution to immigration and we should be committed to achieving this goal. I say listen to the leadership from Arizona, Texas, California and New Mexico. They will offer a practical solution to illegal immigration because they know the people and the circumstances.

Monday, June 04, 2007

RTA Election

ROADBUILDERS RULE


There appear to be several occurrences recently that together made a parody of our election laws.

The RTA election set forth by the roadbuilders lost in the polls but won the election. Now suspicions have arisen that the computer was programmed to flip votes, giving us an upside down tally.

Added to these coincidences is the fact that the pro RTA people did fund 22 pro RTA statements in the election booklet mailed to voters. This gave the impression that 22 people paid $100 each or the privilege of expressing their opinion about the RTA proposals
The actuality was that the pro RTA committee had paid $2200 to buy the ad spots in the election literature without noting that fact, kind of like sending letters through proxies but nobody is supposed to know about it but a few insiders. I call the opinions expressed under the aegis of the pro-RTA committee ads because that is what they were. I think it is required by law to sign an election booklet opinion when you pay for it. The pro RTA committee lawyer was ‘unaware’ of this law and received a slap on the wrist for falsifying election literature. Voters were deceived.

The parody comes in when the poor schmuck voter is sent misleading election literature. Corruption in elections is corruption in governments.

Hey man, you make a fool of us when you lie, cheat and maybe steal our tax dollars for bogus projects. First the untrustworthy election materials, now this alleged flipping off the electorate with slick rhetoric and maybe a few bucks on the side for somebody plus a very large roadbuilder mealticket, all on the taxpayer’s dollars.

What some people won’t do to get their hands on money…undermine the election process for short term goals is a guaranteed long term failure. Trust in our elections is more important than roadbuilders, trust me.