Ronald Reagan was the TEA Party!

/in , , /by

Newly re-elected Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ) on CNN’s Jake Tapper show stated, “I’m a conservative. I’ve governed as a conservative in this state, and I think that’s led to some people disagreeing with me in our state, because it’s generally a left-of-center, blue state.”

But is Christie truly a conservative?

Republicans, like Christie, often quote Ronald Reagan when speaking about conservatism. In September 2011 Christie spoke at the Reagan Library, his topic was “Real American Exceptionalism“. Christie focused on Ronald Reagan’s stand against striking air traffic controllers in 1981. Christie said, “The air traffic controllers, in violation of their contracts, went on strike.  President Reagan ordered them back to work, making clear that those who refused would be fired. In the end, thousands refused, and thousands were fired. I cite this incident not as a parable of labor relations but as a parable of principle. Ronald Reagan was a man who said what he meant and meant what he said. Those who thought he was bluffing were sadly mistaken.  Reagan’s demand was not an empty political play; it was leadership, pure and simple.”

“We tend to still understand foreign policy as something designed by officials in the State Department and carried out by ambassadors and others overseas. And to some extent it is. But one of the most powerful forms of foreign policy is the example we set. This is where it is instructive to harken back to Ronald Reagan and the PATCO affair. President Reagan’s willingness to articulate a determined stand and then carry it out at home sent the signal that the occupant of the Oval Office was someone who could be predicted to stand by his friends and stand up to his adversaries. If President Reagan would do that at home, leaders around the world realized that he would do it abroad as well.  Principle would not stop at the water’s edge,” noted Christie.

Reagan’s policies were based upon in what has become known as his “three legged stool”. Some call them the “Three Pillars of Conservatism”.

Kevin Price from Renew America writes, “If you know of Ronald Reagan, you are likely to be aware of his ‘three legged stool.’ Reagan developed a success formula to build winning coalitions that was as simple as it was brilliant. A sample of that simplicity and one of the hallmarks of Reagan’s policies was his ‘three legged stool.’ Reagan’s policies were built on three ideas; free enterprise, strong defense, and pro-family social policies. He chose these three because they, of course, reflected his own values, but he also realized that each of these ideas have enormous appeal on their own.”

Reagan was a man of principle, true conservatives are as well. Compromise on matters of principle is foreign to conservatives. Conservatives intuitively know that compromise on principles is the art of losing slowly.

J. Matt Barber from Christian News Today in his column “The Complete Conservative” writes, “I recently attended the Ronald Reagan Centennial Celebration hosted by the Republican Party of Virginia. It was co-sponsored by, among others, the Ronald Reagan Institute for Conservative Leadership. Michael Reagan, the oldest child of the man widely considered our greatest modern president, was the keynote speaker. Mr. Reagan said something that I think concisely sums up the core values shared by the ragtag millions who comprise the Tea Party movement. ‘People often ask me if Ronald Reagan would have supported the Tea Party,” he said. ‘Ronald Reagan was the Tea Party’.”

Speculation about who is the frontrunner for in the 2016 presidential Republican primaries has begun. The media always frames the Republican selection process as a need to run as a conservative in order to win the primary but run as a moderate in order to win the White House. That strategy was unsuccessful for both John McCain and Mitt Romney.

Price wrote, “Today, the common cry from economic conservatives is that they are the only ones with a message that matters to the voting public. After 40 years of Roe vs. Wade, we have two generations who only know a country with abortion on demand, they argue. Secondly, many conservatives have grown suspicious of ‘the military’ leg. They believe that just as the government has gotten suspicious in its domestic spending, it has also lost its bearings when it comes to defense and has found itself being internationalists with muscle. Essentially, ‘the three legged stool’ is being replaced by a pogo stick. A single area of interest and concern — the economy, being the springboard for political success.”

Price concludes, “The reality is the ‘three legged stool’ tripled the reasons why one would vote Republican. If the GOP provides the only means to protect traditional families, Christian conservatives will support it, regardless of the other legs of the stool. I think the same can be [said] of the other parts of a coalition that made the Republican Party very successful. If the stool is dead, the fortunes of the party may be also.”

Has the GOP adopted a “pogo stick” as the only path for political success? If so, losses as far as the eye can see may occur, as they did in Virginia, a state that could have elected the conservative Ken Cuccinelli.

Barry Goldwater wrote, “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!”

It not the economy stupid, its the three legged stool!

RELATED COLUMNS: 

Tea party peeved with GOP over governor races, says Ken Cuccinelli was robbed

Christie Sued on His Victory Day

 McConnell Debt Plan: Press Release Conservatism

The Republican Establishment Lost Virginia

Look to Cruz, Not Christie

Has there been a “redistribution of political power” in America?

/in , , /by

There is a growing sense among Americans that political power has shifted away from the people. City and county governments, school boards and state legislatures are losing political power while the federal government becomes more powerful politically. Just ask any of your locally elected officials about the rules and regulations coming from “on high”.

Many believe there has been a redistribution of political power in the United States.

Gallup in December 2011 found, “Americans’ concerns about the threat of big government continue to dwarf those about big business and big labor, and by an even larger margin now than in March 2009. The 64% of Americans who say big government will be the biggest threat to the country is just one percentage point shy of the record high, while the 26% who say big business is down from the 32% recorded during the recession. Relatively few name big labor as the greatest threat.”

This fear led to the creation of the TEA Party in 2008 and Occupy Movement in 2011. Organizations like the Oath Keepers, 912 Project and the Tenth Amendment movement are expanding. Coincidently, there are growing numbers of lawsuits by and against states involving the federal government.

The redistribution of political power has caused an explosion of internet bloggers such as the Drudge Report, Huffington Post, Breitbart.com, ProPublica and Watchdog Wire. A growing Fifth estate, revealing the secret inner workings of the federal government, includes the likes of WikiLeaks, Project Veritas and a growing number of whistleblowers.

Milton Friedman in Capitalism and Freedom wrote, “Economic power can be widely dispersed. There is no law of conservation which forces the growth of new centers of economic strength at the expense of existing centers. Political power, on the other hand, is more difficult to decentralize. There can be numerous small independent governments. But it is far more difficult to maintain numerous equipotent small centers of political power in a single large government than it is to have numerous centers of economic strength in a single large economy.”

Friedman noted, “There can be many millionaires in one large economy. But can there be more than one really outstanding leader, one person on whom the energies and enthusiasms of his country – men are centered?”

Friedman stated, “If the central government gains power, it is likely to be at the expense of local governments. There seems to be something like a fixed total of political power to be distributed. Consequently, if economic power is joined to political power, concentration seems almost inevitable.”

“On the other hand, if economic power is kept in separate hands from political power, it can serve as a check and counter to political power,” wrote Friedman.

To prove his point Friedman used a hypothetical example to reinforce his point on how the market works to preserve political freedom. In Capitalism and Freedom he wrote:

“One feature of a free society is surely the freedom of individuals to advocate and propagandize openly for a radical change in the structure of society – so long as the advocacy is restricted to persuasion and does not include the use of force or other forms of coercion. It is a mark of the political freedom of a capitalist society that men can openly advocate and work for socialism. Equally, political freedom in a socialist society would require that men be free to advocate for the introduction of capitalism.”

But how can the freedom to advocate for capitalism be preserved and protected in a social society? That is the question many believe the US is facing.

The answer: In order for men to advocate for or against anything, they first must “be able to earn a living”.

The more men are able to earn a living the more free they are to advocate. However, in socialist societies all jobs are under direct control of the political authorities. Friedman states, “It would be an act of self-denial … for a socialist government to permit employees to advocate policies directly contrary to official doctrine.” Hence the growing concern about fewer working and more of those who are working are filling part time jobs.

The more jobs are controlled by political authorities the less freedom. History tells us so. So when a politician says his role is to “create jobs” beware.

St. Lucie County, Florida withdraws from Seven50 Plan (+ Video)

/in , , /by

Watch the November 7, 2013 meeting of the St. Lucie Board of County Commission that culminates with the Commission voting 4-1 to withdraw from the regional Seven50 Plan.

St. Lucie Board of County Commission. For a larger view click on the photo.

The following email was received by WDW – FL from the American Coalition 4 Property Rights Task Force:

All,

First, let me tell you our reactions last night following the St. Lucie Board of County Commissioner’s courageous decision to formally withdraw from the Seven50 Regional Plan. The very fact that they chose to vote immediately following the Seven50 Staff’s grand presentation, and to do it while their staff was still sitting in the BOCC Chamber was simply amazing. Immediately after the vote, we stood there feeling both numb and humbled, saying to ourselves……did this just happen ?

On our way home I said to June “OMG, so this is what is feels like after a well fought political victory. What a concept”. It had been so long since I felt that way that I had truly forgotten … and we both liked it!

We were feeling so very grateful and humbled by the help & support present at this event. There are so many public & private individuals who put in countless hours supporting this Stop Seven50 movement. There are so many, we will not attempt to single out individuals because we do not want to offend someone who could possibly be left out. Over the past few months, an army of dedicated and talented folks have worked hard to achieve the results we so desperately desired and needed last evening. Many have endeavored long hours behind the scenes without fanfare or even looking for recognition. We are truly blessed and very thankful for all of your efforts. It really has taken a team of committed and passionate individuals working together to accomplish this victory for the citizens of St. Lucie County.

