A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Re-Post: State Impact on High School Career and Technical Training

September 22, 2020 by Doug Masson 7 Comments

(General programming note for blog readers in the West Lafayette school district: I am a candidate in the 2020 West Lafayette School Board election. There are four seats open, and I would like to fill one of them. If you want to know more about my campaign, ask questions, request a yard sign, please go to https://masson.us/schoolboard.)

As I’m in the middle of my campaign for West Lafayette school board, I’m going through some of my older posts on education. This one from July 2017 remains relevant:

Peter Balonon-Rosen, writing for State Impact Indiana has a good article on career and technical training initiatives in Indiana schools:

A new state law could allow job training programs to replace other high school graduation requirements. The law requires the State Board of Education to develop new pathways to high school completion.

It comes just as job training in Indiana high schools has taken on a new life — and new name.

“I think there’s a negative perception associated with the term ‘vocational training,’” Deuberry says. “Instead it is kind of like job training program. It’s so much bigger.”

. . .

Career and technical education programs are growing across Indiana. Today, students learn skills from welding to 3D printing to cooking – not just shop class skills, as was common in the past.

This is probably a good concept if done well but subject to abuse if done poorly. (Not very insightful: you could probably say that about almost literally any initiative.) Earlier in the article, Balonon-Rosen mentions that policymakers have struggled with whether education should be about getting kids ready for college or for the workforce. Molly Deuberry, speaking for the Department of Education, says “both.” And that’s correct as far as it goes, but I cringed a little at the idea of “college” being the counterpart to “workforce” because you run into the same question in college. Is that just advanced vocational training?

The larger question, in my mind, is whether you are teaching the student to be a worker or teaching the student to be a person. The ability to make a living is a big part of what is going to make you a productive, happy, fully developed citizen and human. But, it’s obviously not the only thing. Schools have to focus on vocational capabilities as a significant part of what will make a student a good person and a citizen who will improve the community. College preparation is not necessarily the path to excellence in those non-vocational areas of life.

But, I’m straying a bit from the point. When I was a kid, it seemed like vocational classes were a place where the troublemakers were shunted off. As I walked the hallways, I saw lots of rough kids through the doors of shop rooms that I never set foot in. The danger is that these vocational classes won’t be used so much as an alternate route for a fully developed education as storage space for “troublemakers.”

But it definitely doesn’t have to be that way, and from the article it sounds like the aspiration of the career and technical training initiatives is to recognize that college isn’t for everyone. (And, as I say this, I’m extremely wary of sounding like Judge Smails in Caddyshack when he tells Danny, “the world needs ditch diggers too.”) A strong career and technical education path was one of the recommendations of the NCSL report on how to build a world-class educational system after the study group reviewed a number of other educational systems around the world. As I put it in a blog post from last year:

Develop a Career and Technical Education path for those students preferring more of an applied education rather than a more academic approach. This shouldn’t be an educational backwater like so many vocational programs. It should be geared to boosting the national economy and providing a higher standard of living for a broader base of the population.

Life on Venus

September 14, 2020 by Doug Masson 1 Comment

As we’re mired in our day-to-day parochial concerns, it’s nice to be reminded that there are people still working on the big picture stuff. Jennifer Chu, writing in SciTech Daily, has an article about likely discovery of life on Venus. Scientists have discovered phosphine in a layer of Venus’ atmosphere that is the most likely to be hospitable to life. Venus has an atmosphere that is really, really inhospitable to life — extreme heat and acidic clouds, among other things. But, there is apparently a pocket between 48 and 60 kilometers above the surface, where temperatures range from 30 to 200 degrees Fahrenheit. If Venus had life, that’s where it would be expected. And that’s where they’ve detected phosphine.

Phosphine is associated with biological processes, and scientists have ruled out the non-biological explanations they can think of. So, their conclusion is that this probably means there is life of some kind in the air of the (relatively) hospitable pocket of Venus.

Extra-terrestrial life seems like kind of a big find. Josh Claybourn, writing on Facebook, suggested that the two most likely scenarios for the origin of that life would be that something hitched a ride on the Soviet probes to Venus 50 years ago or that something ejected from earth (debris from a meteor strike) made its way to Venus.

