Western Cultural Suicide

From VDH, at National Review:

Multiculturalism — as opposed to the notion of a multiracial society united by a single culture — has become an abject contradiction in the modern Western world. Romance for a culture in the abstract that one has rejected in the concrete makes little sense. Multiculturalists talk grandly of Africa, Latin America, and Asia, usually in contrast to the core values of the United States and Europe. Certainly, in terms of food, fashion, music, art, and architecture, the Western paradigm is enriched from other cultures. But the reason that millions cross the Mediterranean to Europe or the Rio Grande to the United States is for something more that transcends the periphery and involves fundamental values — consensual government, free-market capitalism, the freedom of the individual, religious tolerance, equality between the sexes, rights of dissent, and a society governed by rationalism divorced from religious stricture. Somehow that obvious message has now been abandoned, as Western hosts lost confidence in the very society that gives us the wealth and leisure to ignore or caricature its foundations. The result is that millions of immigrants flock to the West, enjoy its material security, and yet feel little need to bond with their adopted culture, given that their hosts themselves are ambiguous about what others desperately seek out....

At no time in our history have so many Americans been foreign born. Never have so many foreign nationals resided in America, and never have so many done so illegally. Yet at just such a critical time, in our universities and bureaucracies, the pressures to assimilate in melting-pot fashion have been replaced by salad-bowl separatism — as if the individual can pick and choose which elements of his adopted culture he will embrace, which he will reject, as one might croutons or tomatoes. But ultimately he can do that because he senses that the American government, people, press, and culture reward such opportunism and have no desire, need, or ability to defend the very inherited culture that has given them the leeway to ignore it and so attracted others from otherwise antithetical paradigms.

That is a prescription for cultural suicide, if not by beheading or by a pressure cooker full of ball bearings, at least by making the West into something that no one would find very different from his homeland.

RTWT.

Fatal Crash Near Long Beach City College

At the Long Beach Patch, "Woman Killed in Long Beach Hit-and-Run."

I had two students come about a half-hour late to my 11:10am class. I thought nothing of it until a phone starting ringing like it was an alarm or something. I said, "What was that"? And one of the women said, "There's a crash out there," pointing out the window to the intersection at Carson and Clark Streets. Then when I started my 12:45pm class, a young man told me that someone had been killed. I went over to the intersection after class to check it out.

Also at the Long Beach Report, "UPDATE: 47 Year Old Long Beach Woman Dies, 21 Year Old Bellflower Man Arrested, In Alleged Hit and Run, Carson/Clark (LBCC Area); LBPD Says Driver Hit Three Vehicles at High Rate of Speed, Was Allegedly Unlicensed Driver."

Yeah, probably an illegal immigrant.

More photos at the Long Beach Press Telegram, "Long Beach police capture suspect at LBCC in fatal hit-and-run."

I Picked Up Some Moose Drool

After beer tasting last week, I decided to quit procrastinating on diversifying my repertoire.

Here's the Moose Drool six-pack below. I haven't tried it yet. I also picked up a pack of the Rasputin Stout. Had some with dinner last night. Oh boy, is that good beer!

I'll update when I sample these puppies. The alcohol content much higher than domestic light beers (the Rasputin's at 9% ABV), so it might be next weekend until I have some more. Otherwise, I'll fall asleep too early in the evening.

Beer Tasting!

I joined some of my colleagues yesterday for a "Faculty Guided Beer Tasting & Reading" event, one in the "Know Your College, Know Your Colleagues" series sponsored by my department and the faculty union.

Presenting was Professor Matthew Lawrence, the author of Philosophy on Tap: Pint-Sized Puzzles for the Pub Philosopher. He's got a book page with his biographical information. And he's got an interview at the Huffington Post, "Interview with a Philosopher: On Beer and Thought."

We tasted five beers. Here's Matt's slide for Weihenstephaner Hefe Weissbier, a German hefeweizen.

Here's the beer list on the host's refrigerator:

In addition to Weihenstephaner, we tasted Boulevard Brewing Tank 7 Farmhouse Ale (Kansas City); Fuller's ESB (London): Alesmith Horny Devil Belgian Strong Ale (San Diego); and Left Coast Brewing Old Rasputin Russian Imperial Stout (Fort Bragg).

Here's the Rasputin Stout:

Matt recommended Hi-Time Wine Cellars in Costa Mesa for its wide selection of beers. I asked about picking up some of that Rasputin Stout for myself. Excellent beer. Shoot, they were all good.

Check the links for the beer pages and enjoy.

I'll see you at the pub!

'Dr. Douglas is a bit of a drag as a professor. He does not provide study guides for the test which means you must study the book VERY well...'

I cribbed the title from the first entry at my Rate My Professors profile:

Loved the class material and enjoyed reading the book. However, Dr. Douglas is a bit of a drag as a professor. He does not provide study guides for the test which means you must study the book VERY well. Not a lot of class work, and no homework. I would recommend you take someone else if you are a polsc major or wish to gain from the course.

