By Will Parry
Each and every issue on our November ballot, if approved by voters, will affect the quality of life in our state for good or for evil, and for years to come. Here’s an effort to help our readers cast an informed vote on a very complicated ballot.
Five of the seven measures due to come before the electorate have this in common: They are the work of narrow special interests, designed to undermine existing institutions or programs and to increase private profit at public expense. None of the five deserve five cents worth of support.
Here are the “dirty five”:
Initiative 1082: The welfare of every injured worker is on the line here. The insurance industry and the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) want to privatize workers’ compensation, to open the door to domination of the system by insurance companies.
Long ago, Washington workers gave up the right to sue their employers in exchange for “sure and certain relief” – that is, for the right to receive pay and care and job retraining when job injury or job disease strike.
I-1082 would enable BIAW and the likes of AIG and Liberty Mutual to transform our nonprofit system, challenging, delaying and denying claims in the classic manner of health insurers. The measure would drive up employers’ costs by 25 percent or more, cost jobs, and compel taxpayers to bail out any insurer who became insolvent. Written by and for private insurance, it would wreck a program that has functioned well for decades.
Initiative 1107: The Office of Financial Management (OFM) says I-1107 will reduce revenue to the state by $352 million and to local governments by $83 million over the next five years. This during a deep, ongoing recession labeled by Governor Chris Gregoire “the worst in 80 years.”
But I-1107 will do wonders for the big national beverage companies by repealing small, mostly temporary taxes on soda pop, gum, candy and bottled water. That’s why the big soft drink companies have already poured $10 million into the campaign to enact the measure.
Revenue produced by I-1107’s small taxes on nonessential products helps to fund education, health care, senior services – or at the very least, to ward off cuts in those programs.
Initiatives 1100 and 1105: Both measures would end the carefully regulated sale of liquor in our state by privatizing the business. It’s estimated that passage of either would increase the number of outlets from the present 340 to as many as 5,000 – hard stuff in every corner drug store.
Privatization would cost the state. OFM estimates a reduction in state revenues from liquor sales of $277 million over five years under I-1100, and up to $730 million over five years under I-1105.
Either initiative would end Washington’s leadership in having the fewest illegal sales of any state. Either would increase illegal sales to underage persons, by up to 400 percent, according to the state auditor. And either would wipe out a thousand stable, family-wage jobs.
The liquor interests could care less. At our deadline, backers had poured $1.2 million into I-1100 and $2.2 million into I-1005. Booze bucks a-plenty to underwrite one big statewide binge.
Initiative 1053: Tim Eyman’s latest gridlock initiative would require a two-thirds vote to enact any revenue-raising legislation. Thus it would give a minority of legislators veto power over the majority. It would be our state’s counterpart to the 60-vote requirement that has tied the U.S. Senate in knots.
Passage of I-1053 would compel the 2011 legislature to deal with an anticipated $3 billion revenue shortfall with no recourse other than brutal cuts and drastic state employee layoffs.
Blood-soaked oil money is bankrolling the Eyman initiative. BP Corporation of North America, the architect of the Gulf oil disaster, and Tesoro Company, Inc., who gave us the Anacortes refinery explosion and fire, are the top donors to I-1053 at $65,000 each. BP killed 11 workers and Tesoro seven in their ghastly April dance of death.
So much for the “dirty five.” Let’s look now at two positive measures.
I-1098: It brings a long-overdue measure of equity to our state’s tax system. It establishes a limited income tax on the wealthiest 3 percent of Washingtonians. It helps thousands of small businesses by exempting them from the business and occupations tax. And it helps homeowners by reducing the state’s portion of the property tax by 20 percent.
I-1098’s tax on high incomes will generate about $2 billion a year, wholly dedicated to education and health care. And the money’s needed. Washington currently ranks 46th of the 50 states in the amount of our economy we invest in education. As for health care, there are 100,000 residents on the waiting list for the state’s Basic Health Plan right now.
(To volunteer for I-1098, use the form inserted with this issue of the Retiree Advocate.)
Referendum 52: A quality education also depends on the quality of the school buildings. Passage of Referendum 52 will enable the state to sell bonds to fund an energy refit of schools across the state. Nearly half our schools were built, or were last remodeled, 40 or more years ago. A retrofit will remove asbestos, mold, lead and other toxics. New energy-efficient systems will save money for years to come.
