IFF - Idaho Freedom Foundation

you guys on this site will love this "other" site http://www.jbs.org/

enjoy...the like minded thoughts

"Performance Pay" as they call it for teachers is ridiculous. People who talk about that have NEVER been in a Title One school dealing with poverty, child abuse, learning disabilities, and neglect. Who is going to teach there when their pay is based on their "performance" in the classroom? How do you rate their ability to inspire, challenge, and teach these kids? When was the last time you saw an "inspirational" film that deals with teachers and working with children of poverty at the elementary level? As a teacher at at a Title One school, I would love to make more money, but I fear for the students left behind by good teachers simply because they can't get them to perform on a state test.

Interesting

Yes, that is a great way to reduce education cost, but what about private education. It is way past time for vouchers. If the money is to be seized from the collective disproportionately, in order to offer even a token of equitability each student should be allotted a voucher to school where they and their parents wish. However, we must ask ourselves, what is the goal of public education? Is it to provide the best education for the dollars available or is it to condition the children and preserve the monopoly?

University of Idaho economics professor John T Wenders wrote this piece for the Cato institute a while back.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4210

While I agree that it is generally a good idea for employees to have to contribute to their health care premiums, in this case, Ms. Wistisen's comment is spot on--this would be a reduction in teachers' total compensation and is no different than a salary cut. If the decision is to cut teachers', that is fine, but we must live with the attendant consequences--i.e. likely even fewer teachers willing to teach in public schools when their total compensation gets reduced. Simply making them pay a portion of their health care premiums is no silver bullet for our budget problems.

I'm not a union fan at all. The pay package should be negotiated by the each employer and employee depending on them meeting qualifications and experience. Raises should be given depending on results. If a teacher constantly performs well in the classroom, he/she should receive good raises. Some basic group insurance should be included because of the ability of the group to get better rates. The overall pay package should depend on market conditions.

As to cost saving, I believe there are way too many regulations, administrators and sometimes even facilities. Look to private schools that know how to stretch a dollar. Do not accept any federal government money as it generally comes with so many strings attached that it is counterproductive. Demand that it be returned to the taxpayer that then can afford to pay for that "free lunch". If is much easier for a taxpayer to ask questions of the local school board than the federal government.

Public schools hire good professional educators and then tie their hands behind their backs. Generally their opinions are not heard when it comes to resources, classroom materials and all the decisions it takes to run schools. For example, they generally aren't allowed to enter grades directly into a database. It is said, "there might be a mistake". I ask, “why did you hire a professional”? The data entry person should go and the teacher held accountable for his/her actions. Simply stop duplicating effort.

School boards should seek most services from private enterprises. This includes buildings, transportation, food services, security, legal services and maintenance. Demand that they supply qualified personnel, services and products. Reward them for cost savings. My understanding is that some districts pay 3 to 4 times what another pays for new school construction on a per square foot basis.

I hope my response gives some food for thought, as the problem is much bigger than just who pays for insurance.

What applies to regular schools does not apply to charter schools. They do not have health benefits for teachers. Teachers have to purchase their own health insurance. Another good reason to have more charter schools allowed in Idaho.

I have a question on the Health Insurance plans for teachers.

The artical states, "The district receives proposals from different companies."

There are only two insurance "companies" in the state, which happens to be Blue Cross and Regence Blue Sheild. These are the "companies" that normal Idaho families have to choose from. Does the above statement indicate that school districts can shop across state line's?

Also, what is an average deductable, an average copay on office visits/prescriptions etc. on the policies. Also what is the average premium paid per employee and are the teachers families included on their policies. If so, is the premium portion for the families taken form the teachers salaries or is that at tax payers expence also?

I and my family may not be amoung the norm, however I saw the doc two times last policy year and two of the three children saw the doc one time each. The third child has had no need to see a doc in three years.

My point being, our premium costs this last policy year was right at $9,000.00. This is with a $2,000 deductable and a $40.00 copay for O.V. and I am faily sure educators get a much better deal up front than I and my family do. They most certainly could bare a portion of the cost.

I beleive that a LOT could be done to cut the taxpayers expences for educators; insurance being, as you stated, a big one!

I have a question on the Health Insurance plans for teachers.

The artical states, "The district receives proposals from different companies."

There are only two insurance "companies" in the state, which happens to be Blue Cross and Regence Blue Sheild. These are the "companies" that normal Idaho families have to choose from. Does the above statement indicate that school districts can shop across state line's?

Also, what is an average deductable, an average copay on office visits/prescriptions etc. on the policies. Also what is the average premium paid per employee and are the teachers families included on their policies. If so, is the premium portion for the families taken form the teachers salaries or is that at tax payers expence also?

I and my family may not be amoung the norm, however I saw the doc two times last policy year and two of the three children saw the doc one time each. The third child has had no need to see a doc in three years.

My point being, our premium costs this last policy year was right at $9,000.00. This is with a $2,000 deductable and a $40.00 copay for O.V. and I am faily sure educators get a much better deal up front than I and my family do. They most certainly could bare a portion of the cost.

I beleive that a LOT could be done to cut the taxpayers expences for educators; insurance being, as you stated, a big one!

I awoke today with the realization of my failure to connect the dots about the ineffectiveness of the education system, notwithstanding my study of John Taylor Gatto's book, THE UNDERGROUND HISTORY OF AMERICAN EDUCATION and his stating that it was born of influence from Prussia. I don't know why he never stated that it was the consequence of the Communist Manifesto's 10th plank, "Free education for all children in public schools. . . "

The purpose of education is not education but the redistribution of wealth.

Coincidentally, I awoke today with the realization of my failure to connect the dots about the ineffectiveness of the education system, notwithstanding my study of John Taylor Gatto's book, THE UNDERGROUND HISTORY OF AMERICAN EDUCATION and his stating that it was born of influence from Prussia. I don't know why he never stated that it was the consequence of the Communist Manifesto's 10th plank, "Free education for all children in public schools. . . "

The purpose of education is not education but the redistribution of wealth.

Wayne,

I did not realize that the folk in the private sector paid so little for health insurance. I doubt anyone has thought about it, but the whole thing would be a lot better if the entity (school, business etc) did not pay any of the health insurance, but gave the money to the individual. They could then pick the insurance plan that suited them the most, or no plan as they chose. We have never had health insurance and have survived. It has not been easy at times, but God has been faithful. I wonder if given the choice how many people would rather have the money than the insurance. I think some health care policies cost almost $1,000/month. That is a lot of money. At the very least I think that teachers ought to pay 50% of the cost. That way they have a part in the program and will not be so inclined to abuse the system.
Jim Hollingsworth