Indiana AG Candidate Weinzapfel promises criminal investigation into $86 million charter school debacle

September 12, 2020 by Doug Masson Leave a Comment

Taylor Wooten, writing for the Statehouse File, reports in an article about (Republican) Superintendent of Public Instruction, Jennifer McCormick’s endorsement of (Democratic) candidate for Attorney General, Jonathan Weinzapfel:

Weinzapfel, former chancellor of the Ivy Tech Evansville campus, has said he wishes to be a “champion for education” by fighting for enhanced pay for teachers and increased accountability for educational institutions that receive tax dollars.

The $86 million controversy regarding two Indiana virtual charter schools will be a subject of criminal prosecution if he becomes attorney general, Weinzapfel said. The Indiana Virtual School and Indiana Virtual Pathways Academy collected over $80 million from the state by falsifying student enrollment data.

(For those who don’t know, Weinzapfel was also mayor of Evansville from 2004-2011.)

That’s good news. I’ve said before that there is some indication that charter schools can be successful — but not under the conditions that Indiana is ever likely to put them on offer. In Massachusetts, strong regulation and oversight seems to make them complementary to the traditional public school system in a way that can benefit students for whom traditional public schools aren’t a great fit. In Indiana, we have a system with weak regulation and poor oversight where charter and voucher schools divert funds from traditional public schools, work at cross-purposes, provide a comparable or worse education, and — as we saw in the case of the virtual charter schools — line the pockets of their operators.

Indiana is unlikely to implement Massachusetts’ approach because the quality of educational opportunities appears to be mostly incidental to the motivations of voucher and charter school enthusiasts in Indiana. Higher priorities seem to be: a) reducing the influence of teachers unions; b) redirecting the flow of education money to friends and well-wishers of policymakers supporting charters; and c) using public money to subsidize religious education.

Fun fact: Indiana Virtual School used a Brink’s armored truck instead of a school bus.

The state’s experience with the Indiana Virtual School and Indiana Virtual Pathway Academy is instructive of how, under the state’s approach to charter schools, public money can be hideously misspent.

The joke is that dead people vote in Chicago. Apparently they go to school in Indiana. Stephanie Wang, reporting for Chalkbeat Indiana, has an article about the Indiana Virtual School and Indiana Virtual Pathway Academy which, among a number of other abuses, kept a dead kid on their claims for state money for two years after he died.

“Five years after two students moved to Florida, they reappeared on enrollment records for Indiana Virtual School and its sister school.

And nearly every one of the more than 900 students kicked out of Indiana Virtual School and its sister school in the 2017-18 school year for being inactive were re-enrolled the next school year, included in per-pupil funding calculations that netted the two online schools more than $34 million in public dollars last year.

These were among the ways that Indiana Virtual School and Indiana Virtual Pathways Academy allegedly inflated their enrollment to at least twice its actual size, according to the findings of a state examiner’s investigation released Monday.”

According to a State Board of Accounts audit filed in February of this year, the best estimate to date is that the schools improperly cost the State $86 million. It would definitely seem appropriate to follow the money trail identified by the SBOA and, where appropriate, prosecute individuals lining their pockets instead of educating our kids. So, it’s good to see Mr. Weinzapfel taking an interest. Hopefully Superintendent McCormick’s endorsement will carry some weight in the Attorney General election. (To be candid, I was skeptical of Dr. McCormick when she was elected, but that skepticism was misplaced. She’s been an excellent Superintendent of Public Instruction, particularly given the political environment in which she has been navigating.)

(I am running for West Lafayette School Board in the 2020 election. If you’re interested in my candidacy, check out my campaign website. If you like what you see & live in West Lafayette, I’d appreciate your vote. Tell your friend & request a yard sign!)