I haven't checked the evaluations over there in a couple of years. They're largely useless from the instructor's perspective. (Or at least from my perspective.) And they have no impact on me professionally, so I ignore them. I've always thought students are poorly equipped to evaluate the quality of teaching, and not just because they have a vested interest in a good grade. Students don't have training in pedagogy and most of them haven't the foggiest idea of what constitutes excellent instruction. As for the student's evaluation above, I'm sorta tickled by that review. Sure, the student didn't like my class, but only because I didn't make it easy for her. I made her read the book "VERY" well, which is exactly as planned. That the student thoroughly enjoyed the material is only added positive feedback. Moreover, I do provide study guides --- just not the photocopied handouts that many faculty members provide to students. My class textbook (which the student enjoyed) comes with a tremendously helpful companion website that features online practice tests, glossaries of all the key terms and concepts, electronic flashcards and fill-in-the-blank exercises, problem simulations based on the readings, and more. Students have access to the material. It's up to them to make use of it. I don't spoon feed, and for a lot of students, that makes me a "poor quality" instructor.

C'est la vie.

What got me going on this is Janice Fiamengo's piece at PJ Media, "How Well Does ‘Rate My Professors’ Rate?"

It doesn't rate very well, obviously, but let's hear it from Professor Fiamengo:

No one, likely, will be surprised to discover that students are critical of instructors who have a high standard and mark them down when they fail to reach it: “A sweet person who seems to really care about her students,” runs a typical comment attached to an “Average Quality” ranking, “but don’t expect an A, even if your [sic] sure you aced the test.” Statistical researcher Valen Johnson has demonstrated in Grade Inflation: A Crisis in College Education (2003) that student responses to their university experience have been corrupted by an entitlement mentality about grades. Because students tend to excuse poor performance by pointing to external factors, they often blame their teachers when marks are lower than expected — when, as one student wrote on the site, they are “completely blindsided by a bad grade.” The problem is acute in the grade-inflating Humanities disciplines, where an element of subjectivity is always present and where one instructor’s decision to give higher marks than the material deserves — whether from pedagogical principle or to grease the wheels of a happy classroom — creates pressure on other instructors to do the same, and leads to negative evaluations of those who will not. As even a cursory perusal of Rate My Professors uncovers, “Very hard marker” almost always equates to a “Poor Quality” evaluation. This fact alone, as Johnson concludes and as many thoughtful observers can attest, makes teacher evaluations, which are widely used as a ranking method in the modern university, next to meaningless.

In such a context, it might seem that the most valuable commendations are those — and they are certainly the most heartening — that warn against the professor’s difficulty or dryness while still recommending him or her. “Sure, he’s tough, even mean. But he is also brilliant.” “You’ll find no great excitement in her lecture room, but you will have the chance to hear tremendously intelligent and thoughtful ideas on life and literature that will stay with you outside the classroom.” For a student to find a professor’s teaching valuable despite the instructor’s refusal to provide esteem-boosting marks or a jazzy presentation speaks to some other quality that has touched the student. But what is the quality, exactly? Can it be distinguished from personal charm, winsomeness, superficial articulateness, or an engrossing manner? Can the vast majority of students tell if an instructor actually knows his subject or has wisdom to impart?

Not very likely. Given that a significant percentage of students, according to a recent National Post article based on a study by a Memorial University (Newfoundland) professor, cannot locate the continent of Africa on a world map or even identify the Atlantic Ocean, how can they possibly locate their professors on the scale of intelligence and knowledge? Too frequently, the most enthusiastic declarations about an instructor’s “amazing lectures” and “brilliance” also dwell on the sexy looks and other forms of personal appeal that make him or her so easy to listen to. “Never worked so hard for an A. Loved the material, and his lectures were stimulating and hilarious. He’s hot too, great outfits.”

This, really, is what Rate My Professors most consistently highlights, that physical attractiveness, a magnetic style, and the ability to relate good stories, deliver witty one-liners, or toss off nuggets of seeming profundity (with today’s short attention spans, they can only be nuggets, usually liberally interspersed with jokes, chitchat, and sentimental fluff) have come to define “good teaching” — and make it nearly indistinguishable from a diverting performance — for the majority of students. In the main, such teaching does not meet the standard that David Solway defined in Education Lost (1989), where he analyzed education as a performative co-encounter in which the teacher “performs” the “initiating presence” and the student “impersonates his ideal or projected self” in a complex drama taking full account of the “prolonged” and often “agonistic” process of learning.

That sounds about right, but it's nothing new to me. Websites like RateMyProfessors.com can be actually painful for instructors who're worried about their evaluations. Rumor has it that administrators read the evaluations --- a horrifying thought in light of the criticisms mentioned above. But again, I personally don't care. But part-timers or probationary faculty members probably check their ratings --- I did --- because some of the same kind of comments are submitted by students on the college-sponsored teaching evaluations that are required periodically. So this stuff matters. (Note that RateMyProfessors can be gameed easily and legitimately, simply by asking the students who do well in classes, the ones who've developed relationships with their instructors, to post their own evaluations. Indeed, the RateMyProfessors feedback page suggests just that to instructors who're unhappy with their rankings.)