And the retrofit will create an estimated 30,000 jobs in a time of acute need, even as it gives our children the learning environment they deserve.
For our children, our health and our state’s future: YES on Initiative 1098 and on Referendum 52! NO on the ‘dirty five’ -- Initiatives 1082, 1107, 1100, 1105, and 1053!
Back to Home
Friday, September 3, 2010
Social Security: It’s there for all of us
By Marilyn Watkins
For 75 years, Social Security has been the foundation of economic security for Americans. It represents the best of American values, rewarding hard work, looking out for family and community, and honoring the contributions retirees have made to our current prosperity.
Despite its success and overwhelming popularity, the program faces two serious threats – but not the ones mainstream media have focused on.
The first threat is that the majority of young people are convinced they’ll never get Social Security. A recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that three fourths of those 18 to 34 believe they won’t receive Social Security when they retire. Even 56% of retirees believe their benefits will be cut. That level of resigned skepticism means voters are less likely to demand that Congress protect and strengthen the program.
The second threat stems from the deficit reduction frenzy. President Obama’s commission to consider ways to reduce the federal deficit is to make recommendations to Congress by December 1. Congressional leadership has agreed to an up or down vote. Prominent among the “solutions” under consideration are cuts to future Social Security benefits.
But Social Security has run surpluses for decades. It is in no way responsible for the federal deficit, nor does it face any looming crisis that needs to be “fixed.” Let’s take a look at the facts.
Social Security is not only the main source of income for seniors. Young Americans and their children are protected by its disability and survivors insurance if the unthinkable happens. In 2009, 3.4 million children through age 19 received Social Security benefits directly, and more than 3 million children lived in households with a beneficiary.
Social Security is also solidly financed. Its resources can continue to provide growing benefits clear through the end of the century.
When Social Security did face a financing problem during the 1970s and early 1980s, Congress raised benefits, instituted automatic COLAs, and raised payroll taxes both to finance those improvements and to build up the Trust Fund for the retirement of the baby boomers. The Trust Fund has now grown to $2.5 trillion.
When we deposit money in the bank, we receive interest because the bank loans out those funds for investments in homes and businesses. So, too, the federal government “invests” the Trust Fund in college loans, Head Start, transportation projects, basic research, and public structures that benefit all Americans.
Such investments make the future workforce more productive and boost economic growth. In the long run this means more revenue for Social Security. Loans from Social Security also enable the federal government to borrow less from individuals and foreign governments, and to keep personal income and corporate taxes low.
Every year, the Social Security Trustees project the program’s finances 75 years into the future. Doing so requires making numerous assumptions about economic growth, productivity, wages, fertility, longevity, immigration rates, and other factors. Three scenarios are created.
Under the assumptions of the “low cost” scenario, the Trust Fund will never be depleted. Under the “Intermediate” scenario, the Fund is projected to continue growing until 2025. Then Social Security will draw down the Fund as planned. In 2037 the assets of the Trust Fund will be depleted and payroll taxes alone will cover 78% of benefits under the current formula.
By that time everyone will be richer because of continuing gains in productivity. Average wages after accounting for inflation are expected to rise from $43,000 in 2010 to $60,000 in 2037. Typical retirement benefits will increase from $17,676 to $24,700 annually. If the Trust Fund is exhausted in 2037, payroll taxes alone would cover benefits averaging about $1,600 more than today’s typical retiree receives after inflation.
If the Fund does run out, Congress could eliminate the arbitrary cap on income subject to payroll taxes (currently $106,800) or adopt some other strategy to maintain the promised level of benefits.
The loudest advocates for reducing Social Security benefits seem to be saying, “To avoid having to cut benefits in the future, we should cut benefits for future recipients now.” What cutting future benefits now really does is allow tax rates on the wealthiest to remain at historic lows.
The Bush tax cuts set the federal income tax on the wealthiest lower than at any point since 1931, except for the years from 1988 to 1992. The Congressional Budget Office says those tax cuts have already increased the deficit by $1.6 trillion, and if extended, will keep future federal revenues well below anticipated expenses – including the cost of making good on the Social Security Trust Fund.
Some argue we must cut benefits because people are living longer. But raising the retirement age or otherwise cutting benefits is both unnecessary and certain to cause hardship. Ongoing increases in productivity mean workers in coming decades will have higher standards of living and be able to support more retirees – just as today a few farmers can feed many urbanites. And people who are in physically demanding jobs or who face early disability often cannot work even to age 65, let alone to 70.