West Lafayette Community School Corporation wins round in effort to protect Happy Hollow

August 28, 2020 by Doug Masson 2 Comments

This is an update to a previous post which I’m just going to copy below for convenience. By way of reminder he General Assembly has adopted a law that (simplified a bit) requires a school corporation to sell its real estate to a charter school for $1 if the school corporation is not currently using the facility. West Lafayette Community School Corporation currently owns the Happy Hollow property but it is not being used for school purposes at the moment. Rather, it’s being leased to the City of West Lafayette as a city government building while West Lafayette renovates the old Morton facility. Happy Hollow has structural issues that need to be remedied which is what led to the school corporation building the new West Lafayette Intermediate School. Long-term, the plan is to renovate Happy Hollow so that it once again becomes suitable for use by WLCSC – the current thinking is that it might be a good location for an early childhood education center. The state’s $1 charter school legislation is an impediment to long-term planning of this kind.

WLCSC filed suit in Tippecanoe County in September of 2019 challenging the law. Not long thereafter, however, it became apparent that a lawsuit filed by Lake Ridge School Corporation and School City of Hammond in Lake County, schools that had similar concerns, would be a better vehicle for the litigation challenging the law generally. WLCSC dismissed its Tippecanoe County suit and filed a motion to intervene in Lake County (45D05-2001-PL-2). The State filed a motion to dismiss very similar to the one it had filed in Tippecanoe County, arguing primarily that the issue was not “ripe” for adjudication (because no charter school was yet actively seeking to purchase one of the affected properties) and also arguing — somewhat breathtakingly — that the State has no obligation at all to pay for property it takes from local government. For reasons I explained more in the previous post, I think the State does have to compensate local government if it takes local government property. I’m also of the opinion that this law would violate Art. 10, §1 of the Indiana Constitution which provides requires the General Assembly provide a “uniform and equal rate of property assessment and taxation.” Happy Hollow was paid for by property taxes that were not “uniform” to those that you would find in, say, unincorporated Tippecanoe County. That non-uniform taxation is appropriate insofar as it is used to benefit the school district. It is inappropriate to use taxes peculiar to the District to benefit the State at large. See City of Richmond v. Scott, 48 Ind. 568, 572-73 (Ind. 1874) (determining that unequal rates of municipal taxation do not violate Art. 10, §1 because “taxes for corporate purposes cannot be equal. The wants and necessities of towns and cities cannot be equal. Some require a higher and some a lower rate of taxation.)

While not necessarily reaching the substance of these arguments; yesterday, the Lake County Superior Court gave the first round to the schools – determining that West Lafayette would be permitted to intervene (i.e. participate in the case) and that the State’s motion to dismiss would be denied. That means the parties can proceed with discovery, summary judgment arguments, and, if necessary, trial. This wouldn’t seem to be the type of case where trial is likely to be necessary because the relevant facts shouldn’t be in much dispute. The contested issues will be issues of law — e.g. whether the State is required to compensate local government for takings and, if so, whether the law making the property subject to purchase for a dollar by a charter school amounts to a compensable taking. Issues of law are decided by the Court. The trial court’s decision will not be the final word. However the trial court rules, somebody will almost certainly appeal.

I’m obviously pulling for WLCSC. Even putting my local loyalties aside, the way the State has handled charter schools has undermined public education in Indiana. As I’ve said before, there is some evidence (out of Massachusetts mostly) that properly regulated charter schools can do some good. But the Indiana General Assembly is decidedly uninterested in any sort of rigorous regulation of charter schools.

(Earlier post follows).

================================================

State of Indiana Claims Right to Take Local Government Property Without Compensation

Our Price: $1.00
Cheap!

West Lafayette Community School Corporation has sued Governor Holcomb in his official capacity (Cause 79C01-1909-PL-115 in the Circuit Court of Tippecanoe County) to challenge a law that requires local school corporations to make unused buildings available to charter schools for a dollar before they can sell them, leave them vacant, or (the law is less clear) lease them for non-school purposes. West Lafayette has an old building, Happy Hollow, that’s on its last legs and the school corporation has long term plans to use the site, likely as an early education facility, once it gets a solid model put together and can line up the proper funding. In the meantime, it’s being leased to the City of West Lafayette as a temporary city hall for which the City is paying the School a healthy lease payment which, in turn, is being used to fund School operations.

