Comment Rescue: JC on HB117 House Passage
Jun 10th, 2009 by RSmitty
Friend and commenter, Joanne Christian, dropped a comment on Delaware Liberal in reference to the shocking and seemingly ignorant passage of HB117 in the house yesterday. 17 wise and well-thought-out Representatives voted no on this bad piece of Longhurst legislation. My focus being on Appoquinimink, I’d like to thank Rep Dick Cathcart for his no vote, but give loud jeers to Rep Quinn Johnson, whose yes vote is no surprise with his Appo. history. Additionally, I’d like to thank Rep Kowalko for his no vote. He doesn’t overlap into Appoquinimink area, but he took the time to come here and comment in reference to the bill, so I felt the need to give him proper praise. To the other 15 representatives who voted no, thank you.
Before we get to JC’s comment, this bill now goes to the Senate. Senators Bruce Ennis and Bethany Hall-Long, big chunks of your district are Appoquinimink SD. As a resident of Appoquinimink, I ask you LOUDLY to OPPOSE this extremely short-sighted and horribly misguided legislation. Sens Ennis and Hall-Long, VOTE NO ON HB117!
I am just getting word of this, as myself and many school board members were in our monthly meetings this pm, tied up with our respective district’s business. Ed Czerwinski will now be replaced after ten years of high-paced, sweat of his brow, honest, engaged, advocacy for education in Delaware, and specifically in Appoquinimink. He did not hesitate to go toe to toe w/ any legislator at any level to advance public education in this state. He was feted tonite, by those who are well aware of his drive and push for funding, and fundamentals of 21st century skills needed for our students today. He brought his case, and made his case to anyone in position to act–because of the unafilliated position in education that can trump any risk of political fall-out, or suspicion of political pay-off. I am real sorry you folks in RC or Christina claim to have a hard time with politics, but do we really need to dial down education to the least common denominator of decision, and service–POLITICS? Spare the “it’s already there” speech..if it is….YOU let it in…and didn’t have the strength of conviction to go against a machine. Five individuals ran for our board seat, and I did not see one mention or connection to any party or idealogy. Looking around I would say 300 hundred bucks MAY have been the top dollar spent. Well, this bill has now cleared the path for some of us other districts to become just like you. If what you say is true–no thanks–I prefer my local citizens, not my local party running the local school board.. It is a sad day when you applaud what you have done for your state government, by going against the machine and sending Markell to Dover, but no hesitancy in usurping a volunteer, local position, and condemning it to party play. Regardless of the untagged candidate–broke and vulnerable have a certain appeal to both parties and prostitutes. What a shame the school board goes the way of the brothel.
I will be in mourning, until our good Senators can see the folly of the House decision, and keep the boards as boards–local policy makers–and not their personal bedmakers.
It is a bad bill. It will take away voter oversight right when the Governor is proposing to give more authority to the boards. It will discourage candidates running which will off set any gain in voter participation. Fewer choices, less attention, and more money in the campaigns does not seem like reform.
Why Smitty, you’ve quoted me?! Perhaps I can rise from grief, and post back. Where would you like it? It’s non-partisan to me, so up for grabs to some commentary.
Here. Would you like to email it for guest-post status?