Rather than debating cuts, we should focus on ways to increase benefits for those who are struggling. People of color and women are especially likely to be poor or near poor in their later years. Both groups earn far less than white men and have less access to pensions. Women also live five years longer than men on average, and take more time out of the labor force for family care.
Social Security could be strengthened by:
• Increasing benefits for the lowest income earners;
• Increasing benefits for a surviving spouse to 75% of the couple’s pre-death benefit;
• Providing Family Care Credits; and
• Treating state-recognized same-sex couples and their families equally with heterosexual couples.
A well-orchestrated and lavishly-funded misinformation campaign by Social Security’s opponents, echoed by opportunistic politicians and rarely examined by the media, has convinced most Americans that Social Security is going bankrupt. A proactive campaign of positive reforms is the best way to reach the public with the truth.
Social Security is more important now than ever. Traditional pensions have all but disappeared. Assets have evaporated. Half the workforce has no retirement plan other than Social Security.
We can never predict who will become disabled, who will die young leaving behind dependent children, or who will live to be 100. But we do know that every year a certain percentage of Americans face these challenges.
Social Security is there for the lucky and the unlucky. It is there for all of us. It will continue to be there only if we fight to protect it.
Back to Home
For 75 years, Social Security has been the foundation of economic security for Americans. It represents the best of American values, rewarding hard work, looking out for family and community, and honoring the contributions retirees have made to our current prosperity.
Despite its success and overwhelming popularity, the program faces two serious threats – but not the ones mainstream media have focused on.
The first threat is that the majority of young people are convinced they’ll never get Social Security. A recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that three fourths of those 18 to 34 believe they won’t receive Social Security when they retire. Even 56% of retirees believe their benefits will be cut. That level of resigned skepticism means voters are less likely to demand that Congress protect and strengthen the program.
The second threat stems from the deficit reduction frenzy. President Obama’s commission to consider ways to reduce the federal deficit is to make recommendations to Congress by December 1. Congressional leadership has agreed to an up or down vote. Prominent among the “solutions” under consideration are cuts to future Social Security benefits.
But Social Security has run surpluses for decades. It is in no way responsible for the federal deficit, nor does it face any looming crisis that needs to be “fixed.” Let’s take a look at the facts.
Social Security is not only the main source of income for seniors. Young Americans and their children are protected by its disability and survivors insurance if the unthinkable happens. In 2009, 3.4 million children through age 19 received Social Security benefits directly, and more than 3 million children lived in households with a beneficiary.
Social Security is also solidly financed. Its resources can continue to provide growing benefits clear through the end of the century.
When Social Security did face a financing problem during the 1970s and early 1980s, Congress raised benefits, instituted automatic COLAs, and raised payroll taxes both to finance those improvements and to build up the Trust Fund for the retirement of the baby boomers. The Trust Fund has now grown to $2.5 trillion.
When we deposit money in the bank, we receive interest because the bank loans out those funds for investments in homes and businesses. So, too, the federal government “invests” the Trust Fund in college loans, Head Start, transportation projects, basic research, and public structures that benefit all Americans.
Such investments make the future workforce more productive and boost economic growth. In the long run this means more revenue for Social Security. Loans from Social Security also enable the federal government to borrow less from individuals and foreign governments, and to keep personal income and corporate taxes low.
Every year, the Social Security Trustees project the program’s finances 75 years into the future. Doing so requires making numerous assumptions about economic growth, productivity, wages, fertility, longevity, immigration rates, and other factors. Three scenarios are created.
Under the assumptions of the “low cost” scenario, the Trust Fund will never be depleted. Under the “Intermediate” scenario, the Fund is projected to continue growing until 2025. Then Social Security will draw down the Fund as planned. In 2037 the assets of the Trust Fund will be depleted and payroll taxes alone will cover 78% of benefits under the current formula.
By that time everyone will be richer because of continuing gains in productivity. Average wages after accounting for inflation are expected to rise from $43,000 in 2010 to $60,000 in 2037. Typical retirement benefits will increase from $17,676 to $24,700 annually. If the Trust Fund is exhausted in 2037, payroll taxes alone would cover benefits averaging about $1,600 more than today’s typical retiree receives after inflation.