Earlier this year, the General Assembly passed HB 1641 which added IC 20-26-7.1 featuring the $1 lease/purchase requirements. (If a school sells real estate in violation of this requirement, proceeds from the sale go to the State to fund charter school grants). In the case of Happy Hollow, the school corporation arguably has to forego a revenue stream from the City lease or put long term plans on hold if a charter school expresses interest and an intent to get a charter school up and running in the next two years.

So that’s the background. Being a strong proponent of local government and of public schools, it will come as no surprise to anyone that I take the school’s side on this one. But that’s not what prompted me to write this.

In defending the lawsuit, Governor Holcomb (by counsel) has made the breathtaking argument:

“[T]he Takings Clauses and Just Compensation do not apply to the State’s relationship with political subdivisions.”

“[M]unicipalities and subdivisions of the State cannot request just compensation even if there is taking[.]”

The State’s argument does not offer any limitation to this principle which is unique to schools. The State can take local government property and not pay for it. Full stop. The argument is that local government is merely a “subalternate instrumentality” of the State government — in other words, local government is just a tool of State government, so there’s really been no loss if the State commandeers local property for its own purposes.

There is an old United States Supreme Court case, Board of Commissioners of Tippecanoe County v. Lucas, 93 U.S. 108 (1876) where the Court said, “the legislature of a state possesses the power to direct a restitution to taxpayers of a county or other municipal corporation of property exacted from them by taxation, into whatever form the property may be changed, so long as it remains in possession of the municipality.” (emphasis added) It’s true that the State has a lot of power to direct the affairs of local government. So, if the State said that the school had to sell vacant property at market value and, for example, use the proceeds to buy school buses for itself, the “taking” argument would be much weaker. Yes, the State is meddling in local affairs, but taxes paid by local residents are not being diverted to other entities.

But that’s not the argument the Governor is making. Local government property can be used for any purpose the State wants. It doesn’t matter if taxpayers supported a local tax rate precisely because decisions about the use of those taxes were being made by the city council or school board. This goes well beyond taking local school property to subsidize charters. In principle, it could be used to sell off the Wayne County Courthouse in Richmond and use it to subsidize toll road operations in northern Indiana. Or whatever. Like I said, the argument doesn’t offer any limiting principle to the State’s authority to seize local government property without paying for it.

Now, if I had to guess, this is probably the case of an attorney operating out of Indianapolis trying to grind out a win without having run the argument past any political types. I highly doubt that Gov. Holcomb knows anything about this argument even though it’s being made in his name. I suspect the political types would understand that an assertion by the State of unfettered control over local resources is unlikely to be well received outside of the State House.

Re-Post: Some thoughts on Red for Ed, Caleb Mills, and Indiana’s School Policies

August 4, 2020 by Doug Masson Leave a Comment

Re-posting this because, with all that’s going on with our schools these days, it’s easy (and understandable) to slip into a sort of survival mode that makes us lose track of the longer term threads of what’s going on with education in Indiana. This was originally posted on November 13, 2019. Also, I’m running for school board.

Read, Circulate, and Discuss

The recent $40 million failure of the ILEARN test has prompted the “Red for Ed” rally scheduled for November 19, 2019 at the State House when the General Assembly gathers for its annual organization day. Among other things, the movement is asking for schools and teachers to be “held harmless” from the consequences that the legislature has tied to such testing. That would include not penalizing schools for performance on this test, stopping the clock on the time given to “failing schools” to improve (since this testing year was essentially wasted), and not penalizing teachers based on data generated by this test.

It is also a good time to revisit our overall approach to education policy in Indiana. What we have now isn’t really a “system” per se in that its component parts don’t work well together. Rather than our current ideologically driven approach based on what policymakers think ought to work, we should evaluate the systems and curricula that actually are working in places like Singapore, Canada, Finland, and Japan and adapt their approaches as best we can to Indiana. Ultimately, a good educational system will have to be built on the quality of its teachers. That means attracting the best and the brightest high school students to the teaching colleges. It means preparing those incoming teachers to teach the curriculum which, in turn, requires a stable approach to education. And, once trained, it means retaining those teachers.

There has been some criticism of the Red for Ed rally and its goals by school privatization enthusiasts. But it has mostly been hand waving. Shane Phipps, writing at Inside Education does a pretty good job of addressing some of these criticisms.