With that said, we have one more request for all involved, especially in the AC4PR Task Force. We’ve received a great deal of support from members in Indian River, Martin & Palm Beach Counties. They have not only worked behind the scenes to support St. Lucie County, but have traveled at great personal expense and time commitment to attend and participate in our SLC efforts. We feel it is therefore our obligation to help them in turn. Much work still needs to be done in IRC with the City of Sebastian, Town of Fellsmere and the IRC MPO. There’s also a great deal of work needed in Martin & Palm Beach County. We still very much need your help & support in these locations to accomplish what has been achieved in SLC. So, please take a few days to bask in the wonderful feelings of victory, then get ready to roll up your sleeves and get back to work ! No groans please……

Lastly, two things we have all learned over the past few months and leading up to last evening at the SLC BOCC meeting: “Victory is always possible for the person who refuses to stop fighting.” (Quote by – Napoleon Hill) And … “Democracy Belongs To Those Who Show Up” !

Feel free to forward to others.

In Liberty,

Leigh & June Lamson, members
American Coalition 4 Property Rights Task Force
SLC 912 Tea Party Leadership Team

Florida veterans hit with massive property insurance rate increase on Veterans Day

/in , , /by

Many of Florida’s 1.6 million veterans have their property insurance with United Services Automobile Association (USAA). USAA’s membership base is primarily active duty military, military retirees, veterans and their families. Over the Veterans Day weekend policyholders received their new USAA policies. Florida’s veterans were shocked that, for a second year in a row, they are being hit with a massive increase in property insurance rates. Most of Florida’s veterans are on a fixed income.

Senior Chief Geoff Ross USN (Ret.) from Navarre, Florida in an email to WDW – FL writes, “Today your friendly Senior Chief got into a pissing contest with his homeowners insurance company USAA. They just can’t stop jacking up my rates this time almost doubling my policy. So in my polite and cordial tone I called them up and politely told them where to shove their new rate. The lady actually was very nice and tried very hard not to lose me as a customer after 14 years with this company.”

A Sarasota County veteran who has been a member of USAA for thirty-nine years, saw the property insurance on his modest home go up $741.95. According to his USAA policy, “Of this amount, $693.26 is due to a rate increase, and $48.69 is due to other changes initiated by you or us.” Nothing changed on his home in 2013, which was built in 1990, and he changed nothing on his policy other than increase his deductibles in 2012 to reduce his premium. He raised his risk to keep his costs down, as he is on a fixed income.

WDW – FL contributor Ruth Roman wrote, “Flood insurance premiums for Floridians are expected to rise sharply as the result of new rate hikes which have gone into effect October 1, 2013.  ‘They are not aware of what is about to hit them,’ said Pattit Latshaw of St. Petersburg-based Wright National Flood Insurance Co., the largest underwriter of federal flood insurance in the U.S. The repercussions of these hikes will be devastating for homeowners and small businesses alike.”

When the Sarasota veteran contacted USAA about why the dramatic and costly increase he was referred to paragraph 6 of his policy which states in bold letters, “IN RESPONSE TO FLORIDA LEGISLATION SB1486, LAW AND ORDINANCE COVERAGE IS AN IMPORTANT COVERAGE THAT YOU MAY WISH TO PURCHASE. YOU MAY ALSO NEED TO CONSIDER THE PURCHASE OF FLOOD INSURANCE FROM THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. WITHOUT THIS COVERAGE, YOU MAY HAVE UNCOVERED LOSSES. PLEASE DISCUSS THESE COVERAGES WITH YOUR INSURANCE AGENT.”

The Sarasota veteran’s USAA policy also states in paragraph 9, “Your policy does NOT cover loss due to flood from any source. For information about obtaining flood coverage from the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), call USAA at (800) 531-8722, or contact the NFIP directly.”

The NFIP website states, “In 2012, the U.S. Congress passed the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 which calls on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and other agencies, to make a number of changes to the way the NFIP is run. As the law is implemented, some of these changes have already occurred, and others will be implemented in the coming months. Key provisions of the legislation will require the NFIP to raise rates to reflect true flood risk, make the program more financially stable, and change how Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) updates impact policyholders. The changes will mean premium rate increases for some – but not all — policyholders over time.”

Florida is hardest hit as it is both flood and hurricane prone. The Sarasota veterans home is not in, but is near, a floodplain. The Sarasota, Florida veteran also noted that his property insurance policy includes coverage for: Volcanic Eruption; Weight of Ice, Snow or Sleet; Explosion; Riot or Civil Commotion; and Aircraft.

If the Sarasota veteran’s home is not in a flood plain then what caused such a dramatic increase in his annual property insurance premium? Answer: Surcharges.

His USAA policy statement under “surcharges” lists the following:

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FUND $2.00
FL HURRICANE CATASTROPHE FUND (FHCF) PREMIUM RECOUPMENT $276.45
FL HURRICANE CATASTROPHE EMERGENCY ASSESSMENT $48.51
CITIZENS EMERGENCY ASSESSMENT $37.32
FL INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION RECOUPMENT $22.12

Total – $386.40

Chief Ross noted something else strange when talking with his USAA insurance agent.

ross fish pond

Chief Ross’ Koi fish pond. For a larger view click on the image.

“Well what was interesting was this fact. I put in a Koi fish pond a few years ago in my backyard. Its pretty cool and it has fed many Blue Herons in the past that swoop in and steal my aquatic buddies. But check this out. The lady on the phone said I have a beautiful house and my back yard is lovely with a lovely pond. Let me tell you boys and girls I did not tell my insurance company I put in a Koi pond. There is only one way you can see this feature due to my location and that is from the air,” notes Ross.

Ross concludes, “Using my superior skills of decisive intellect and previous life hanging out with CIA operators I conclude these people took aerial pictures of my house to see if I am adding improvements, pool, etc.I am so isolated out here surrounded by trees etc. the only way to see in my back is from above. I asked the lady how did she know I have a fish pond in my backyard and she did not reply. I could here her shuffling the pictures of my home around in her hand. Boys and girls if you have homeowners insurance with USAA and you put in a swimming pool or add on a new room they will know about it…… look above you for the satellite taking pictures. Skinny dippers beware.”

So veterans across Florida are faced with either paying the higher premiums, taking on more risk to reduce their property insurance rate or cancelling their USAA policy. Happy Veterans Day 2013!

Letter demands AG Bondi investigate misconduct by Florida elected and appointed officials

/in , , /by

A coalition of twelve Florida based organizations has sent a letter to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi stating, “We the undersigned, ask that your office immediately launch an investigation into the possibility of widespread official misconduct potentially involving fraudulent activity and malfeasance, by elected and appointed officials. While our concerns are primarily involved with SE Florida, the results of such an investigation may affect all Floridians, with likely national ramifications.”

The letter is signed by: Taking Our Country Back: Randy McLendon, Tea Party Ft. Lauderdale: Danita Kilcullen/Jack Gillies, Save America Foundation: Fred Brownbill, FL Panhandle Patriots: Brenda Follis-Lengyel, The American Citizen’s League: Bob Knox, The American Coalition 4 Property Rights: Phyllis Frey, Taylor County Tea Party: Bob Root, Tea Party Solutions: Steve Hunter, Martin County 9/12 Tea Party Committee: Cindy Lucas, North Pinellas 912 Project: Debra/Tony Caso, Gilchrist County Tea Party: Charlie Perez, The Highlands Tea Party: John Nelson, Northport Patriots: Sherry Smart and Tea Party of Punta Gorda Mark Zehr. Combined these groups represent over 16,475 Floridians.

Fox News reports, “Through the stroke of the pen, President Obama on Friday [November 1, 2013] used his executive powers to elevate and take control of climate change policies in an attempt to streamline sustainability initiatives – and potentially skirt legislative oversight and push a federal agenda on states. The executive order establishes a task force of state and local officials to advise the administration on how to respond to severe storms, wildfires, droughts and other potential impacts of climate change. The task force includes governors of seven states — all Democrats — and the Republican governor of Guam, a U.S. territory. Fourteen mayors and two other local leaders also will serve on the task force.”

PBS Newshour‘s Margaret Talev states, “What’s really interesting about this [Presidential] task force is that it is really codifying, it’s laying down the policy for the Obama administration for the sort of stuff that he can’t do though Congress because Congress will not cooperate with his policy goals on this front. And so, the real question becomes one of funding. If these agencies said we need x amount of dollars to rebuild this bridge; shore up this shoreline; work on roads and infrastructure and be prepared for wildfires and excessive heat; it will still be up to Congress to decide how to appropriate. But to the extent that he can use executive power to further his policy goals and say ‘hey, I believe climate change exists and we need to take it seriously. ‘This is his effort to do that.”

The letter states, “At the heart of our allegations is what appears to be a long-term conspiracy by numerous SE Florida officials and their science advisors to deceive Floridians about the full range of causes and effects of climate change. This conspiracy involves the use of the unproven hypothesis of mankind being the primary agent of climate change. We believe it can be shown that the citizens of Florida have been injured by local and state officials’ inappropriate use of this flawed hypothesis and associated, potentially fraudulent, unreliable, and manipulated data, and untrustworthy climate science reports. The source of this bad climate science is primarily from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN-IPCC) and similar unreliable climate reports from agencies within the US government, State of Florida offices, as well as governing documents and policies of city and county governing bodies.”

The letter concludes with, “Further, although there is much money available to those who have been pushing man made climate change, we as individual citizens or groups of citizens cannot mount an expensive effort to fight this climate charade. We therefore call on your office to fully fund and lead this necessary investigation in the interest of all Floridians. If required, we would be willing to supply a list of independent conflict-free, national and international climate science experts who would add greatly to the investigation’s credibility. We look forward to your response to our request and respectfully ask that you provide it by Thanksgiving, November 28, 2013.”

RELATED COLUMN: Global warming ‘pause’ may last for 20 more years and Arctic sea ice has already started to recover

RELATED VIDEO: An executive order puts climate change up front from PBS Newshour.