If the Fund does run out, Congress could eliminate the arbitrary cap on income subject to payroll taxes (currently $106,800) or adopt some other strategy to maintain the promised level of benefits.
The loudest advocates for reducing Social Security benefits seem to be saying, “To avoid having to cut benefits in the future, we should cut benefits for future recipients now.” What cutting future benefits now really does is allow tax rates on the wealthiest to remain at historic lows.
The Bush tax cuts set the federal income tax on the wealthiest lower than at any point since 1931, except for the years from 1988 to 1992. The Congressional Budget Office says those tax cuts have already increased the deficit by $1.6 trillion, and if extended, will keep future federal revenues well below anticipated expenses – including the cost of making good on the Social Security Trust Fund.
Some argue we must cut benefits because people are living longer. But raising the retirement age or otherwise cutting benefits is both unnecessary and certain to cause hardship. Ongoing increases in productivity mean workers in coming decades will have higher standards of living and be able to support more retirees – just as today a few farmers can feed many urbanites. And people who are in physically demanding jobs or who face early disability often cannot work even to age 65, let alone to 70.
Rather than debating cuts, we should focus on ways to increase benefits for those who are struggling. People of color and women are especially likely to be poor or near poor in their later years. Both groups earn far less than white men and have less access to pensions. Women also live five years longer than men on average, and take more time out of the labor force for family care.
Social Security could be strengthened by:
• Increasing benefits for the lowest income earners;
• Increasing benefits for a surviving spouse to 75% of the couple’s pre-death benefit;
• Providing Family Care Credits; and
• Treating state-recognized same-sex couples and their families equally with heterosexual couples.
A well-orchestrated and lavishly-funded misinformation campaign by Social Security’s opponents, echoed by opportunistic politicians and rarely examined by the media, has convinced most Americans that Social Security is going bankrupt. A proactive campaign of positive reforms is the best way to reach the public with the truth.
Social Security is more important now than ever. Traditional pensions have all but disappeared. Assets have evaporated. Half the workforce has no retirement plan other than Social Security.
We can never predict who will become disabled, who will die young leaving behind dependent children, or who will live to be 100. But we do know that every year a certain percentage of Americans face these challenges.
Social Security is there for the lucky and the unlucky. It is there for all of us. It will continue to be there only if we fight to protect it.
Back to Home
McDermott pledges on Labor Day
Join the PSARA contingent on Monday, September 6 – Labor Day – as Congressman Jim McDermott publicly signs a pledge to defend the integrity of Social Security. The ceremony will take place during organized labor’s traditional summer-ending holiday celebration at Seattle’s Woodland Park. The event runs from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Shelters 1, 2 and 3. McDermott is scheduled to sign the pledge at around 12:30 p.m.
Hot dogs, ice cream, coffee, popcorn and soda are free, with live music by the Fabulous Boomers and – a special treat – Mariachi Grullence, from Jalisco, Mexico. As always, PSARA’s literature table will offer brownies and chocolate chip cookies.
Congressional candidates of both parties throughout the state are being asked to join McDermott in pledging to reject any and all attempts to weaken Social Security, and to work instead to strengthen it. Thus far, Susan DelBene, Democratic candidate in the Eighth Congressional District, has said she will sign, and we are awaiting confirmation of a tentative agreement to sign from Fifth District Republican Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers.
The pledge campaign is being led by Social Security Works/Washington, a broad coalition formed in response to attacks on Social Security emanating from the federal deficit reduction commission.
Back to Home
Hot dogs, ice cream, coffee, popcorn and soda are free, with live music by the Fabulous Boomers and – a special treat – Mariachi Grullence, from Jalisco, Mexico. As always, PSARA’s literature table will offer brownies and chocolate chip cookies.
Congressional candidates of both parties throughout the state are being asked to join McDermott in pledging to reject any and all attempts to weaken Social Security, and to work instead to strengthen it. Thus far, Susan DelBene, Democratic candidate in the Eighth Congressional District, has said she will sign, and we are awaiting confirmation of a tentative agreement to sign from Fifth District Republican Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers.
The pledge campaign is being led by Social Security Works/Washington, a broad coalition formed in response to attacks on Social Security emanating from the federal deficit reduction commission.
Back to Home
Judy Cato is convention speaker
Judy Cato, executive vice president of the Alliance for Retired Americans, will join widely-known economist Dean Baker Wednesday, September 29, as speakers at the annual convention of the Washington State Alliance for Retired Americans (WASARA).