In any case, here's the remainder of my ratings from the front page:

Talks a lot about current events during class, sometimes leaves little time for lecture. Only writes titles of sections on board. Writing notes is useless. Have to read book. Grade consist of 5 tests and one report.

*****

I wish Dr. D would give more time to discuss the lesson than talk about current events. And I wish that he will give study guides, so that the students will know what he expects from them. Dr. D is a nice professor, though.

*****

GOOD TEACHER. SHOW UP TO CLASS, TAKE NOTES, PAY ATTENTION, AND YOU SHOULD BE FINE.

*****

He is a very good teacher. You must attend class because he notices and will call you out on it. There's two books required for this class. He only goes over one and the other you have to read on your own. He is available during office hours and tells you where your [sic] at and what you need to do to pass the class.

And by the way, the student rankings are 2 "poor quality," 1 "average quality," and 2 "good quality" --- which is pretty interesting, quite balanced, actually, and useful! The students here are expressing straight evaluations rather than trying to attack the professor and harm his ratings in revenge for a poor grade (something that's pretty common with this kind of thing).

In any case, there's still more at PJ Media, at the link.

Gov. Jerry Brown Looks at Reshaping California's Higher Education

I wrote on this previously, "Governor Brown Seeks Dramatic Community College Makeover."

And now at the New York Times, "In California, Son Gets Chance to Restore Luster to a Legacy":

LOS ANGELES — During a 1960s renaissance, California’s public university system came to be seen as a model for the rest of the country and an economic engine for the state. Seven new campuses opened, statewide enrollment doubled, and state spending on higher education more than doubled. The man widely credited with the ascendance was Gov. Edmund G. Brown, known as Pat.

Decades of state budget cuts have chipped away at California’s community colleges, California State University and the University of California, once the state’s brightest beacons of pride. But now Pat Brown’s son, Gov. Jerry Brown, seems determined to restore some of the luster to the institution that remains a key part of his father’s legacy.

Last year, he told voters that a tax increase was the only way to avoid more years of drastic cuts. Now, with the tax increase approved and universities anticipating more money from the state for the first time in years, the second Governor Brown is a man eager to take an active role in shaping the University of California and California State University systems.

Governor Brown holds a position on the board of trustees for both Cal State and UC. Since November, he has attended every meeting of both boards, asking about everything from dormitories to private donations and federal student loans. He is twisting arms on issues he has long held dear, like slashing executive pay and increasing teaching requirements for professors — ideas that have long been met with considerable resistance from academia. But Mr. Brown, himself a graduate of University of California, Berkeley, has never been a man to shrink from a debate.

“The language we use when talking about the university must be honest and clear,” he said in a recent interview. “Words like ‘quality’ have no apparent meaning that is obvious. These are internally defined to meet institutional needs rather than societal objectives.”

California’s public colleges — so central to the state’s identity that their independence is enshrined in its Constitution — have long been seen as gateways to the middle class. Mr. Brown said his mother had attended the schools “basically free.” Over the last five years tuition at UC and Cal State schools has shot up, though the colleges remain some of the less costly in the country.

Governors and legislatures are trying to exert more influence on state colleges, often trying to prod the schools to save money, matters that some say are “arguably best left to the academic institution,” said John Aubrey Douglass, a senior research fellow of public policy and higher education at Berkeley. So far, Mr. Brown has not taken such an aggressive approach, but half of the $250 million increase for the university systems is contingent on a tuition freeze.

“He’s creating stability, but basically he’s looking at cost containment with an eye on the public constituency,” Mr. Douglass said. “But the system has been through a very long period of disinvestment, and this may meet an immediate political need, but it is not what is going to help in the long term.”

I think he could do more for education --- and for the state as a whole --- by expanding economic growth and opportunity. It would take pressure off the higher education system, for one thing. As it is now the colleges and universities are expected to be saviors for all manner of societal failure, especially crime, poverty and social breakdown. A strong economy, through deregulation and business expansion, would help create a rising tide to lift all boats. I hope that doesn't get overlooked amid all the hoopla about increasing tax revenues. People need to learn the lessons of the past decade.

More at that top link, plus interesting photos.

And from some not unrelated thoughts, see Joel Kotkin, at the O.C. Register, "California Is Becoming Less Family-Friendly."

Governor Brown Seeks Dramatic Community College Makeover

There's a lot coming down the pipeline, and much of it good, although community colleges just won't be anything like they used to be. And that's a little sad if you've ever been around one for any length of time.

At the Los Angeles Times, "Brown seeks to reshape California's community colleges":

With a slate of bold and controversial budget proposals, Gov. Jerry Brown has placed a renewed focus on the state's struggling community colleges, the world's largest system of two-year schools that are often overshadowed by the University of California and Cal State systems.

The governor's recommendations are aimed at keeping community colleges affordable, keeping classes accessible and moving students faster through the system to allow them to graduate or transfer to a four-year university at higher rates. Brown's spending plan must clear the Legislature, and some college officials have vowed to oppose — or at least try to modify — some portions.