It’s War: GOP establishment goes after TEA Party, TEA Party Goes RINO hunting

/in , , /by

There are multiple reports that “establishment” Republicans are going after those who do not think like them. It is also reported that the TEA Party is targeting the eighty-seven house Republicans who voted on October 16th to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling. Republican members of the Florida delegation in Congress Vern Buchanan (co-Chair of the delegation), Gus Bilirakis, Ander Crenshaw, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Daniel Webster voted with Democrats to end the government shutdown.

How will this impact Florida elections in 2014? Only the primaries will tell.

Breitbart’s Matthew Boyle reports, “The National Republican Senate Committee, the GOP campaign arm responsible for Senate elections, has decided to use its political power to block consulting firm Jamestown Associates from receiving political work from GOP candidates or incumbents. Jamestown’s “sin” is working with the Senate Conservative Fund, an organization that supports conservative candidates for the US Senate.”

“Jamestown Associates has done work with the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF), a conservative group largely responsible for the elections of Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Rand Paul (R-KY), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Pat Toomey (R-PA), and Ron Johnson (R-WI), among others. Former Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), who left the U.S. Senate last year to become the president of the Heritage Foundation, founded SCF,” notes Boyle.

Paul Bedard from the Washington Examiner writes, “Tea Party leaders Monday announced plans to hunt down the 87 House Republicans who recently voted to reopen the government, fund Obamacare and raise the debt ceiling, and demand they return donations from conservatives. They’ve dubbed their prey “RINOs” — Republicans in name only — an intra-party slur conservatives have for liberal Republicans.”

“These RINOs have let the American people down and it is time for us to get our money back,” said Dan Backer, Treasurer of the Tea Party Leadership Fund, which is leading the new effort. They created a special website where anybody can ask for their refund back. “We want our money back, and you should ask for yours back too, from any RINO who voted to fund Obamacare,” he added.

The same group recently launched PrimaryTraitors.com to rally support for primaries against the 87.

Watchdog Wire contributor Mary Kay Ruppel writes, “Republicans are fond of calling themselves conservatives when running for office. Once elected they tend to do something other than what they promised.  Republicans talk about having a ‘big tent’, but as of late that big tent excludes conservative groups and individuals such as Libertarians and members of the TEA Party.”

Abraham Lincoln stated, “A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free.” The Republican House of Representatives appears to be divided.

Former Arizona Senator and candidate for President Barry Goldwater wrote, “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!”

The war is on for the heart and soul of the Republican party of Florida. Who wins can determine the future elections in the sunshine state in 2014  and the nation in 2016.

Below is the petition to TEA Party supporters urging action against the five Florida lawmakers (courtesy of the Washington Examiner).

Dear 87 House RINOs: You don’t deserve my money, GIVE IT BACK!

We believed in them. We believed they, like us, saw our nation’s finances careening out of control and were committed to doing something about it. We believed they realized this president has added more to our national debt than all previous presidents combined. We thought even if we can’t stop ObamaCare now, we at least could stop digging the holes even deeper.

But the RINOs who joined forces with liberal Democrats to raise the debt limit and end the shutdown let us down. They took our money and our hopes for smaller government, and they abused them. We were raised to believe people delivered when they took money for something. But these traitors to the cause took the money, then delivered a vote for bigger government, more taxes, more spending, more government dependence, more human misery.

It’s time we take action. RINOs, we need you out of our party, out of Congress, out of any position where you even pretend to hold public trust. We’ll take care of the “out of Congress” part come election day, but what we need now is our money back. We need a refund. We need a RINO refund because we didn’t get what we thought we were supporting … not by a long shot.

It is the honorable thing to do. Have they any honor left?

132 Catholic Professors take “Extraordinary Step” of asking all Bishops to Stop Common Core

/in , /by

One hundred thirty-two Catholic Professors have taken “the extraordinary step” of signing a letter that asks all Catholic Bishops to stand up and firmly oppose Common Core. The letter states, “[W]e are convinced that Common Core is so deeply flawed that it should not be adopted by Catholic schools which have yet to approve it, and that those schools which have already endorsed it should seek an orderly withdrawal now.”

The letter states, “Sadly, over one hundred Catholic dioceses have set aside our teaching tradition in favor of these secular standards. Common Core adopts a bottom-line, pragmatic approach to education. The heart of its philosophy is, as far as we can see, that it is a waste of resources to ‘over-educate’ people.”

The letter notes that, “[N]otwithstanding the good intentions of those who made these decisions, Common Core was approved too hastily and with inadequate consideration of how it would change the character and curriculum of our nation’s Catholic schools. We believe that implementing Common Core would be a grave disservice to Catholic education in America.”

The below letter was sent to each Catholic bishop in the United States. At the end are the names of the 132 Catholic professors who signed the letter.

Gerard V. Bradley, Professor of Law
c/o University of Notre Dame, The Law School
3156 Eck Hall of Law, PO Box 780
Notre Dame, IN 46556

October 16, 2013

Your Excellency:

We are Catholic scholars who have taught for years in America’s colleges and universities. Most of us have done so for decades. A few of us have completed our time in the classroom; we are professors “emeriti.” We have all tried throughout our careers to put our intellectual gifts at the service of Christ and His Church. Most of us are parents, too, who have seen to our children’s education, much of it in Catholic schools. We are all personally and professionally devoted to Catholic education in America.

For these reasons we take this extraordinary step of addressing each of America’s Catholic bishops about the “Common Core” national reform of K-12 schooling. Over one hundred dioceses and archdioceses have decided since 2010 to implement the Common Core. We believe that, notwithstanding the good intentions of those who made these decisions, Common Core was approved too hastily and with inadequate consideration of how it would change the character and curriculum of our nation’s Catholic schools. We believe that implementing Common Core would be a grave disservice to Catholic education in America.

In fact, we are convinced that Common Core is so deeply flawed that it should not be adopted by Catholic schools which have yet to approve it, and that those schools which have already endorsed it should seek an orderly withdrawal now.

Why – upon what evidence and reasoning – do we take such a decisive stand against a reform that so many Catholic educators have endorsed, or at least have acquiesced in? In this brief letter we can only summarize our evidence and sketch our reasoning. We stand ready, however, to develop these brief points as you wish. We also invite you to view the video recording of a comprehensive conference critically examining Common Core, held at the University of Notre Dame on September 9, 2013. (For a copy of the video, please contact Professor Gerard Bradley at the address above.)

News reports each day show that a lively national debate about Common Core is upon us. The early rush to adopt Common Core has been displaced by sober second looks,and widespread regrets. Several states have decided to “pause” implementation. Others have opted out of the testing consortia associated with Common Core. Prominent educators and political leaders have declared their opposition. The national momentum behind Common Core has, quite simply, stopped. A wave of reform which recently was thought to be inevitable now isn’t. Parents of K- 12 children are leading today’s resistance to the Common Core. A great number of these parents are Catholics whose children attend Catholic schools.

Much of today’s vigorous debate focuses upon particular standards in English and math. Supporters say that Common Core will “raise academic standards.” But we find persuasive the critiques of educational experts (such as James Milgram, professor emeritus of mathematics at Stanford University, and Sandra Stotsky, professor emerita of education at the University of Arkansas) who have studied Common Core, and who judge it to be a step backwards. We endorse their judgment that this “reform” is really a radical shift in emphasis, goals, and expectations for K-12 education, with the result that Common Core-educated children will not be prepared to do authentic college work. Even supporters of Common Core admit that it is geared to prepare children only for community-college-level studies.

No doubt many of America’s Catholic children will study in community colleges. Some will not attend college at all. This is not by itself lamentable; it all depends upon the personal vocations of those children, and what they need to learn and do in order to carry out the unique set of good works entrusted to them by Jesus. But none of that means that our Catholic grade schools and high schools should give up on maximizing the intellectual potential of every student. And every student deserves to be prepared for a life of the imagination, of the spirit, and of a deep appreciation for beauty, goodness, truth, and faith.

The judgments of Stotsky and Milgram (among many others) are supported by a host of particulars. These particulars include when algebra is to be taught, whether advanced mathematics coursework should be taught in high school, the misalignment of writing and reading standards, and whether cursive writing is to be taught. We do not write to you, however, to start an argument about particulars. At least, that is a discussion for another occasion and venue. We write to you instead because of what the particular deficiencies of Common Core reveal about the philosophy and the basic aims of the reform. We write to you because we think that this philosophy and these aims will undermine Catholic education, and dramatically diminish our children’s horizons.

Promoters of Common Core say that it is designed to make America’s children “college and career ready.” We instead judge Common Core to be a recipe for standardized workforce preparation. Common Core shortchanges the central goals of all sound education and surely those of Catholic education: to grow in the virtues necessary to know, love, and serve the Lord, to mature into a responsible, flourishing adult, and to contribute as a citizen to the process of responsible democratic self-government. Common Core adopts a bottom-line, pragmatic approach to education. The heart of its philosophy is, as far as we can see, that it is a waste of resources to “over-educate” people. The basic goal of K-12 schools is to provide everyone with a modest skill set; after that, people can specialize in college – if they end up there. Truck-drivers do not need to know Huck Finn. Physicians have no use for the humanities. Only those destined to major in literature need to worry about Ulysses.

Perhaps a truck-driver needs no acquaintance with Paradise Lost to do his or her day’s work. But everyone is better off knowing Shakespeare and Euclidean geometry, and everyone is capable of it. Everyone bears the responsibility of growing in wisdom and grace and in deliberating with fellow-citizens about how we should all live together. A sound education helps each of us to do so.