Cato, a veteran housing activist, is in charge of ARA’s community advocacy and outreach.
Registration begins at 8:30 a.m. and the convention will run from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Machinists Lodge 751 hall, 9125 15th Place South in Seattle. For directions, or for convention information, call (206) 448-0859. The registration fee of $25 covers materials and lunch.
(Registration form.)
The agenda includes workshops on Social Security, led by Steve Kofahl, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 3937; and on health care legislation, led by Robby Stern, who serves both as vice president of WASARA and as president of PSARA.
Back to Home
Cato, a veteran housing activist, is in charge of ARA’s community advocacy and outreach.
Registration begins at 8:30 a.m. and the convention will run from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Machinists Lodge 751 hall, 9125 15th Place South in Seattle. For directions, or for convention information, call (206) 448-0859. The registration fee of $25 covers materials and lunch.
(Registration form.)
The agenda includes workshops on Social Security, led by Steve Kofahl, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 3937; and on health care legislation, led by Robby Stern, who serves both as vice president of WASARA and as president of PSARA.
Back to Home
We’re nearing the home stretch
It’s not quite the last of the ninth inning, but we’re entering the home stretch and it’s time for the team to drive for the winning touchdown.
Translating today’s sorry bouquet of mixed sports metaphors, we’re looking at September, October, November and December to reach (and exceed) our goal of 250 new members in 2010.
We have now signed up 165 new members since January 1, 2010. PSARA has never in its history grown that fast. We can be proud of that growth. But not so cocky that we get tackled short of the goal line. Here’s what we propose.
Many of our members have responded to our monthly appeals in these pages. Some have come through for us time and again. We salute them. But a majority of our 900 members have yet to sign up their first recruit or send in their first gift membership. We appeal to these good members: Identify a friend, relative, neighbor or workmate right now. Introduce that person to The Retiree Advocate. Sign that person up. If need be, offer to give her or him an introductory year’s membership.
Let every member help pick up the pace as we near the finish line. Make September a victorious month!
Back to Home
Translating today’s sorry bouquet of mixed sports metaphors, we’re looking at September, October, November and December to reach (and exceed) our goal of 250 new members in 2010.
We have now signed up 165 new members since January 1, 2010. PSARA has never in its history grown that fast. We can be proud of that growth. But not so cocky that we get tackled short of the goal line. Here’s what we propose.
Many of our members have responded to our monthly appeals in these pages. Some have come through for us time and again. We salute them. But a majority of our 900 members have yet to sign up their first recruit or send in their first gift membership. We appeal to these good members: Identify a friend, relative, neighbor or workmate right now. Introduce that person to The Retiree Advocate. Sign that person up. If need be, offer to give her or him an introductory year’s membership.
Let every member help pick up the pace as we near the finish line. Make September a victorious month!
Back to Home
We will ally with those who fight to create investment in America.
By Robby Stern
More and more workers are losing their jobs. The “recovery” is weak and faltering. These are ominous tidings. How to address this economic crisis was a hot topic at the just completed Washington State Labor Council convention in Tacoma. Policy makers and our nation as a whole must address fundamental questions: Do we want a manufacturing base in our country? Do we want a growing middle class rather than a declining middle class?
One thoughtful presentation at the convention asserted that any hope to achieve an economic recovery requires the immediate implementation by the federal government of a five point plan:
1. Take care of families hard hit by the downturn,
2. Rebuild America’s infrastructure.
3. Help state and local governments meet pressing needs
4. Put people back to work doing work that needs to be done
5. Ease the credit crunch for small and medium sized businesses.
Compare this five point program with the prevailing agenda of a large sector of the economic elite in our country: deregulate, privatize, globalize and dismantle the safety net. They care little about the promise of the social contract -- that working hard and playing by the rules will yield real opportunities for good quality of life for families and communities.
Our state and country need an industrial investment program that requires coordinated economic development, quality job creation, raising the standard of living and committing to a higher quality of life for the people of our country. We have to move beyond the goal of industry success at any cost. That narrow goal leads to policies that facilitate off-shoring of jobs, a phenomenon we have seen expand exponentially in the last four decades, leading to the loss of quality jobs in our country.
PSARA will join with those who push governments to implement programs that have as their goal raising the standard of living and quality of life for the majority of people while helping to build stronger communities. Government policies need to encourage investment in America. Unfortunately, the trend is just the opposite.