These proposals are among the most significant policy shifts in years and could reshape many campus operations.

"It's a courageous plan," said Eloy Oakley, president of Long Beach City College. "The governor is focusing on policy issues we've been talking about for many years but dancing around the margins. A lot of this has been on the table in statehouses throughout the nation, but we're addressing these issues in California in a meaningful way."

Community colleges play a vital role in California's higher education system, training large segments of the state's workforce. But the 112-college system has strained under the pressure of huge funding cuts and increased demand. Thousands of courses have been slashed and enrollment has been shrunk by more 500,000 students in recent years.

Most of the schools' 2.4-million students are unprepared for college-level work: 85% need remedial English, 73% need remedial math and only about a third of remedial students transfer to a four-year school or graduate with a community college associate's degree.

Education leaders praised the governor's efforts to follow through on his commitment to voters to restore education funding through the passage of Proposition 30, the school tax initiative —- even while expressing misgivings about aspects of the plan. The budget includes nearly $200 million in additional funding for the colleges.

"It's wonderful to have an environment where we're going to have some provocative conversations about policy," said community colleges Chancellor Brice Harris. "We're not going to shy away and [we] actually look forward to the discussion."

State officials said the plan is meant to build on changes proposed last year by a statewide task force charged with improving the colleges. Measures approved by the Legislature and Board of Governors establish registration priorities, including preventing students from repeating courses to improve their grades and allowing students who participate in orientation and academic assessment programs and have 100 units or less to enroll in classes first. Students also would have to maintain satisfactory grades to continue to qualify for fee waivers.

Brown goes further toward moving students through the system. He is seeking to limit the number of credits students can accumulate. Beginning next fall, he suggests a cap on state-subsidized classes at 90 units, requiring students who exceed that to pay the full cost of instruction, about $190 per semester unit versus $46 per unit. In the 2009-10 academic year, nearly 120,000 students had earned 90 units or more.

Students said they are particularly concerned that the unit cap is punitive for those who have a double major, who may be returning to college to train for a new job or who want to explore their interests before deciding on a field of study.

"We're going to work very hard to get rid of this," said Rich Copenhagen, a College of Alameda student who is president of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges. "The governor does seem to be interested in pushing through a lot of policy in this budget. He's in a position to say I got you more money, now you need to make your system better."

Perhaps one of the more controversial elements of Brown's plan is to change the funding formula for community colleges to pay schools for students who complete courses. Funding is now based on the number of students enrolled at the third or fourth week of the term.

The goal, said state officials, is to provide incentives for colleges to improve.

That's my college president, Eloy Oakley, interviewed for the article. And the piece mentions both of the key reforms coming down the pike, the cap on the number of credits students can accumulate at 90 (without losing subsidized tuition rates) and the shift in how colleges are paid by the state, to apportionment by how many students complete classes rather than by the number still attending at the fourth week of classes. That second reform would be devastating to community college funding, because so many students are remedial. But it's a good reform. All of these are good if they force people to wake the f-k up. The two-year colleges could make a small step toward being real colleges teaching real college-level academics. As it stands now a lot of what we do is a joke. We have a decent number of students who would excel at any college or university, but the great majority aren't ready to do the work. Things do need to change.

Surviving an Active Shooter Event

My college's public relations office, working with Risk Services and the LBPD, posted this announcement to the college community, "A Reminder - Be Prepared - What to do in the case of an Active Shooter."

On campus, California's a gun free state, although watching the video it's clear that someone needed to be on hand [added: it's not clear that the guard shot at 1:15 is armed, although talking as he is so casually, he might as well be off duty in any case], armed and ready to defend against the intruder. See Weasel Zippers for what's happening in Montpelier, Ohio, "School Board in Ohio Unanimously Votes to Arm Custodial Staff." Hey, it's a start.

Winter Break

At Althouse, "How I spent the winter break between semesters at the University of Wisconsin Law School":

I sat in my Freedom Chair or stood at my motorized desk in front of a wall of picture windows looking out over our snow-covered yard though which a dog occasionally bounded, and — once the blizzard came — went cross-country skiing nearly every day. I ate many delicious meals at home with my beloved husband, and watched some football games on TV. I blogged, read, graded some exams, worked on new syllabi, reorganized a couple closets, and — at long last — burned the rest of the CDs I still cared about into my iTunes.

Keep reading.

I my world, winter break doesn't start until the papers are graded and semester grades submitted. Then I can forget about it --- and this year I have until February 5th to chill, with the college's new 16 week calendar giving faculty members a really long and wonderful holiday.

PHOTO: "At the Winter Walk Café..." (on Flickr).

Support Crashes for California's Proposition 30

The Los Angeles Times released a number of poll findings over the last week, but I've been focused on national politics. The raw survey is here. And here's the write-up on the tanking support for this ridiculous tax-hike initiative, "Support plunges for Prop. 30, Gov. Jerry Brown's tax initiative":

SACRAMENTO — Support has plunged for Proposition 30, Gov. Jerry Brown's plan to raise billions of dollars in taxes, a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll shows, with less than half of voters planning to cast ballots in favor of the measure.