At root, there is a lack of appreciation as to what a world-class educational system provides and possibly a lack of ambition by policymakers. Can we afford one? We can’t afford not to have one. Opportunity is slipping away from Hoosiers because we’re allowing our foundation to erode. The high stakes testing and privatization approach that have been in place for the better part of a generation have put us in a downward spiral. Teachers have been scapegoats and their salaries have remained mostly stagnant as their burdens have grown.

When it comes to education, we are too often shrewd with our pennies but foolish with our dollars. This is an investment. As Caleb Mills, the father of Indiana’s common school system observed in the 19th century, a good education system adds to the social, literary, and intellectual capital of the citizens and adds materially to the real and substantial happiness of everyone. Mills said that we must “convince the ignorant man that knowledge would increase his happiness and satisfy the prejudiced man that he has only misapprehended the best means of securing his own welfare.” In 1848, a referendum was put to the people of the State, asking “are you in favor of free schools?” The result was narrowly in favor, but it was significant that the opposition came chiefly from the areas with the highest level of illiteracy. The people with better educations recognized the tremendous opportunity provided by public education.

There is a charitable, moral argument for paying to educate your neighbors. But, even on the level of simple self-interest, we have an interest in the proper education of all who are socially and politically connected to us. Better schools lead to (as Mills pointed out) “more valuable real estate, productive capital, lightened public burdens, increased social enjoyments, and security of possession.” Investment in education pays further dividends in reduced expenses from crime and costs of punishment. What’s more, for most areas, the school serves as the nucleus of the social fabric. It’s an important part of what turns a collection of individuals into a community.

Mills again: “There is but one way to secure good schools, and that is to pay for them.” How much should we pay for them? As much as they are worth. Taxes are absolutely part of the equation. This will require some courage from legislators as taxes inevitably cause initial dissatisfaction. Per Mills, “a legislature that would wait for a harmony of views before action would never affect anything great and noble.” As with any investment, benefits come later. Politicians who crow about surplus funds and low taxes while we are unable to attract and retain teachers should receive the same reception as a homeowner who brags about a shiny new car and a healthy bank account while the foundations of his home are crumbling. The State has taken over the business of funding schools. Locals lack the power to move the needle very much. If we want good schools, we will have to persuade the legislators we have or get new ones. Because the State made the decision to swallow the elephant of public education, it now represents about half of the state budget. As such, there is a strong argument to be made that education should be a central focus of every legislator and that the General Assembly should be judged based on the resulting quality of Indiana schools. In 2021, as the Governor takes total control of the State’s education system (by virtue of the Superintendent of Public Instruction becoming an appointed position), a gubernatorial candidate’s education bona fides should be one of the electorate’s primary concerns.

Ultimately, we need to produce the best teachers at our institutes of higher learning and pay teachers commensurate to their training and value. We are entrusting them to instill in our children the capacity to be productive citizens. What’s that worth? To attract and retain teachers of the highest caliber, we need to recognize what society gains by attracting the best and the brightest to the profession. Mills describes the situation in the 1840s: “What inducement had a youth of commanding talents, noble and generous aspirations, to spend years of time and hundreds of dollars [19th century money] to fit himself for an employment that would not command a higher compensation than was given for services requiring no intellectual training or moral culture?” The young men you would have wanted as teachers chose instead to become preachers and lawyers. History may not repeat, but it certainly seems to rhyme.

The privatization fad isn’t working. Voucher and charter schools do not produce better results than traditional public schools and there is some evidence that they produce worse outcomes. A fractured approach to education cannot produce consistent results. If we’re looking to be responsible with our money, we can’t afford to have education dollars sucked up by self-dealing charter management companies with opaque accounting or vouchers sent to private institutions with books closed to the public. We can’t spend tens of millions of dollars on tests with arbitrary faulty metrics. The reason we’re having so much trouble with the tests and vouchers and charters is because the arguments for them were always pretexts. The tests weren’t designed to provide feedback to improve education — they are designed as cudgels for proclaiming that public schools are failing (and to redirect public money to testing companies.) Vouchers weren’t designed to give poor children attending public schools a way out — they were designed to subsidize religious education and give “good families” a way to keep their kids away from undesirables. If we were serious about our approach to charter schools, we’d consider the rigorous accountability process used in Massachusetts. But, we’re not, so we get charters authorized by tiny Daleville and overseen by apparently nobody.