As an organization, we will ally ourselves with organizations and communities that fight to create investment in America. At the state level, we will join with those who want to bar contracting of state services offshore. We will work for transparency to identify those companies who get taxpayer dollars and then offshore jobs. We will avoid the trap that identifies Washington as the most trade dependent state in the country and therefore promotes a free trade policy that leads to the deterioration of the standard of living of our residents and of masses of people around the world. We will embrace protecting American jobs and raising the standard of living of our communities. We do not oppose trade, but it must be fair trade that benefits workers all over the world.
As one of the speakers at the State Labor Council convention stated, unfortunately government, which is supposed to be the referee, has instead given the ball to the other team and then joined them. We need government that places as its top agenda item the welfare, standard of living and quality of life of the people of this country and recognizes the terrible price paid by people all over the world as a result of unfettered and unregulated free trade.
The road ahead looks tough but the road to real recovery is clear. We need an economic investment program that creates millions of good paying jobs and that rebuilds our declining infrastructure and industrial capacity. We are the majority and we must mobilize smartly to assure a decent future for ourselves and the generations to come.
Back to Home
More and more workers are losing their jobs. The “recovery” is weak and faltering. These are ominous tidings. How to address this economic crisis was a hot topic at the just completed Washington State Labor Council convention in Tacoma. Policy makers and our nation as a whole must address fundamental questions: Do we want a manufacturing base in our country? Do we want a growing middle class rather than a declining middle class?
One thoughtful presentation at the convention asserted that any hope to achieve an economic recovery requires the immediate implementation by the federal government of a five point plan:
1. Take care of families hard hit by the downturn,
2. Rebuild America’s infrastructure.
3. Help state and local governments meet pressing needs
4. Put people back to work doing work that needs to be done
5. Ease the credit crunch for small and medium sized businesses.
Compare this five point program with the prevailing agenda of a large sector of the economic elite in our country: deregulate, privatize, globalize and dismantle the safety net. They care little about the promise of the social contract -- that working hard and playing by the rules will yield real opportunities for good quality of life for families and communities.
Our state and country need an industrial investment program that requires coordinated economic development, quality job creation, raising the standard of living and committing to a higher quality of life for the people of our country. We have to move beyond the goal of industry success at any cost. That narrow goal leads to policies that facilitate off-shoring of jobs, a phenomenon we have seen expand exponentially in the last four decades, leading to the loss of quality jobs in our country.
PSARA will join with those who push governments to implement programs that have as their goal raising the standard of living and quality of life for the majority of people while helping to build stronger communities. Government policies need to encourage investment in America. Unfortunately, the trend is just the opposite.
As an organization, we will ally ourselves with organizations and communities that fight to create investment in America. At the state level, we will join with those who want to bar contracting of state services offshore. We will work for transparency to identify those companies who get taxpayer dollars and then offshore jobs. We will avoid the trap that identifies Washington as the most trade dependent state in the country and therefore promotes a free trade policy that leads to the deterioration of the standard of living of our residents and of masses of people around the world. We will embrace protecting American jobs and raising the standard of living of our communities. We do not oppose trade, but it must be fair trade that benefits workers all over the world.
As one of the speakers at the State Labor Council convention stated, unfortunately government, which is supposed to be the referee, has instead given the ball to the other team and then joined them. We need government that places as its top agenda item the welfare, standard of living and quality of life of the people of this country and recognizes the terrible price paid by people all over the world as a result of unfettered and unregulated free trade.
The road ahead looks tough but the road to real recovery is clear. We need an economic investment program that creates millions of good paying jobs and that rebuilds our declining infrastructure and industrial capacity. We are the majority and we must mobilize smartly to assure a decent future for ourselves and the generations to come.
Back to Home
For Reina and our future, vote for I-1098
By Frieda Takamura
My young friend, Reina, has just completed her second year as a third grade teacher in South Seattle. Reina was a social worker for two years after college, but decided she wanted to work more closely with individual children, so with a hefty loan from the bank, she went back to graduate school to get her masters in teaching with an endorsement in bilingual education. With that specialty in a “hard to fill” position, she quickly got a job and come September, found herself in a class with twenty-two eager students, as racially, ethnically, socially, economically diverse as the South Seattle community from which they came.