Only 46% of registered voters now support Brown's initiative, a 9-point drop over the last month, and 42% oppose it. The findings follow a lackluster month of campaigning by the governor, who had spent little time on the stump and found himself fighting off attacks from backers of a separate ballot measure that would raise taxes for schools.

Although Brown recently launched a frantic push for votes, both proposals could fail. Tax measures rarely gain support in the closing days of a campaign.

Proposition 30 would temporarily raise taxes on individuals earning more than $250,000 a year and impose a quarter-cent hike in the state sales tax. Enthusiasm for the governor's plan has fallen across the political spectrum.

The steepest decline is among voters who register without a party preference — a crucial voting bloc for Brown. Support from those Californians dropped from 63% a month ago to 48%.

"Proposition 30 has been under attack from the left and the right," said Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at USC. "It has taken a toll."

The USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences/Los Angeles Times poll surveyed 1,504 registered voters by telephone from Oct. 15 to Oct. 21. It was conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, a Democratic firm, in conjunction with American Viewpoint, a Republican company. The margin of error is 2.9 percentage points.

The Los Angeles Times editorial page endorsed the measure, mainly because the initiative's funding doesn't have to be spent on education! But see the Stockton Record, "Proposition 30 is voter manipulation at its finest":

Gov. Brown and proponents of Prop. 30 make it seem like Prop. 30 requires education cuts by saying that the initiative prevents them. But, there is nothing in Prop. 30 that mandates funding cuts to education if it doesn't pass. The governor and the Legislature can change the budget at any time. They have made a choice to cut education. This is voter manipulation at its finest. The message the governor is sending is essentially this: "Give us more money or we're taking it out on schools."

Sacramento politicians are notorious for poor budgeting. Voting yes on Prop. 30 sends a message that we are OK with the tax-and-spend system that is crippling California. We all want good schools, but Prop. 30 doesn't help them. Prop 30 is another ploy from Sacramento politicians to get us to hand over more of our tax dollars. This November, Californians must say enough is enough. Vote no on Prop. 30.

Stop Paycheck Theft: Vote Yes on Proposition 32

From the letters to the editors, at the Los Angeles Times, "Letters: Prop. 32, unions and political giving":

Re "Prop. 32's real purpose," Column, Oct. 18

George Skelton calls Proposition 32, which would prohibit unions from making payroll deductions to raise money for political spending, a "self-serving sham." So should we continue to allow teachers unions to force their members to donate to their leaders' favorite political causes?

Why must my wife, a first-grade teacher, contribute to political causes she doesn't like? How would Skelton feel if The Times effectively forced him to support Mitt Romney via a paycheck deduction?

If unions want their members to give to certain causes, let them persuade the workers to do it. Forcing people to give to political causes they don't believe in runs contrary to the basic rules of a democracy.

I believe Proposition 32 would reduce the power of special interests and let candidates work for all Californians and not just for their donors. And I'm a dedicated Democrat.

Vince Scully
Long Beach

Get that? A "dedicated Democrat" and his union-member wife don't like big labor stealing their hard-earned dollars. Because that's what it is. If you have no choice about the matter, the unions are taking your money against your will. See also the recent editorial at the Orange County Register, "Editorial: Yes on Prop. 32 (unions)":

Anyone familiar with California politics knows that the most powerful forces, by far, in the state Capitol are the public-employee unions. Their clout was demonstrated this year when the California Teachers Association, the most powerful of them all, killed Senate Bill 1530, which would have made it easier to fire bad teachers for actions "that involve certain sex offenses, controlled-substance offenses or child abuse offenses."

SB1530 was not concocted by a conservative Republican, but by state Sen. Alex Padilla of Los Angeles, a liberal Democrat. The bill advanced after several cases of teacher abuse against children came to light, especially a disgusting scenario allegedly involving Los Angeles Unified School District teacher Mark Berndt. The bill passed overwhelmingly in the state Senate, 33-4. Then the CTA killed it in the Assembly Education Committee.

The episode illustrates what has happened since California public-employee unions were given collective bargaining rights in the 1970s by Gov. Jerry Brown. This occurred even though such stalwart liberal private-sector union partisans as President Franklin Roosevelt had warned that public-sector unionization would lead to too much union power and the loss of public trust in the government.

That is so nausea-induceing it's literally perverse. But that's what you get when you have the hard-left, socialist-backed teachers' unions as the most powerful political force in California. These thugs are literally bringing the state down low, morally, politically, and economically. This is how nations self-destruct. You get the image of the end of the republic right here in the once-great "Golden State."

PREVIOUSLY: "Long Beach Press-Telegram: Yes on 32."

Is College Really for Everyone?

Well, the educational system just assumes that it is. Mostly, though, kids have to find out for themselves, and that wastes a lot of people's time and resources. Perhaps there's a better way.

In any case, from Patrice Apodaca, at The Daily Pilot, "Is College Really For Everyone?"