The sad facts about Common Core are most visible in its reduction in the study of classic, narrative fiction in favor of “informational texts.” This is a dramatic change. It is contrary to tradition and academic studies on reading and human formation. Proponents of Common Core do not disguise their intention to transform “literacy” into a “critical” skill set, at the expense of sustained and heartfelt encounters with great works of literature.

Professor Stotsky was the chief architect of the universally-praised Massachusetts English language arts standards, which contributed greatly to that state’s educational success. She describes Common Core as an incubator of “empty skill sets . . . [that] weaken the basis of literary and cultural knowledge needed for authentic college coursework.” Rather than explore the creativity of man, the great lessons of life, tragedy, love, good and evil, the rich textures of history that underlie great works of fiction, and the tales of self-sacrifice and mercy in the works of the great writers that have shaped our cultural literacy over the centuries, Common Core reduces reading to a servile activity.

Professor Anthony Esolen, now at Providence College, has taught literature and poetry to college students for two decades. He provided testimony to a South Carolina legislative committee on the Common Core, lamenting its “cavalier contempt for great works of human art and thought, in literary form.” He further declared: “We are not programming machines. We are teaching children. We are not producing functionaries, factory-like. We are to be forming the minds and hearts of men and women.”

Thus far Common Core standards have been published for mathematics and English language arts. Related science standards have been recently released by Achieve, Inc. History standards have also been prepared by another organization. No diocese (for that matter, no state) is bound to implement these standards just by dint of having signed onto Common Core’s English and math standards. We nonetheless believe that the same financial inducements, political pressure, and misguided reforming zeal that rushed those standards towards acceptance will conspire to make acceptance of the history and science standards equally speedy – and unreflective and unfortunate.

These new standards will very likely lower expectations for students, just as the Common Core math and English standards have done. More important, however, is the likelihood that they will promote the prevailing philosophical orthodoxies in those disciplines. In science, the new standards are likely to take for granted, and inculcate students into a materialist metaphysics that is incompatible with, the spiritual realities –soul, conceptual thought, values, free choice, God– which Catholic faith presupposes.

We fear, too, that the history standards will promote the easy moral relativism, tinged with a pervasive anti-religious bias, that is commonplace in collegiate history departments today.

Common Core is innocent of America’s Catholic schools’ rich tradition of helping to form children’s hearts and minds. In that tradition, education brings children to the Word of God. It provides students with a sound foundation of knowledge and sharpens their faculties of reason. It nurtures the child’s natural openness to truth and beauty, his moral goodness, and his longing for the infinite and happiness. It equips students to understand the laws of nature and to recognize the face of God in their fellow man.

Education in this tradition forms men and women capable of discerning and pursuing their path in life and who stand ready to defend truth, their church, their families, and their country.

The history of Catholic education is rich in tradition and excellence. It embraces the academic inheritance of St. Anselm, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Blessed John Henry Newman. In contrast to such academic rigor, the Common Core standards lack an empirical evidentiary basis and have not been field-tested anywhere. Sadly, over one hundred Catholic dioceses have set aside our teaching tradition in favor of these secular standards.

America’s bishops have compiled a remarkable record of success directing Catholic education in America, perhaps most notably St. John Neumann and the Plenary
Councils of Baltimore. Parents embrace that tradition and long for adherence to it – indeed, for its renaissance. That longing reflects itself in the growing Catholic homeschool and classical-education movements and, now, in the burgeoning desire among Catholic parents for their dioceses to reject the Common Core.
Because we believe that this moment in history again calls for the intercession of each bishop, we have been made bold to impose upon your time with our judgments of Common Core.

Faithfully in Christ, we are:

Institutional Affiliations Are for Identification Purposes Only

Gerard Bradley
Professor of Law
University of Notre Dame

Robert P. George
McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence
Princeton University

Anthony M. Esolen
Professor of English
Providence College

Anne Hendershott
Professor of Sociology
Franciscan University of Steubenville

Kevin Doak
Professor
Georgetown University

Joseph A. Varacalli
S.U.N.Y. Distinguished Service Professor
Nassau Community College-S.U.N.Y.

Patrick McKinley Brennan
John F. Scarpa Chair in Catholic Legal Studies
Villanova University School of Law

Robert Fastiggi, Ph.D.
Professor of Systematic Theology
Detroit, MI

Duncan Stroik
Professor of Architecture
University of Notre Dame

Thomas F. Farr
Director, Religious Freedom Project and
Visiting Associate Professor
Georgetown University

Matthew J. Franck, Ph.D.
Director, Simon Center on Religion and the Constitution
Witherspoon Institute

Ronald J. Rychlak
Butler Snow Lecturer and Professor of Law
University of Mississippi, School of Law

V. Bradley Lewis
Associate Professor of Philosophy
The Catholic University of America

Patrick J. Deneen
David A. Potenziani Memorial Associate
Professor of Political Science
University of Notre Dame

E. Christian Brugger, D.Phil.
J. Francis Cardinal Stafford Professor of Moral Theology
Saint John Vianney Theological Seminary, Denver

Kenneth L. Grasso
Professor of Political Science
Texas State University

James Hitchcock
Professor of History
Saint Louis University
Maria Sophia Aguirre, Ph.D.
Director of Economics Programs and Academic Chair
The Catholic University of America

Fr. Joseph Koterski SJ
President, Fellowship of Catholic Scholars
Fordham University

Francis J. Beckwith
Professor of Philosophy and Church-State Studies
Baylor University

Thomas V. Svogun
Professor of Philosophy and Administration
of Justice and Chairman of the Department of Philosophy
Salve Regina University

Scott W Hahn
Professor of Theology
Franciscan University of Steubenville
Eduardo J. Echeverria, Ph.D., S.T.L.
Professor of Philosophy and Systematic Theology
Sacred Heart Major Seminary

Ryan J. Barilleaux, Ph.D.
Paul Rejai Professor of Political Science
Miami University (Ohio)

Brian Simboli, Ph.D.
Science Librarian
Lehigh University

John A. Gueguen
Emeritus Professor, Political Philosophy
Illinois State University

G. Alexander Ross
Institute for the Psychological Sciences

Suzanne Carpenter, Ph.D., R.N.
Associate Professor of Nursing
Retired

Patrick Lee
McAleer Professor of Bioethics
Franciscan University of Steubenville

Peter J. Colosi, PhD
Associate Professor of Moral Theology
St. Charles Borromeo Seminary

Dr. Robert Hunt
Professor of Political Science
Kean University

Matthew Cuddeback, PhD
Assistant Professor of Philosophy
Providence College

Dr. Joseph H. Hagan
President Emeritus
Assumption College

John A. Cuddeback, PhD
Professor of Philosophy
Christendom College

Dr. Michael J. Healy
Professor and Chair of Philosophy
Franciscan University of Steubenville

Thomas Hibbs
Dean of the Honors College
Baylor University

Susan Orr Traffas
Co-Director, Honors Program
Benedictine College

Michael J. Behe
Professor of Biological Sciences
Lehigh University

Thomas R. Rourke
Professor of Politics
Clarion University

Robert H Holden
Professor, Dept. of History
Old Dominion University

Philip J. Harold
Associate Dean, School of Education and
Social Sciences
Robert Morris University

David T. Murphy, Ph.D.
Dept. of Modern & Classical Languages
Saint Louis University

W. H. Marshner
Professor of Theology
Christendom College

David W. Fagerberg
Associate Professor, Theology
University of Notre Dame

Melissa Moschella
Assistant Professor of Philosophy
Catholic University of America

Daniel J. Costello, Jr.
Bettex Professor of Electrical Engineering,
Emeritus
University of Notre Dame

Brian Scarnecchia,
Associate Professor of Law
Ave Maria School of Law

Thomas Behr
Assistant Professor of Comparative Cultural
Studies
University of Houston

Bernard Dobranski
Dean Emeritus and Professor of Law
Ave Maria School of Law

Daniel Philpott
Professor, Political Science and Peace Studies
University of Notre Dame

Anne Barbeau Gardiner
Professor emerita, Dept of English
John Jay College, CUNY

C.C. Pecknold
Assistant Professor of Theology
The Catholic University of America

Anthony Low
Professor Emeritus of English
New York University

Heather Voccola
Adjunct Professor of Church History
Holy Apostles College and Seminary

Raymond F. Hain, PhD
Assistant Professor of Philosophy
Providence College

Catherine Abbott
Professor of Mathematics
Keuka College

Thérèse Bonin
Associate Professor of Philosophy
Duquesne University

Dr. Francis P. Kessler
Prof. Political Science
Benedictine College

Christopher Wolfe
Co-Director, Thomas International Center
Emeritus Professor, Marquette University

Carson Holloway
Associate Professor of Political Science
University of Nebraska at Omaha

Stephen M. Krason, J.D., Ph.D.
President
Society of Catholic Social Scientists

Laura Hirschfeld Hollis
Associate Professional Specialist and
Concurrent Associate Professor of Law
University of Notre Dame

Wilson D. Miscamble, C.S.C.,
Professor of History
University of Notre Dame

Stephen M. Barr
Professor of Physics
University of Delaware

D.C. Schindler
Associate Professor of Metaphysics and Anthropology
The John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family

Jeanne Heffernan Schindler
Senior Research Fellow
Center for Cultural and Pastoral Concerns

David L. Schindler
Gagnon Professor of Fundamental Theology
Pontifical John Paul II Institute, Catholic University of America

Rev. Edward Krause, C.C.C.
Professor of Social Sciences, Emeritus
Gannon University