If the concern was truly that Indiana’s traditional public schools were not performing as well as they should, the rational approach would be to look to those school systems in our country and around the world that are producing the desired outcomes. That’s not what we did because those systems would not have provided a rationale for subsidizing private, religious education; reducing the influence of teacher’s unions; or redirecting public education money to friends and well-wishers of privatization enthusiasts. So, they had to come up with this cobbled together mess of half-measures and contradictions they could market to the public with rhetoric about “choice,” “accountability,” “empowerment,” and “the market.” When the results fail to materialize they either ignore the results or just say we have to do it harder. Privatization can’t fail, it can only be failed.

We have been some place like this before. Prior to creation of common schools, Indiana’s commitment to public education was more aspirational than real. The qualifications of teachers were left to local trustees. The quality of education was wildly uneven. There was a powerful disincentive for educated Hoosiers to become teachers. At a time other institutions were becoming well organized and efficient, the schools were struggling with unequal lengths of term, incapable teachers, dishonest trustees, diversity of textbooks, lax enforcement of school laws and school discipline, neighborhood quarrels over school sites, narrow views of education, and a lack of wise leadership. (Worley at p.6) This description reminded me powerfully of our recent charter school debacle at the Indiana Virtual School.

We pulled ourselves off the educational floor once. So did Finland and Singapore and Ontario and any number of places that now surpass us in educational outcomes. We can do it again. But we have to look to examples that work and craft a system with pieces that fit together, one enhancing the other. A Hobbesian war of all-against-all, even if marketed under the banner of “choice,” will inevitably result in a cacophony of cross-purposes. We need to rethink our policies.

—One of the People

Education

August 4, 2020 by Doug Masson 1 Comment

So, I just filed to run for the West Lafayette School Board. (Some of you may remember my run from four years ago where I lost by a nose.) I intend to write more later about this particular race, who I am, and what I want to do. But, in case people are looking me up before I get that taken care of and want to get more insight into my thoughts on education, I figure it’s probably good to have a link to the Education category of my blog front and center: Click here for that link.

Let the Facts Be Submitted to a Candid World

July 4, 2020 by Doug Masson 2 Comments

Two hundred and forty-six years ago:

The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies
In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

West Lafayette Schools Education Foundation Virtual Fundraiser THURSDAY 6/25 at 7 p.m.

June 23, 2020 by Doug Masson Leave a Comment

This post is for a pretty specific audience, but anyone should feel free to read and donate! I’m currently serving as the Board President for the West Lafayette Schools Education Foundation. The Foundation is a non-profit with a mission to support the West Lafayette Community School Corporation.

The short version: the Foundation’s normal annual fundraiser was derailed by COVID-19 and we are having a virtual fundraiser this Thursday at 7 p.m. (You will be able to watch here). You can donate here. Several teachers will compete in games for your amusement while we ask you to donate money to support the Foundation and, by extension, the West Lafayette Schools.

https://www.facebook.com/wlsef/videos/1703991603073300/

The longer version:

The West Lafayette Schools Education Foundation supports the West Lafayette Community School Corporation. Specifically this has involved things like securing funding for the backpack program which helps with food security for school families with a need; funding the teacher grant program which helps teachers acquire supplies and services for initiatives they think will help in the classroom; administering student scholarships; raising money to help with the school’s capital projects (like the James R. Guy Education Wing); and coordinating alumni outreach.

A lot of the money that comes into the Foundation is restricted — donors have given money with the stipulation that it only be used for a particular scholarship or to fund bricks and mortar, etc.. That’s great, and we welcome those donations, but the Foundation needs a certain amount of unrestricted money to fund its general operations. Normally, we have an annual dinner and an auction that serves as our primary fundraiser, but this year COVID-19 upended that plan for us like it did for so many others. So, we are trying a virtual fundraiser. The structure is like a game show with some of our teachers going head-to-head. The contestants are:

Lane Custer – WL Intermediate School PE, WL Varsity track & field coach

Jane Schott – WL High School Science, Varsity girls’ basketball coach

Randy Studt – WL High School German/Educator of the Year!