Long Beach Press-Telegram: Yes on 32

I'm glad to see it.

"Endorsement: Yes on Proposition 32 -- Unions have inordinate amount of power in state politics":

To understand the need for Proposition 32, all a voter has to do is look at the the vast sums of cash pouring into the campaign against it. A total of more than $50 million has been donated to the "yes" and "no" campaigns. Of that, the vast majority has gone to fund advertising for the "no" side. And of that, most has come from unions representing California teachers and other public employees.

This is an example of the financial power that gives unions outsized political influence everywhere from election campaigns to the halls of the state Legislature and local city halls, too often resulting in laws that benefit union members over the interests of all Californians.

Now California voters have a chance to rein in that power. They should not miss the opportunity on Nov. 6. The editorial board urges passage of Proposition 32.

The measure would do three things: It would ban donations to state and local candidates by unions and corporations. It would ban the political use of money deducted from paychecks by unions or corporations. And it would ban government contractors from contributing to the campaigns of public officials who control the awarding of those contracts.

The measure's well-funded opponents complain that it would affect labor interests more than business interests -- because businesses don't use payroll deductions in the same way as unions, and because companies that aren't corporations are exempt from the proposition.

But the proponents don't pretend they're aiming for balance in the proposal. They want to curb the influence of unions over the decisions of state lawmakers, which has been out of balance for years.

That is a cause that this page has supported for a long time. We endorsed 2005's Proposition 75 and 1998's Proposition 226, which would have required unions to get individual members' permission before spending dues money on politics. (Those propositions lost by 8 percent and 6 percent, respectively.)

The arguments then are no less valid now.

Recent examples of Big Labor's influence in Sacramento include the power it has exerted over pension reform and prison issues. Another egregious example that arose this summer was a bill considered by the Assembly Education Committee to make it easier for school districts to fire teachers accused of terrible crimes involving sex, violence or drugs.

Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla of Pacoima had introduced the bill in the wake of several child sex-abuse cases in Los Angeles schools. The bill passed the Senate with bipartisan support. It had popular support.

But the California Teachers Association bused in members to confront the key Assembly committee, underscoring its arguments for protecting the job security of teachers with a not-so-subtle reminder of the union's 800-pound-gorilla influence. Enough committee members voted against the bill to kill it.

They bused in thugs. That's what they always do.

More at the link.

Constitution Day: Long Beach City College

Here's the announcement: "Constitution Day Panel Discussion."

Constitution Day is September 17th, but the college scheduled the panel for the 20th (for scheduling convenience, one assumes). I was a reluctant participant. Also on the panel was my highly esteemed colleague, Dr. Julian Delgaudio. He's a communist. A nice fellow, actually, I just can't stand his arrogance, hypocrisy, and ideological bankruptcy. The original invitation asked presenters to prepare a two-minute introduction. That's my department chair Professor Gene Goss who introduces the panelists. Professor Delgaudio spoke first. I thought he was defending a dissertation or something. He was droning on and on about how terrible ---- terrible! ---- is the U.S. Constitution. Professor Goss had to ask him to wrap up his comments at least three times. Talk about a bloviator. I had a student who flagged me down on campus last week asking, "Who was that guy who spoke first?" And even one of the part-time faculty members had questions. He obviously left an impression, and it wasn't a great one. And frankly, Professor Delgaudio was not well versed in how the Constitution actually works. It wasn't designed to prevent wealth accumulation. Delgaudio conflates wealth with power, and thus the Constitution "failed" since enormous wealth has been concentrated at the top of the social hierarchy historically. Whatever. All the other panelists did a wonderful job. I just don't like communists, and I don't think people like this are doing LBCC students any favors.

Battle Over Unions Moves to California

At the New York Times, "California Is Latest Stage for Election Battle Over Unions":

LOS ANGELES — The battle to curb labor’s political clout has moved from Wisconsin to California, where wealthy conservatives are championing a ballot measure that would bar unions from donating to candidates. Labor leaders describe it as the starkest threat they have faced in a year of nationwide challenges to diminish their once-formidable power.

The measure, Proposition 32 on the November ballot, would prohibit both unions and corporations from making contributions, but the corporate provision is far less stringent than the one aimed at unions, analysts said. If passed, it would also bar unions from using automatic payroll deductions to raise money for political campaigns, a major source of labor’s political funding.

“This would be a big deal for unions if it passes since it would largely cut off their participation in state and local California politics,” said Daniel J. B. Mitchell, a professor emeritus at the U.C.L.A. Anderson School of Management.

The prospect that Proposition 32 could become law in an overwhelmingly Democratic state that has a rich history of union activism has alarmed labor leaders. A victory here, they argued, would pave the way for similar efforts across the nation.

“This is intended not to hobble us, this is intended to eviscerate us,” said Art Pulaski, the head of the California Labor Federation. “If they can do it in California, they can do it everywhere and anywhere.”

Well, it's good to see the thug union idiots quaking in their boots, although it's a poorly designed initiative, as I noted previously.

