Props. 74, 75 misplace funds for schools, unions

Judging by the propositions on the November special-elections
ballot, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger does not like to take
“no” for an answer. Many of the issues in this election
have been voted on and rejected before, most notably, the
propositions instituting state-spending caps, redrawing legislative
districts and restricting union political contributions.

The special election is a waste of the public’s money,
time and energy. It largely benefits big businesses and signifies
the governor’s disregard for the public good. We’ve
already said “No, Schwarzenegger.” How many times must
we tell you?

The reality is, however, that the special elections will take
place Nov. 8. Here are two issues that seem to benefit the public,
but really divert attention from genuine problems and mark
bureaucratic and corporate supremacy.

Proposition 74, as stated by the attorney general,
“increases the length of time required before a teacher may
become a permanent employee from two complete consecutive school
years to five complete consecutive school years.”

The major problem with California’s educational system is
lack of funding, not poor quality of teachers. Granted, we have all
had some teachers who didn’t make the grade, but aren’t
textbook shortages, overcrowded classrooms and leaking roofs far
more significant problems?

Existing California state law already provides a method for the
dismissal of poor educators, no matter how long they’ve been
on the job. There is also no evidence that extending the
probationary period from two to five years improves teacher
performance or student achievement.

The California Teacher’s Association and the state
superintendent of public instruction view the proposition as an
attack on the state’s educators. The organizations see the
measure as retribution for the widespread public criticism the
governor faced when he failed to repay $3.1 billion to the state
educational budget last year.

Schwarzenegger is taking a punitive approach to education when
he should be placing funds where they’re really needed
““ in the schools themselves.

Proposition 75, as stated by the attorney general,
“prohibits the use by public employee labor organizations of
public employee dues or fees for political contributions except
with the prior consent of individual public employees each year on
a specified written form.”

This proposition is completely unnecessary. All public employees
are already protected from misuse of union dues. Any time a union
intends to contribute politically, it must notify and send
financial statements to all workers. The workers can then opt out
of the contribution.

Under Proposition 75, the workers would have to opt in and file
a series of government-reviewed forms. The proposition thwarts the
efficiency and freedom of public-employee unions by bogging them
down in unnecessary bureaucratic procedure and paperwork.

Proposition 75 specifically targets public-employee unions
because a very similar bill that applied to all unions failed
miserably in 1998.

Proposition 75’s backers want the measure to pass so the
policy can be more easily expanded to all unions in the next
election.

The proposition is a blatant attempt to suppress the voices of
public workers and increase the already domineering powers of big
businesses. It is mostly supported by the deceptively named
“Small Business Action Committee.” This warm and fuzzy
pseudonym masks the fact that the committee receives most of its
funds from major corporations and executives, most notably
Ameriquest, Philip Morris and PG&E.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the private
sector currently outspends unions in politics by 24 to 1. If
Proposition 75 passes, this divide would increase even more.

The governor declares himself California’s
“warrior.” Mr. Schwarzenegger, in order to fight for
us, don’t you first have to listen to what we want?

Tokushige is the internal vice president of Bruin
Democrats.