Christopher O. Tollefsen
Professor of Philosophy
University of South Carolina

Paige E. Hochschild
Assistant Professor of Theology
Mount St. Mary’s University

Robert C. Jeffrey
Professor of Government
Wofford College

Rev. Anthony E. Giampietro, CSB
Executive Vice President and Academic Dean
Saint Patrick’s Seminary & University

Dr. Roger Loucks
Associate Prof. of Physics
Alfred University

J. Daniel Hammond
Professor of Economics
Wake Forest University

Kenneth R. Hoffmann, Ph.D.
Professor of Neurosurgery
SUNY at Buffalo

Timothy T. O’Donnell, STD, KGCHS
President Christendom College

Thomas W. Jodziewicz
Department of History
University of Dallas

Sr J. Sheila Galligan IHM
Professor of Theology
Immaculata University

Maura Hearden
Assistant Professor of Theology
DeSales University

Robert Gorman
University Distinguished Professor of
Political Science
Texas State University

Steven Justice
Professor of English
University of California, Berkeley and University of Mississippi

Carol Nevin (Sue) Abromaitis
Professor of English
Loyola University Maryland

Dr. Sean Innerst
Theology Cycle Director,
St. John Vianney Theological Seminary

Robert A. Destro
Professor of Law & Director
The Catholic University of America

Richard Sherlock
Prof. of Philosophy
Utah State University

Adrian J. Reimers
Adjunct Assistant Professor in Philosophy
University of Notre Dame

Dr. Jessica M. Murdoch
Assistant Professor of Fundamental and Dogmatic Theology
Villanova University

Mary Shivanandan, S.T.L., S.T.D.
Professor of Theology Retired
John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family at
The Catholic University of America

Alice M. Ramos
Professor of Philosophy
St. John’s University

Dennis J. Marshall, Ph.D.
Professor of Theology
Aquinas College

Dennis D. Martin
Associate Professor of Theology
Loyola University Chicago

Janet E. Smith
Father Michael J. McGivney Chair of Life Ethics
Sacred Heart Major Seminary

Leonard J. Nelson,III
Retired Professor of Law
Samford University

Charles D. Presberg, PhD
Associate Professor of Spanish
University of Missouri-Columbia

Brian T. Kelly
Dean
Thomas Aquinas College

Michael F. McLean
President
Thomas Aquinas College

Philip T. Crotty
Professor of Management (Emeritus)
Northeastern University

James Matthew Wilson
Assistant Professor of Literature
Villanova University

R. E. Houser
Bishop Wendelin J. Nold Chair in Graduate Philosophy
University of St. Thomas (TX)

Gary D. Glenn
Distinguished Teaching Professor Emeritus
Department of Political Science, Northern Illinois University

Cynthia Toolin, Ph.D.
Professor of Dogmatic and Moral Theology
Holy Apostles College and Seminary

Virginia L. Arbery, Ph. D.
Associate Professor of Humanities
Wyoming Catholic College

Maryanne M. Linkes, Esquire
Adjunct Professor
University of Pittsburgh & Community
College of Allegheny County

James Likoudis, M.S.Ed.
Education writer
Montour Falls, NY 14865

Dr. Emil Berendt
Assistant Professor of Economics
Mount St. Mary’s University

David F. Forte
Professor of Law
Cleveland State University

Anthony W. Zumpetta, Ed.D.
Professor Emeritus
West Chester University (PA)

Thomas D. Watts
Professor Emeritus
University of Texas, Arlington

Catherine Ruth Pakaluk, PhD
Assistant Professor of Economics
Ave Maria University

Craig S. Lent
Freimann Professor of Electrical Engineering
University of Notre Dame

Christina Jeffrey, Ph.D.
Lecturer on the Foundations of American Government
Wofford College

Robert G Kennedy
Professor of Catholic Studies
University of St Thomas (MN)

Holly Taylor Coolman
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Theology
Providence College

Raymond F. Hain, PhD
Assistant Professor of Philosophy
Providence College

David Whalen
Provost
Hillsdale College

David M. Wagner
Professor of Law
Regent University School of Law

John G. Trapani, Jr., Ph.D.
Professor of Philosophy
Walsh University

Tina Holland, Ph.D.
South Bend, Indiana

James F. Papillo, J.D., Ph.D
Former Vice President of Administrative
Affairs and Associate Professor in the Humanities
Holy Apostles College and Seminary

Dr. J. Marianne Siegmund
Theo. Department and SCSS member
University of Dallas

Dr. Daniel Hauser
Professor of Theology
University of St. Francis

Joshua Hochschild
Mount St. Mary’s University

William Edmund Fahey, Ph.D.
Fellow and President
The Thomas More College of Liberal Arts

John C. McCarthy
Dean, School of Philosophy
The Catholic University of America

Christopher O. Blum
Academic Dean
Augustine Institute

Chiyuma Elliott
Assistant Professor of English and African-American Studies
University of Mississippi

Mark C. Henrie
Senior V.P., Chief Academic Officer
Intercollegiate Studies Institute

Jeffrey Tranzillo, Ph.D.
Professor, Systematic Theology

Craig Steven Titus, S.Th.D/Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Director of Integrative Studies
Institute of the Psychological Sciences

Rev. Peter M.J. Stravinskas, Ph.D., S.T.D.
Executive Director
Catholic Education Foundation

William W. Kirk
Vice President for Student Affairs and General Counsel
Ave Maria University

Curt H. Stiles, Ph.D.
Professor of Business Policy
Cameron School of Business
University of North Carolina

Senator Dick Durbin attacks Florida’s stand your ground law

/in , /by

On October 29th, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing chaired by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), assistant Majority Leader, titled, “‘Stand Your Ground Laws’: Civil Rights and Public Safety Implications of the Expanded Use of Deadly Force.”

According to the NRA-ILA, “Present were several witnesses who attacked not only SYG laws, but also the Right-to-Carry, and even the American jury system.”

Ronald S. Sullivan, Clinical Professor of Law Harvard University.

NRA-ILA reports:

During his testimony, Harvard Law Professor Ronald Sullivan incorporated the themes of the previous witnesses and also shared his opinion of the highly publicized case involving George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. Coming to a different conclusion than that of the jury who acquitted Zimmerman, Sullivan theorized that Zimmerman was motivated by racism and that he shot Martin as Martin was attempting to defend himself from attack. In a radical statement, Sullivan noted that as a result of the Zimmerman case, residents of Florida are led to believe “they can incorrectly profile young black children, kill them, and be protected by stand your ground laws.”

One of the witnesses who defended the right to self-defense was Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies at the Cato institute Illya Shapiro.  Shapiro’s testimony made clear that that the concept of no duty to retreat has been part of the American legal tradition dating back 150 years and that it is the law in 31 states. Shapiro went on to note that the Supreme Court enshrined the concept in federal law with the 1895 case of Beard v. United States, and that as an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama sponsored an expansion of the state’s self-defense laws.

Christopher Amore, a graduate of Brooklyn Law School and an associate at the law firm of Mound Cotton Wollan & Greengrass in New York, in the National Security Law Journal, published by George Mason University writes:

The concept of self-defense has long been a part of most legal systems. For example, the Bible endorses the principle of self-defense in its recognition of the right of the homeowner to kill the unlawful intruder. The Talmud acknowledges a right to use force against aggressors who threaten human interests, or threatened to kill. Saint Thomas Aquinas, a thirteenth century Italian Catholic priest and philosopher, reasoned that the purpose of using deadly force in self defense was not to kill, but rather to repel the attacker.

“[The] force had to be directed against the attack, not the attacker. The death was a side effect of the legitimate purpose rather than the goal itself.”

In 1688, English lawmakers, affirming the natural right for people to defend themselves, codified the right to bear arms in the Declaration of Right: “the Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law.” The Convention Parliament, the legislative body responsible for the drafting of the Declaration of Right, believed that the right to bear arms for the purpose of self-defense was one of the “true auntient and indubitable Rights and Liberties of the People.”

England’s recognition of the inherent right to self-defense in the seventeenth century would be echoed over three hundred years later by the United States Supreme Court. Interpreting this provision of the Declaration of Right in the landmark Second Amendment case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court explained that “the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defence” was necessary in order to protect “the natural right of resistance and self-preservation.”

Sanford Police Chief Cecil Smith. (Photo credit: News 13)

Guns.com reports, “Sanford Police Chief Cecil Smith announced this week that the city’s neighborhood watch program has been revamped and has now banned neighborhood watch members from carrying guns, local media reports…Opinions on the shooting – and the trial – remain a highly debated and heated topic, just as the program’s decision to ban firearms likely will be. The new rules and regulations of the neighborhood watch program, which will be announced at a community meeting next Tuesday, include prohibiting volunteers from pursuing any individual who they deem suspicious.”

Smith appears to be implementing procedures that not in accordance with Florida’s concealed carry and stand your ground statutes. The decision to carry and use deadly force is made by the individual.

Senator Christopher Smith, Democrat Minority Leader Florida Senate.

The Florida legislature will take up stand your ground during the 2014 legislative session. According to Robert M. Levy:

With the outcome of the George Zimmerman trial — in which he was acquitted in the shooting of a black teenager — some lawmakers are calling for a serious revision of Florida’s 2005 “stand your ground” self-defense law.

Following Trayvon Martin’s killing, Scott convened a task force to look at the law, but the panel did not recommend any major changes and none were achieved this year. But Senate Democratic leader Chris Smith of Fort Lauderdale has re-filed legislation [SB 0122] that would prevent individuals from “unreasonably escalating” a violent conflict and then claiming self-defense. The bill would also prevent a self-defense shield for individuals who chased someone down or left a safe place.