And see the Sacramento Bee as well, "More voters oppose Proposition 32 than support it, poll says."

Voters May Reject California's Proposition 32

It's the big payroll protection initiative, which I'd love to see passing in November. But it's a hard sell, since the measure is deceptive. It indeed appears to contain major loopholes for big business, and is hence seen as punitive and unfair.

At the Los Angeles Times, "California voters leaning against campaign finance initiative":

SACRAMENTO — California voters appear poised to reject a November ballot measure that would ban political contributions by payroll deduction, according to a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll.

Forty-four percent of those surveyed said they opposed Proposition 32, which would eliminate the main fundraising tool of unions. Just 36% said they supported the measure, which would also bar corporations and unions from contributing directly to candidates.

Proponents of the measure, having focused squarely on unions in two past attempts to end paycheck deductions for political purposes, adopted the language of the Occupy Wall Street movement this time around and rebranded their campaign as an effort to curb the power of special interests.

An ad touting the measure says it would "cut the money tie between special interests, lobbyists and career politicians" and "put people back in charge." The supporters' core argument is that the initiative would apply "evenhandedly, without exception," to corporations and unions.

Campaign finance experts disagree, saying the measure would disproportionately hobble organized labor by prohibiting payroll deductions to collect campaign cash. Corporations, they say, rarely use such a method to raise political money, instead tapping executive checkbooks and company treasuries.

The labor-backed opposition campaign has hit on that theme, airing radio and TV ads for more than a month that paint the measure as a deceptive corporate power grab, complete with exemptions for business. So far, unions have raised more than $43.4 million to defeat Proposition 32, which is being bankrolled by Republican donors, conservative activists and business executives.

As a result, proponents "aren't able to convince voters this is a clean-government, stop-special-interests initiative," said Dave Kanevsky of the Republican polling firm American Viewpoint, which conducted the survey in conjunction with the Democratic company Greenberg Quinlan Rosner.

Indeed, when respondents heard arguments for and against the measure — supporters saying it would end influence peddling and opponents calling it phony campaign finance reform — opposition grew, with 48% saying they would vote against the initiative. Only 36% said they would vote for it.

"People are ready to believe that … corporations are spending this money to rig the system more for them," said Stan Greenberg, the Democratic pollster.

PREVIOUSLY: "Support Dwindles for Proposition 30's Multi-Billion Dollar Tax Hike."

Long Beach Students Head Back to School

School's back in.

The Long Beach Press-Telegram reports, "First day of school in Long Beach a lesson in waiting":

LONG BEACH - Long Beach City College student Vicky Van was hoping to enroll in a psychology class on Monday, but at No. 14 on the wait-list, Van knows her chances are slim.

"I'm going to try again on Wednesday, but I doubt I'll get in," said the 19-year-old Wilson High School graduate. "It's just so crowded this year."

Thousands of area college students headed back to school on Monday for the first official day of the fall semester. And as community colleges and universities face millions in state budget cuts, students are being greeted with higher tuition, crowded classrooms and fewer courses.

Education officials warn that more cuts loom on the horizon if voters fail to pass a November tax initiative designed to fund public education.

The article discusses Long Beach State, and then continues:

Long Beach City College is also facing significant budget challenges.

Funding for California's community colleges has been cut by $809 million over the past three years. California Community Colleges Chancellor Jack Scott has said the system will face another possible $338 million loss in funding depending on the outcome of the November tax initiative.

As a result of the budget cuts, community college students this fall are facing fewer classes, fewer instructors, higher fees and larger class sizes. On Wednesday, Scott and other system leaders plan to hold a news conference to discuss the steps that colleges are taking to offset funding cuts at a time of increased demand for community colleges.

Meanwhile, LBCC this month announced a plan to cut up to 20 instructional programs and lay off about 10 full-time faculty members next year for a savings of $2 million.

LBCC President Eloy Oakley said the college plans to cut less popular programs in an effort to focus more resources on the core courses students need for transfer and graduation.

This fall, the college increased class sizes by about 10 percent for the majority of its courses, said LBCC spokesman Robert Garcia.

Many students on LBCC's liberal arts campus said classes this fall seem larger and also more affected than in previous years.

"I was surprised because I registered early this summer and I still got wait-listed," said 19-year-old Long Beach resident Jonathan Bealta.

Bealta said he was originally No. 12 on the wait-list for his English class but was bumped to No. 2 on Monday after several students didn't show up for the first day of class.

There's another video with President Oakley, and he makes no mention of the layoffs, "LBCC - 2012/13 Message to Faculty and Staff."

My classes were jam-packed. Lots of students are petitioning classes and I routinely admit all comers --- 13 students petitioned my Monday-Wednesday 11:00am class in American government, and there were almost that many trying to add my Tuesday-Thursday early morning classes.

These are tough times and students not only enroll in large numbers, but way fewer of them drop out than in earlier years. The tough fiscal times have forced students to be more careful about maintaining their enrollment, even if they're not doing especially well in their classes, which is an ongoing problem.

More on that later.

Meanwhile, also at the Press-Telegram, "California community colleges facing dire times."