It was a tough first year, trying to meet the many needs of her students and families, but it was also a tremendously satisfying year as she saw her students progress academically and as individuals, not to mention the growth she felt as a person and as a teacher. And she had escaped being laid off because of school district budget cuts. Most of the following summer she spent taking professional development classes and preparing for the coming year. Reina was excited to begin her second year. This year, though, her class-size had grown from twenty-two to twenty-eight students.
As the year went on, Reina’s frustration grew. Slashes in state education funding and the school district budget forced the school to reduce or eliminate classroom and student resources. Gone were the full time librarian, the art, music, and physical education specialists, the nurse, and many of the classroom aides. Reina filled the gaps because she knows students need more than the “3-R’s.” At the same time, she faced constant pressure to “raise academic standards and student achievement,” too often measured only in terms of high stakes tests, required without the provision of additional time, resources or support.
By June, Reina was physically and mentally exhausted as once again, she was faced with the possibility that she might not have a job in September because once again, the district was facing a fiscal crisis. Luckily for her students, Reina will return in September for her third year. But for how many more years of uncertainty and lack of resources can an enthusiastic, dedicated, caring teacher like Reina persevere? For how long can she continue to do what she loves and does best?
The passage of Initiative 1098 on November’s ballot will help provide the resources that the thousands of Reina’s in our schools need. By restoring and dedicating funds for education and basic health care, I-1098 will provide the stable revenue needed for the basic infrastructure of a healthy community. It will do this by requiring those who can most readily afford it (couples making more than $400,000 and individuals more than $200,000) to pay their fair share through a modest income tax.
If we truly believe that the “children are our future,” that “it takes a village to raise a child,” and that “public education is an investment for a stronger, prosperous America,” we must vote “YES” for I-1098. We must prove to the Reina’s of our state that we believe in and support them because they are indeed, ensuring that our future generations will be well educated and productive, and that they, in turn, will support us.
(Frieda Takamura is a member of the PSARA Executive Board.)
Back to Home
My young friend, Reina, has just completed her second year as a third grade teacher in South Seattle. Reina was a social worker for two years after college, but decided she wanted to work more closely with individual children, so with a hefty loan from the bank, she went back to graduate school to get her masters in teaching with an endorsement in bilingual education. With that specialty in a “hard to fill” position, she quickly got a job and come September, found herself in a class with twenty-two eager students, as racially, ethnically, socially, economically diverse as the South Seattle community from which they came.
It was a tough first year, trying to meet the many needs of her students and families, but it was also a tremendously satisfying year as she saw her students progress academically and as individuals, not to mention the growth she felt as a person and as a teacher. And she had escaped being laid off because of school district budget cuts. Most of the following summer she spent taking professional development classes and preparing for the coming year. Reina was excited to begin her second year. This year, though, her class-size had grown from twenty-two to twenty-eight students.
As the year went on, Reina’s frustration grew. Slashes in state education funding and the school district budget forced the school to reduce or eliminate classroom and student resources. Gone were the full time librarian, the art, music, and physical education specialists, the nurse, and many of the classroom aides. Reina filled the gaps because she knows students need more than the “3-R’s.” At the same time, she faced constant pressure to “raise academic standards and student achievement,” too often measured only in terms of high stakes tests, required without the provision of additional time, resources or support.
By June, Reina was physically and mentally exhausted as once again, she was faced with the possibility that she might not have a job in September because once again, the district was facing a fiscal crisis. Luckily for her students, Reina will return in September for her third year. But for how many more years of uncertainty and lack of resources can an enthusiastic, dedicated, caring teacher like Reina persevere? For how long can she continue to do what she loves and does best?
The passage of Initiative 1098 on November’s ballot will help provide the resources that the thousands of Reina’s in our schools need. By restoring and dedicating funds for education and basic health care, I-1098 will provide the stable revenue needed for the basic infrastructure of a healthy community. It will do this by requiring those who can most readily afford it (couples making more than $400,000 and individuals more than $200,000) to pay their fair share through a modest income tax.
If we truly believe that the “children are our future,” that “it takes a village to raise a child,” and that “public education is an investment for a stronger, prosperous America,” we must vote “YES” for I-1098. We must prove to the Reina’s of our state that we believe in and support them because they are indeed, ensuring that our future generations will be well educated and productive, and that they, in turn, will support us.
(Frieda Takamura is a member of the PSARA Executive Board.)
Back to Home
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)