The bill also requires local law enforcement agencies to develop guidelines on neighborhood watch programs.

The House has agreed to hold hearings on the self-defense law, although the chairman of the panel has said he doesn’t support any changes to it.

Is disarming Floridians and weakening Florida’s stand your ground laws the best way to ensure “the natural right of resistance and self-preservation”? We expose, you decide.

Crosspointe: Another failed government computer system

/in , , /by

In 2006 the Sarasota County School Board entered into a long term agreement with CrossPointe.net (a.k.a. CrossPointe, Inc., CrossPointe LLC) for a comprehensive hardware and software upgrade of the District’s information technology (IT) capabilities. The contract for $12 million was initiated under the leadership of former Superintendent Gary Norris and Sarasota County IT Director Bob Hanson, both of whom were being investigated by the FBI for the purchase of white whiteboards from Promethean. The CrossPointe contract has continued under Superintendent Lori White who at that time was Director of Curriculum and Instruction under Norris.

So what is wrong with upgrading the district’s IT capabilities? Nothing except that a simple Google search of the company CrossPointe and its owner Joan Marie Keebler would have turned up a series of lawsuits dating back to 2001.

These lawsuits included filings for copyright infringement and ownership dispute of CrossPointe, Inc., now known as CrossPointe.net. Due diligence would have warned School Board members and District staff about entering into a contract where the software being purchased may have been “vaporware”. There are indications that the contract in which the School Board entered was to develop the software rather than purchase it because you see the software did not exist at the time.

So the School Board purchased software from a company being sued for software copy write infringement. It appears the now defunct CrossPointe.net actually had no software to sell in the first place. So what did Sarasota property taxpayers get for the $12 million contract with CrossPointe.net?

According to a district spokesman Scott Ferguson, “The implementation of Education Solutions Development/ESD (formerly CrossPointe) is in progress.  We are currently working on our Student Information System implementation and are in the final phase of testing this module.  In November, we will be going live with four of our district schools – Tuttle, Brookside, Pineview and North Port.  During this time, we will be working closely with these schools and fine-tuning the application prior to the full district-wide implementation planned for Spring 2014.” Leona Collesano is the project manager assigned to the implementation of ESD.

The district reports the following are fully operational: Gradebook, Parent Portal, Finance, Human Resources, Payroll and Employee Portal. The Student Information System is not fully operational but is planned to become operational this school year – seven years after the initial purchase. The district states, “Fees were negotiated before the project began. The cost to date is $10,013,008.” Total cost to date is over $20 million.

One Sarasota school principal got staff feedback on the ESD system (a.k.a. Crosspointe). He stated, “We have been experiencing problems with Crosspointe for a long time.  It is a district problem. What I’m hearing is: Cumbersome to use. Lacks capacity. Shuts down often. Difficult for parents to use. Often inaccurate.”

Another parent in an email wrote, “About two weeks ago, personnel installed new features to Crosspointe’s gradebook. Parents can now receive weekly reports of their child’s weekly grades and attendance. I am receiving two emails of the same report for my son at Pine View. My daughter is at RHS and is not happening there. Whoever is in charge of the software is NOT thoroughly testing it before it is released to the general public. I have brought this to the attention of the School Board and the Landings administration.”

“Last year, my son’s report card (Pine View) printed the wrong grade. Crosspointe Grade book showed one grade and his report card printed another grade. Then the rounding did not work correctly. I discovered parents at Pine View whose children complained about their children’s grades not being correct and the parents did not know what to do about it. They were so appreciative of me informing them of the problems,” notes the parent.

The district representative points out, “As with any implementation of a system of this magnitude there have been issues along the way, but nothing that has not been addressed and either rectified or in the process of being rectified.  Some issues have involved temporary interfaces put in place to synchronize grades and attendance with our antiquated Student Information System but all were remedied. These interfaces will be eliminated once full implementation is complete. With the Payroll function, staff continue to be paid on time, grades continue to be posted using the Gradebook function, etc.”

On October 2, 2013 Scott Lempe, Sarasota School District Chief Operating Officer, in email Update #4 on the implementation of Crosspointe states, “The Way Forward.  Rather than trying to implement a new SIS District – wide we’ve identified four schools that have agreed to act as our pilot schools.  They are: Tuttle, Brookside, North Port High, and Pine View.  We are referring to them as the Fab‐Four!  As of today we plan to go live at those schools in mid ‐November.  We will use these pilot schools to test the system in a live environment, shake down the system, work out any bugs, and prepare the SIS for full District‐wide implementation.  Given this timeline we’d then look to go‐live with the rest of our schools in late winter or early spring.  In the mean time we will be developing things like refresher trainings and comprehensive data verification plans.”

A parent writes in an update, “Last week I received an email from Leona Campos/Collesano saying that the problem was fixed. This particular problem (one of many) was the duplicate email reports. Well they sure fixed it. Now I don’t get no reports for my daughter at Riverview High School and only one report (grades for the week) for my son at Pine View.  I should be receiving two reports (emails) per child, attendance and weekly grades. My next email will be to the School Board members, the Superintendent and Scott Lempe explaining this issue again. Whoever fixed it is very, very, very careless.  They throw in a fix, but don’t test it to make sure that it works.  Sometimes when fixes are made to software, it can affect other conditions in the code. This is an indicator that someone does not know how to do their work.  Sloppy.  Scary to say the least.”

This government website is seven years old and still does not work. Maybe the School Board should realize this website is looking more like HeathCare.gov on steriods.

Is a Libertarian Party in Florida’s future?

/in , , /by

Click on the image to read the full report.

Debra Caso, a Florida resident and member of Freedom Advocates, in an email writes, “It is time to look at our political choices a little more closely. Principle over Party and issues we can agree on across the board. Are you better off today than you were 16 years ago? If you work for the government you probably are richer but your rights have been radically attacked by the R and D party. Candidates start at the local level and they go right up to Congress!  Congress has failed America. RD Party is 2 sides of the same coin, we need a second party.”

Caso is energized because of the 2013 American Values Survey: In Search of Libertarians in America published by the Public Religion Research Institute on October 30th.

So is Alex Snitker from the 1787 Radio Network. In his column “There Are 2,595,586 libertarians In Florida” Snitker writes, “In Florida, there is only one way for a political party to reach major party status. That is [by] having 5% of registered voters be registered in your party. In the 2013 American Values Survey, “In the Search of Libertarians” a clear path was laid on how the Libertarian Party of Florida can achieve major party status in our state. There are 11,798,121 registered voters in Florida. If this poll is correct this means that there are 2,595,586 libertarian or libertarian leaning voters in Florida. For the Libertarian Party of Florida to reach major party status we need 589,907 to be registered Libertarians.”

For a larger view click on the image.

The 2013 American Values Survey presents an interesting picture of the political landscape in the United States.

The Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) states, “According to a newly developed Libertarian Orientation Scale, less than 1-in-10 (7%) Americans are consistent libertarians, and an additional 15% lean libertarian. At the other end of the spectrum, an equal number of Americans are consistent communalists (7%), and an additional 17% lean communalist. A majority (54%) of Americans have a mixed ideological profile, falling in between libertarian and communalist orientations.”

“Compared to the general population, libertarians are significantly more likely to be non-Hispanic white, male, and young. Nearly all libertarians are non-Hispanic whites (94%), more than two-thirds (68%) are men, and more than 6-in-10 (62%) are under the age of 50,” reports PRRI.

PRRI found, “Generally speaking, libertarians are more opposed than white evangelical Protestants, those affiliated with the Tea Party, and Republicans overall to government involvement across a range of economic policies, such as raising the minimum wage, Obamacare, and increasing environmental protections.”

For a larger view click on the image.

The PRRI survey found that “Unlike economic questions, on which libertarians are generally aligned with other conservative constituencies, libertarians have a more distinct profile on social issues.”

  • Nearly 6-in-10 (57%) libertarians oppose making it more difficult for a woman to get an abortion, a proportion identical to the general population. By contrast, strong majorities of Republicans overall (58%), Americans affiliated with the Tea Party (58%), and white evangelical Protestants (68%) favor making it more difficult for a woman to get an abortion.
  • Seven-in-ten (70%) libertarians favor allowing doctors to prescribe lethal drugs to help terminally ill patients end their lives. Americans who identify with the Tea Party are closely divided on this question (49% favor, 51% oppose). By contrast, strong majorities of Republicans (58%) and white evangelical Protestants (70%) oppose this policy.
  • More than 7-in-10 (71%) libertarians favor legalizing marijuana. By contrast, approximately 6-in-10 Republicans (61%) and Tea Party members (59%), and nearly 7-in-10 (69%) white evangelical Protestants, oppose legalizing marijuana.
  • Unlike most other social issues, libertarians remain socially conservative on same-sex marriage. While a majority (59%) of libertarians oppose same-sex marriage, they are significantly less opposed than Republicans overall (67%) and than other conservative-leaning groups such as Tea Party members (73%) and white evangelical Protestants (80%).

A majority (53%) of libertarian voters say they always vote in primary elections, a rate comparable to white evangelical Protestant voters (48%) and Republican voters overall (50%) but significantly lower than the participation rate among Tea Party voters (62%).

As the 2014 election cycle begins calls for a third party tend to grow. Will there be a Libertarian Party in Florida? Time will tell.

Why did the Florida delegation vote to stuff the Constitution in the wastebasket?

/in , , /by

On October 16, 2013 the majority of the Florida delegation voted to pass the US Senate Budget Agreement. Senator Bill Nelson voted for the agreement and Senator Marco Rubio voted against it. The US House delegation vote on the agreement was 16 for, 10 against and one abstention. The US House vote breakdown is as follows:

Democrats — Brown, Y; Castor, Y; Deutch, Y; Frankel, Y; Garcia, Y; Grayson, Y; Hastings, Y; Murphy, Y; Wasserman Schultz, Y; Wilson, Y.