Morgan Asay – WL Intermediate School Art

Alivia Brooks – WL High School Assistant Band Director

Rick Roseman – WL Elementary PE teacher, WL Varsity Wrestling Coach & Football Defensive Coordinator

We have lined up some matching funds for donations, hence the name “Double Your Dollars.”

You can watch here beginning at 7:00 p.m. until approximately 8 p.m. on Thursday, June 25: https://www.doubleyourdollars.live/episodes-2020-wlsef

You can donate here: https://secure.givelively.org/donate/west-lafayette-schools-eductionfoundation-inc/double-your-dollars-live-2020. I believe you can also donate by texting REDDEVILPRIDE to 44-321. Early donations or donations during the event are both welcome.

And, a final pitch to separate you, dear reader, from your money for a good cause. I’m not a tax professional — so check with one of your choice — but the CARES Act passed by Congress in response to COVID-19 made donations more attractive from a tax perspective. The 2017 tax legislation made it so that most people take the standard deduction rather than itemizing. The new CARES Act legislation lets you take an “above the line” deduction of $300 (or $600 for married, filing jointly) for charitable donations.

So, particularly if you live in West Lafayette, please watch & please donate.

Valuing Death

May 24, 2020 by Doug Masson 4 Comments

The New York Times has a remarkable front page commemorating the 100,000 who have died over the last 3 months during our struggle with COVID-19. It has the names of 1,000 of them (1% of the total) with a brief description of something personal about them — lest they be simply dismissed as a statistic. This milestone coming during Memorial Day Weekend, I observed that COVID-19 was on pace to be more lethal than any of our wars. Apparently not appreciating the significance of the phrase “on pace,” someone objected that World War II cost us 400,000 American lives.

But the second objection was more interesting. He complained that it wasn’t fair to compare COVID-19 deaths to “lives lost fighting for freedoms.” Memorial Day is to honor the men and women who died while in the military service. We don’t limit our respect to just those men and women whose lives were lost fighting for freedom. They did not get to pick and choose which wars or missions they were assigned to. We don’t honor the World War II death because he was fighting against Hitler while ignoring the casualties of the North Russia Intervention or Private Harry Eagan who died in the Sheepeater Indian War.

So should we minimize COVID-19 deaths as compared to military deaths? As I recall, we put 9/11 deaths way up on a pedestal with rhetoric comparable to how we’ve traditionally spoken of military deaths. The coronavirus is an enemy that has curtailed our freedom, damaged our economy, and generally threatened the citizens of the United States far more seriously than Iraq, North Vietnam, or North Korea ever could have. It’s implacable, insidious, and everywhere. Currently we’re losing a 9/11 worth of Americans every 2 or 3 days.

Is there a principled reason for valuing military deaths (including those who died during missions that did not protect freedom in any appreciable way) over COVID-19 deaths? Valuing 9/11 deaths over COVID-19 deaths? Or is it more of a reflexive cultural habit?

Fallout from Attorney General Groping Case or “Thirty Days in the Hole”

May 12, 2020 by Doug Masson 7 Comments

Indiana’s Attorney General, Curtis Hill, had a big night out on March 15, 2018. He seems to have gotten drunk and groped a state representative and several interns in addition to making some inappropriate comments. This was at a sine die party at an Indianapolis bar the night the General Assembly adjourned. If he’d responded with something along the lines of “I had too much to drink, I behaved badly, and I’m very sorry” there would have been some embarrassment, but it seems likely that things would have blown over. Instead he went with the Shaggy “wasn’t me” defense. Technically, his response was, “At no time was my behavior inappropriate nor did I touch anyone in an inappropriate manner.” Then he attacked the accusers, saying their accusations were “false” and “vicious.”