William Jacobson Launches 'College Insurrection'

I read Legal Insurrection every day, multiple times a day. I'm proud to call William a friend. But for some reason I missed his announcement in June that he was launching a new blog, called "College Insurrection."

Here's the announcement, "Welcome to College Insurrection."

And here's the heads-up from June, "The next Insurrection":

Because most campuses are dominated by liberal adminstrators, faculty, and student activists, conservative/libertarian students often feel isolated and alone, and up against seemingly insurmountable forces which wield power over their lives.

For many students, the risk/reward ratio says to shut up and just go along so as not to be singled out and targeted.

In reality, they are not alone.  They are the silenced majority.  They are a youthful Army of Davids.  They just don’t know it yet.

So the next project will be …

Col·lege In·sur·rec·tion

More at the link.

One of the more interesting things, in my teaching experience, is the large number of conservatives students --- students with very traditional values --- who are laid back, quiet and low key. They listen a lot and hold back from the discussions. LBCC is a majority-minority institution, and for the bulk of black and Hispanic students, there's literally no questioning the hard-left line on politics, racism, or you name it. Sometimes, though, I like to have students think through their assumptions, or the assumptions they've been fed by the mass media. I followed the media stories on the Trayvon Martin shooting during classes last semester, and I swear some students where heartbroken to learn a different point of view, to find out the shooting was much more complicated than they'd heard. When ABC News posted images of George Zimmerman's injuries, which seemed to confirm his account that he'd been pushed to the pavement by Trayvon, some of my students went into shock. They really want to think that racism is everywhere and all-encompassing. A left-wing professor will of course encourage such thinking, for sure on my campus, especially in the history classes, and sociology and psychology, off the top of my head. I will often get only one or two conservative students who'll speak up with their opinions in class, because they don't want to deal with being heckled, or called racist. It does happen. A few years ago, I had a homosexual student who claimed in class that traditional marriage didn't matter. He said that anyone could get a sperm donor and have a baby. I asked him then why have marriage at all? He didn't go so far as to want to abolish it, but that was the implication of his argument. I was surprised when a young conservative student spoke up from the back of the class. He said something like, "Everything is about gay politics nowadays. The gay rights groups get whatever they want. And you can't criticize them or you'll be attacked. It's crazy." Needless to say the discussion was getting a little heavy, but that was a rare event. Most conservative students won't express their opinions like that because they're intimidated by a stultifying environment of political correctness.

As for "College Insurrection," there's still a lot I don't know about it, some further plans for the blog, additional goals, range of contributors, etc. But if it generates a critical mass of conservative commentary on academe it will be extremely helpful. And I'll be glad to help toward that goal.

Congratulations to William.

More on this later as things develop.

LBCC Plans Full-Time Faculty Layoffs: Administration Cites Need to Cut $2 Million in College Programs

LBCC President Eloy Oakley sent out a campus-wide internal email yesterday, and the faculty union president followed-up, indicating that the administration personally contacted those full-time faculty members facing lay-offs.

And here's the report at the Long Beach Press-Telegram, "Long Beach City College to cut more programs, staff to save $2 million":

LONG BEACH — Long Beach City College is planning to eliminate several instructional programs next year in an effort to cut $2 million from its budget, officials announced Thursday.

The cuts, planned for the 2013-2014 school year, could include the loss of up to 20 programs and layoffs for around 10 full-time faculty members, said LBCC President Eloy Oakley.

The college has about 200 academic programs and 308 full-time faculty.

Oakley said the latest round of reductions is part of the college's ongoing plan to remain fiscally stable in the face of severe state budget cuts. The college has seen an overall 7.4 percent reduction in state funding.

In April, the Board of Trustees approved a plan to lay off 55 employees and reduce contracts for 96 positions for a savings of more than $5 million. The reduction in staffing was one of the largest in the college's history.

While LBCC has made some difficult decisions, even tougher cuts loom on the horizon if voters fail to pass a November tax initiative designed to fund education, Oakley said.

More at the link.

California can't afford a tax increase --- we're already the nation's economic basket case. But the Democrats are pushing hard for it anyway, "Gov. Jerry Brown formally kicks off Prop. 30 tax hike campaign."

PREVIOUSLY: "LBCC Announces 55 Layoffs — Tensions High as Faculty Union Prepares Jobs Actions and Protests," and "Dr. Gaither Loewenstein Appointed New Vice President of Academic Affairs at Long Beach City College."

RELATED: LBCC's in the national news, at the Chronicle of Higher Education, "At Calif. Public Colleges, Dreams Deferred." (The entire text is cross-posted to the LBCC website.)

'The Riffed'

A film production out of Modesto Junior College, "The Crisis Begins":

The documentary "explores the circumstances around Gaither Lowenstein's resignation from the office of President of MJC, shortly after coming up with what some considered a personal agenda hit list in an effort to turn the public funded community college into something more resembling a private university."

Loewenstein's now at my college: "Dr. Gaither Loewenstein Appointed New Vice President of Academic Affairs at Long Beach City College."