Republicans — Bilirakis, Y; Buchanan, Y; Crenshaw, Y; DeSantis, N; Diaz-Balart, Y; Mica, N; Miller, N; Nugent, N; Posey, N; Radel, N; Rooney, N; Ros-Lehtinen, Y; Ross, N; Southerland, N; Webster, Y; Yoho, N; Young, X.

The Florida Congressional delegation is lead by Rep. Vern Buchanan (R – FL District 16) and Rep. Alcee Hastings (D – FL District 20).

The immediate impact of passage of the US Senate Budget Agreement was Florida Blue dropped 300,000 Floridians “whose policies the health insurer says aren’t sufficiently comprehensive under the health care overhaul.” There is a longer term impact of the agreement that may have greater consequences in the sunshine state and on Floridians. It is Section 1002 of the Agreement titled “Default Prevention” known as the ‘McConnell rule”. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) leads the Republican minority in the US Senate and first introduced this rule to raise the debt ceiling in 2011, the last time the national debt became a point of contention in Congress. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) wants to make the McConnell rule permanent.

The McConnell rule allows for the President to send a letter to Congress announcing his intent to raise the debt ceiling. The Congress will then consider his request, debate it and vote on a “joint resolution” to “disapprove” the request. There is only one problem. “It would then take a two-thirds majority of Congress to override the president’s increases, just as it would to override a presidential veto,” notes Michael Dorstewitz from BizPac Review.

Betsy McCaughey from the American Spectator writes:

Sunday [October 20th] on Meet the Press, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York announced he will propose legislation to permanently take control of the debt limit away from Congress and give it to the president. It’s a dictator’s dream come true. The framers of the U.S. Constitution gave Congress alone power to borrow, tax, and decide how public revenues are spent. They wanted to prevent a president from spending excessively and saddling the public with huge debts. That’s what the despotic kings of Europe had done.

Article 1 Sect. 8 states that ‘Congress shall have the Power To lay and collect Taxes … to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general welfare of the United States; To borrow Money on the credit of the United States.’ Schumer’s proposal stuffs the Constitution in the waste basket. It would allow the president to raise the debt ceiling, subject only to a two-thirds vote of disapproval by both houses of Congress. That’s no more constitutional than allowing the president to impose whatever taxes he wants, unless two-thirds of both houses disapprove.

The greater threat to the sunshine state and every Floridian is the future cost of servicing the debt.

McCaughey writes, “The average rate paid for government obligations is a tiny 1.98%, a third of what it was in 2000. When the rates go up, as they inevitably will, servicing the debt could claim 30% or 40% of tax revenues instead of the current 10%. Republican opposition is probably sufficient to stop Schumer’s bill. Nevertheless, these persistent attempts to elude congressional control over borrowing signal a fundamental problem. Though members of Congress take an oath to uphold the Constitution, they don’t mean it.”

Why would sixteen of the members of Congress from Florida want to stuff the Constitution in the waste basket? Why would they take an oath only to break it?

According to McCaughey, “Schumer claims his proposal will protect against a debt default when Congress and the president disagree.” That is exactly why Representative Buchanan voted in favor of the McConnell Rule. Buchanan in a press release stated, “Jeopardizing the full faith and credit of the United States by defaulting on our obligations was not an option. There is no question that we need to reduce spending and balance the budget, but not by degrading America’s credit rating and destroying our credibility.”

McCaughey concludes, “It’s a dangerous remedy. It plays into what President Obama apparently aspires to do — govern by edict. As he has said numerous times, when Congress won’t go along with what he wants, he will get it done on his own. Our system of checks and balances was designed to protect us from such executive overreach.”

Perhaps those who voted in favor of the McConnell Rule are more worried about reelection than their sworn Constitutional duties and responsibilities.

FL Rep. Grayson: Did you know that Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, spoke at Ku Klux Klan rallies?

/in , /by

For a larger view click on the image. Image courtesy of Dave Leventhal.

Florida Representative Alan Grayson (D – FL District 6) invoked the image of a burning cross in a fundraising email. The intent of his email was to discredit the TEA Party of Florida and its affiliates. In using this image of a burning cross perhaps Rep. Grayson does not know nor understand the history of the Ku Klux Klan?

Here are some facts about who really created and supported the Ku Klux Klan.

In 1926, Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was a guest speaker at a Ku Klux Klan rally in Silverlake, New Jersey. Sanger wrote in her biography, “Eventually the lights were switched on, the audience seated itself, and I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak. Never before had I looked into a sea of faces like these. I was sure that if I uttered one word, such as abortion, outside the usual vocabulary of these women they would go off into hysteria. And so my address that night had to be in the most elementary terms, as though I were trying to make children understand. In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered. The conversation went on and on, and when we were finally through it was too late to return to New York.”

Sanger was a proponent of Eugenics, the racial cleansing of American society. In Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12, Sanger wrote, “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities.  The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

According to Wikipedia:

From the mid-1870s on in the Deep South, violence rose. In Mississippi, Louisiana, the Carolinas and Florida especially, the Democratic Party relied on paramilitary “White Line” groups such as the White Camelia to terrorize, intimidate and assassinate African American and white Republicans in an organized drive to regain power. In Mississippi, it was the Red Shirts; in Louisiana, the White League that were paramilitary groups carrying out goals of the Democratic Party to suppress black voting. Insurgents targeted politically active African Americans and unleashed violence in general community intimidation. Grant’s desire to keep Ohio in the Republican aisle and his attorney general’s maneuvering led to a failure to support the Mississippi governor with Federal troops. The campaign of terror worked. In Yazoo County, for instance, with a Negro population of 12,000, only seven votes were cast for Republicans. In 1875, Democrats swept into power in the state legislature.

Once Democrats regained power in Mississippi, Democrats in other states adopted the Mississippi Plan to control the election of 1876, using informal armed militias to assassinate political leaders, hunt down community members, intimidate and turn away voters, effectively suppressing African American suffrage and civil rights. In state after state, Democrats swept back to power.From 1868 to 1876, most years had 50–100 lynchings.

White Democrats passed laws and constitutional amendments making voter registration more complicated, to further exclude black voters from the polls.

Bob Unruh of World Net Daily, in his column “KKK’s 1st targets were Republicans” reports, “The original targets of the Ku Klux Klan were Republicans, both black and white, according to a new television program and book, which describe how the Democrats started the KKK and for decades harassed the GOP with lynchings and threats. An estimated 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites died at the end of KKK ropes from 1882 to 1964.”

“The documentation has been assembled by David Barton of Wallbuilders and published in his book “Setting the Record Straight: American History in Black & White,” which reveals that not only did the Democrats work hand-in-glove with the Ku Klux Klan for generations, they started the KKK and endorsed its mayhem,” writes Barton.

It appears Rep. Grayson and Democrats with the help of the IRS are again targeting those who oppose them and big government. Invoking the burning cross is in character especially for those who believe in supremacism.

The below video is the full text of Margaret Sanger’s autobiographical recollections on addressing the Ku Klux Klan:

Have Senators Marco Rubio, Bill Nelson and Rep. Vern Buchanan turned Florida into a permanent state of dependency?

/in , , , /by

Three key members of Congress from Florida are Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) and Representative Vern Buchanan (R-FL District 16). These three men are perhaps the most powerful and influential in the sunshine state. Each has voted in different ways which may have turned Florida into a permanent state of dependency. Each is key to major events occurring in Washington, D.C. such as the national debt, the sequester, government spending and amnesty.

Senator Rubio has become the face of immigration reform and amnesty. Senator Nelson has consistently voted in favor of amnesty and to grow and expand government. Representative Buchanan, along with 86 House Republicans, on October 16th voted to raise the debt ceiling, continue funding government via a continuing resolution and fully implement the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

According to ImmigrationReform.com, “What Republicans will get from amnesty and continued mass immigration is a lot of new voters who are likely to vote against them – like, about 32 million of them by 2036. Most of the new voters who could be added to the voter rolls as a result of amnesty and increased legal immigration are likely to support bigger government. Among Hispanic voters, whom some Republicans hope to attract by supporting amnesty, 75 percent say they want bigger government, which provides more services and benefits. Only 19 percent say they support smaller government. This is hardly fertile recruiting grounds for the party that stands for cutting the size and scope of government.”

Since 2000, Florida and those living in Florida legally and illegally have become more dependent on federal and state government benefits, grants, funding and largesse.

The Institute for Truth in Accounting state database for Florida, with charts, shows just how dependent the state is on federal programs and funding. Some examples include:

  • Medicaid enrollment has increased from 1.5 million to 3 million since 2000. Medicaid recipients are now over 15% of the population of Florida, up from 10% in 2000. (Under the Affordable Care Act more of those living in Florida will get benefits as eligibility has expanded.)
  • Medicaid spending in Florida has risen from $7.5 billion in 2000 to $17.5 billion in 2011.
  • The Florida poverty rate (ACS) has risen from 13% in 2000 to 17% in 2011 with the PCS poverty rate going from 11% in 2000 to 15% in 2011.
  •  Florida Food Stamp (SNAP) participation has gone from 900,000 in 2000 to over 3 million in 2011.  In 2011 Florida had 16% of its population on SNAP.
  • Federal funds distributed per capita was nearly $10,000 in 2009.
  • State government spending has risen from 8.5% in 2000 to over 12% in 2011 as a percentage of nominal GDP.
  • Total Florida expenditures has risen from $68 billion in 2005 to $82 billion in 2011.
  • Florida state debt has risen from 4.1% of GDP in 2005 to 5.9% in 2011 (it peaked at 6% in 2008).
  • Florida’s total retirement liabilities have risen from less than $.25 billion in 2009 to over $1 billion in 2012 with $13 billion undisclosed. This has happened even as the number of government employees has dropped from 6.1% of the population in 2000 to 5.8% of the population in 2012.
  • Total revenue has gone from $75 billion in 2005 to $102 billion in 2011. Total revenues dropped to $47 billion in 2009 and have doubled since then.
  • Intergovernmental revenues have increased from $19 billion in 2005 to $27 billion in 2011. Intergovernmental expenditures have gone from $17 billion in 2005 to $20 billion in 2011.
  • Expenditures on public education have risen from $14 billion in 2000 to $24 billion in 2010.
  • From 2000 t0 2012 personal income per capita has gone from $30,000 to $40,000.