A special prosecutor who looked into the matter declined to prosecute, citing the standard of proof and that such a prosecution would not be in the public interest. However, the disciplinary case against him had legs. It had a lower standard of proof (clear and convincing) and lawyers are held to a higher standard than simply “not committing a crime.” The Hearing Officer found that the Disciplinary Commission carried its burden of proof that Hill had committed battery against the women. The touching had taken place, met the standard for “rude” or “insolent,” and was done knowingly or intentionally. The Supreme Court agreed and has suspended Hill’s license for 30 days. Where the Supreme Court and the Hearing Officer parted ways, however, was as to whether Hill should be entitled to automatic reinstatement. The Hearing Officer did not think so. In my view the Hearing Officer’s recommendation to not allow automatic reinstatement was a function of Hill’s attacks on the process and the witnesses after the allegations came to light. The Supreme Court did not find these actions laudable but reasoned that those actions did not entail “the type of wholesale lack of insight or lack of remorse that ordinarily would prompt us to require a respondent attorney to undergo the reinstatement process in order to prove his fitness to resume the practice of law.” He also got some leeway because people working on his behalf did some of the objectionable conduct rather than Hill doing it himself.

The automatic reinstatement is a fairly big deal. The process to petition for reinstatement is fairly burdensome, and you have to convince the Court that you learned your lesson. I think we have a pretty solid Supreme Court, and I agree with them more often than not, but the decision on reinstatement feels political to me. Not in the sense that I think they particularly care whether it’s a Republican or Democrat doing this, but rather that they wouldn’t be particularly excited to be involved with the reinstatement process for such a high profile position. If a private attorney had attacked witnesses and the process in such a public fashion, I think the penalty would have been harsher.

But, light as the penalty was, there are still repercussions. The Governor has filed an “emergency motion to intervene and request for clarification.” He wants the Supreme Court to tell him whether the suspension means that Hill is no longer “duly licensed” as required for the Attorney General under [cite] and, if not, whether his resulting lack of qualification for the office means that there is a vacancy such that the Governor must appoint a new Attorney General. IC 4-6-3-1 requires that the Attorney General be “duly licensed to practice law in Indiana.” The language of the order suspending him suggests that he is no longer “duly licensed” as it provides that, subject to certain conditions, he will be “reinstated to the practice of law” after the suspension period. The fact that he must be “reinstated to the practice” strongly suggests that, at the moment, he is not “duly licensed to practice.”

That being said, the pragmatist in me suggests that, if the Court declined to get entangled with the reinstatement process, it won’t let semantics force Hill out of office. However, in his petition, the Governor cites to a case involving a Prosecutor in Washington County, Indiana who was suspended for 120 days in 2005 for taking a defendant’s note paper when the defendant and his attorney left the deposition room, then attempted to conceal the paper from defendant’s counsel. Thereafter, the Supreme Court determined that the Prosecutor should be suspended from her duties as Prosecutor and her pay suspended during her period of suspension. The Supreme Court appointed her replacement.

The Governor argues that the Attorney General cannot perform his duties while suspended any more than could the Prosecutor in Washington County could. However, there is a wrinkle in that the Washington County case also involved a suspension of the chief deputy. Hill apparently takes the position that his deputy can step into his shoes. The power of a deputy flows from the power of the occupant of the office. I think the Governor can make a strong argument that the deputy cannot have authority exceeding that of the officeholder, meaning that if Hill can’t practice law, the deputy shouldn’t be able to practice law in his place.

But, if Hill can’t perform the duties of the office, does that mean it’s “vacant” in the sense necessary to authorize the Governor to make an appointment for the rest of the term? He cites Article 5, sec. 18 of the Indiana Constitution and IC 3-14-4-3, both of which give him the authority to appoint replacements for vacancies in state offices until the next election. But note that in the Washington County case, that is not what happened. The Supreme Court rather than the Governor appointed a “temporary prosecuting attorney” for the period of the suspension. The appointment does not address the issue of vacancy or really even set forth the basis of its authority to make the temporary appointment. So, if they don’t just figure out a way to avoid the question or allow the deputy to work in Hill’s absence, I suppose precedent would be that the Court appoint someone for a couple of weeks.

And, as luck would have it, Todd Rokita would like the job. Grateful Hoosiers rejoice.