Florida is becoming more dependent on federal funding to meet its obligations. Those living in Florida have grown to depend on federal and state programs to subsist. Florida now has three distinct classes: the wealthy class, the working class and the dependent class. This does not bode well for a efforts to reduce government spending, cut federal and state programs and reduce Florida’s dependence on government.

RELATED COLUMNS:

1 in 3 Florida retirees who receive Social Security survive solely on government checks – Sun Sentinel

Institute for Truth in Accounting finds Florida can’t pay its bills!

/in , , /by

According to analysis by the Institute for Truth in Accounting (ITA), Florida does not have enough assets available ($59 billion), to pay the state’s bills, ($74 billion). The difference between assets and bills is $15 billion. That debt divided by the number of taxpayers reveals Florida’s per-taxpayer burden of $2,500 in 2012.  Only seven states–Alaska, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Nebraska, and Wyoming–achieved a per-taxpayer surplus in 2012.

“Florida lagged behind the 180 day goal time between the close of its fiscal year and release of its 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), publishing the report 221 days after the fiscal year-end,” according to ITA.

SNAPSHOT BY THE NUMBERS

Florida’s Bills Exceed Its Assets:

  • Assets *$179.24
  • Less: Capital Assets *$94.96
  • Restricted Assets *$24.80
  • Assets Available to Pay Bills *$59.48
  • Less: Bills *$74.29
  • Money Needed to Pay Bills *$14.81
  • Each Taxpayer’s Burden$2,500.00

The Bills Florida has Accumulated:

  • State Bonds *$39.48
  • Other Liabilities *$34.18
  • Less: Debt Related to Capital Assets *$12.75
  • Unfunded Pension Benefits *$6.80
  • Unfunded Retirees’ Health Care Benefits *$6.59
  • Bills *$74.29

* Figures in billions

More detail on Florida’s assets and liabilities can be found in the Florida State of the State (2011). Link to FL CAFR: Florida Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Publishing Entity:  Florida Chief Financial Officer. According to the ITA:

  • Florida’s per-taxpayer burden shrank to $2,500 in 2012, and the state’s rank remained 14th.
  • With an average personal income of $40,344, Florida’s taxpayer burden shrank marginally to 6.2% of a year’s income.
  • Florida’s unemployment rate was 8.6%, compared to a national average of 8.1% in 2012.
  • Outbound moves from Florida in 2012 were 45.3% of total moves, compared to inbound moves of 54.7%, meaning that the state attracted more people and businesses than the number that left.
  • Florida’s financial reports disclose only $1 billion of retirement liabilities, leaving $13.3 billion undisclosed.
  • Florida’s ‘Net Revenue’ (total general revenue less total net expenses) was positive in 2012 and was negative in only one of the past seven years (2009). This amount, however, does not include changes in liabilities not fully disclosed such as pensions and retiree health insurance. Read more on ‘Net Revenue‘.

ABOUT THE INSTITUTE FOR TRUTH IN ACCOUNTING

The Institute for Truth in Accounting has a unique, comprehensive methodology to analyze all state assets and liabilities, including unreported pension and retirement health liabilities.  The result is shown as the per-taxpayer surplus or liability, the difference in each state’s assets and liabilities divided by the number of taxpayers in the state. 

Benefit Corporations: The new government-industrial complex

/in , , , /by

President Eisenhower warned America about a growing military-industrial complex stating, “This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

Whenever and wherever government and industry partner Americans face “the acquisition of unwarranted influence”.

Most recently we saw how appointed officials working in partnership with a corporation can directly impact every Floridian. Robert Trigaux, Tampa Bay Times Business Columnist, in “At the PSC, a confederacy of yes men — and women” wrote:

The first thing we do is pass a truth-in-government law that changes the name of the Florida Public Service Commission [PSC] to the Florida Utility Suckup Club.

The PSC hearing held in Tallahassee this past week was beyond embarrassing. It was billed as a review and vote on a proposed settlement with Duke Energy Florida to finalize who gets stuck paying for the $5 billion wasted by the company on the broken Crystal River and the proposed-then-canceled Levy County nuclear power plants.

The vote: 4 to 1 in favor of the settlement agreement. Duke Energy’s Florida customers — victims would be a better word — will pay a whopping 64 percent, or $3.2 billion. Duke shareholders will pay just 20 percent, or $1 billion. The rest will be covered by an insurance policy.

This is a terrible precedent.

Trigaux and Floridians should be prepared for ever more “terrible” precedents.

Since Eisenhower’s speech in 1961 Florida has seen a government industrial complex with growing influence — economic, political, even spiritual — felt in every city, county and in Tallahassee. This greatest threat to one-man-one-vote and local control of government goes by many names: globalization, regionalism, sustainability and a new form of corporation called simply “B” Corp or “Benefit Corporation”.

According to the BenefitCorp.net website, “Certified B Corporations are leading a global movement to redefine success in business…Business, the most powerful man-made force on the planet, must create value for society, not just shareholders…Over 600 businesses have already joined our community, encouraging all companies to compete not just to be the best in the world, but to be the best for the world. As a result of our collective success, individuals and communities will enjoy greater economic opportunity, society will address its most challenging environmental problems, and more people will find fulfillment by bringing their whole selves to work.”

Esquire magazine is quoted on the B Corp website, “B Corps might turn out to be like civil rights for blacks or voting rights for women – eccentric, unpopular ideas that took hold and changed the world.” B Corps want to fundamentally change American business.

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have passed Benefit Corporation legislation. There is a move to pass Benefit Corporation legislation in Florida. The model Benefit Corporation legislations states, “This chapter authorizes the organization of a form of business corporation that offers entrepreneurs and investors the option to build, and invest in, businesses that operate with a corporate purpose broader than maximizing shareholder value and a responsibility to consider the impact of its decisions on all stakeholders, not just shareholders. Enforcement of those duties comes not from governmental oversight, but rather from new provisions on transparency and accountability included in this chapter.”

This fundamental change has been embraced by the Florida Chamber of Commerce in the form or regionalization. In July 2012, Dale A. Brill, Ph.D., wrote on the Florida Chamber website, “Let’s get the bad news out of the way: Too many participants in the private and public economic development arena are missing the considerable opportunity represented by regionalism when they insist on going it alone—even when there is insufficient economic density to make a real difference despite the best of intentions.”

Brill notes, “Let’s start with three straight-forward explanations of regionalism that you already know to be true but may not recognize as one in the same: ‘There is strength in numbers.’ ‘The sum of the parts is greater than the whole.’ ‘I get by with a little help from my friends.’ … Regionalism’s genesis can be traced to the increasing role played by coordinated investments as catalysts for economic development.”

Brill uses Harvard professor Michael Porter’s definition of economic regions, “Economic regionalism exists where geographically contiguous regions coordinate economic development activities tied to a comprehensive economic development strategy.  Economic regionalism focuses on the collaboration of organizations, governments, and businesses across multiple jurisdictions. These stakeholders work to manage the economic opportunities and constraints created by the geographic and social characteristics of a region.”

Regionalism, sustainability and “B” Corps are part of the idea of globalization. Everything feeds into a system that move power – economic, political, even spiritual – away from the city and county into regions that can have grave consequences that Florida is just experiencing with Duke Power – Florida.

Milton Friedman wrote, “Many people want the government to protect the consumer. A much more urgent problem is to protect the consumer from the government.” What we are seeing is the government and businesses working in concert to protect each other at the expense of consumers. The Duke Power – Florida is a case in point.

As Trigaux wrote, “There are a few voices expressing opposition. But they are faint and few…I fear for Florida.”

EDITORS NOTE:

Florida League of Cities in addition to individual municipalities, leagues and organizations of local community authorities have also endorsed the Earth Charter. ICLEI – The Local Governments for Sustainability endorsed the Earth Charter – Sustainable Development in the year 2000. The Florida League of Cities, which is a voluntary municipal league comprised of 404 of Florida’s 408 municipalities and six charter counties, endorsed the Earth Charter in 2001. In the same year, the Earth Charter was also endorsed by the US Conference of Mayors, the official nonpartisan organization of the nation’s 1,183 cities with populations over 30,000.

The National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) serves as the national voice for regionalism. NARC advocates for and provides services to its member councils of government and metropolitan planning organizations.

RELATED: 

What is a corporation?

Benefit Corporations: The Demise of Free Enterprise

VIDEO: Florida Chamber of Commerce – The Importance of Regionalism to Florida’s Future

Regionalism and Fair Housing Enforcement

Walter Tejada Elected to National Association of Regional Councils to promote Regionalism

Community Progress Blog – The BUILD Act of 2013: How EPA brownfield funds can create more sustainable communities by Kate O’Brien, Groundwork USA