Comment Rescue: Dana Garrett on SB51

31 Comments
SB51 sounds good (you can read the synopsis inside and the full bill at the link provided), but the devil is in the details. Take it away Dana:
Recently a student approached very upset SB 51 pending in Dover. My student is an Education major and is, without a doubt, one of the best students I've had in 20 years of teaching. But now he is thinking about changing his major and giving up on his life's ambition of teaching middle school students. Here's why. He read that SB 51 would prohibit anyone from becoming a teacher in DE who received a GPA below a 2.7 in high school. Now mind you, it doesn’t matter how high your GPA is once you graduate from college, although there is also a standard for that. You can have a college GPA of 4.0 but still not become a teacher in DE if your high school GPA is below 2.7. Now, I have had dozens of students who performed poorly in high school when they were immature but waited a few years before they attended college. In college they were mature, intelligent, and dedicated students who performed well. There is simply no reason why these students should be excluded from consideration for teacher positions. If the state of DE wants to have a GPA standard for college and/or graduate school, then that is understandable. And if the state wants would-be teachers to pass a competency test as part of the application process for being a teacher, then that also is sensible. But why a GPA far away from the application process (high school) should matter is absurd. Moreover, it is bad for the children because it could deprive them of excellent teachers, teachers who excelled in college but who performed poorly in high school. I understand that the Markell administration supports this bill and, now get this, so does the DSEA. I don't know yet what other measures are proposed in the bill. Some might be worthwhile. But the measure that exercises my student is draconian, punitive, snobbish, and absurd. Please contact your representative and ask them to reject this provision.

Saturday Open Thread [4.27.13]

8 Comments
There have been several retirements among Senate Democrats this year. Rockefeller, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, and now Max Baucus of Montana. Many Beltway pundits tell us that means the Democratic majority in the Senate is thus in danger. That may be the case in West Virginia, where Rockefeller is likely to be replaced by Republican Shelly Moore Capito. But in Montana and South Dakota, these retirements have likely increased the Democrats' odds of holding onto these seats.

My Mea Culpa

4 Comments
In addition to being a contributor here at Delaware Liberal, I am also involved with the Progressive Democrats for Delaware (PDD). On Tuesday, I made a series of comments after the Marriage Equality vote, and specifically concerning the no votes from Representatives Charles Potter and Earl Jaques. When I made these comments, I left the impression that I was speaking for the PDD in its disapproval of their votes, and I mentioned that both either should or will lose their endorsements from the PDD in their next election. In case you don't know, decisions regarding endorsements or non-endorsements are the exclusive domain of the Endorsement Committee of the PDD. So my speaking on their behalf or leaving the impression that I was speaking on their behalf regarding an action that has not yet been taken was wrong. A decision regarding any future endorsement of Earl Jaques and Charles Potter has not been made yet, and if a decision is made, it will not be made by me. So I was wrong to leave that impression. I attempt to maintain a wall of separation between the two roles of being a liberal blogger and being involved with PDD, and this week I failed, so I apologize for that as well.

McBride is confirmed as a yes.

17 Comments
Senator Dave McBride confirmed to ThinkProgress today that he will vote yes on HB 75, the Marriage Equality bill. Our sources in the General Assembly had already had McBride as a yes vote on the bill, but this is good news that he is confirming it to the media, as it takes away any uncertainty concerning his vote. With Senator Bushweller confirming yesterday that he is a yes, that leaves the whip count at 10-9 in favor, with 2 Senators having not publicly stated how they will vote: Democratic Senator Bethany Hall Long and Republican Senator Cathy Cloutier. And ironically, the information we have on how each might vote goes against your typical partisan breakdown, with Hall Long leaning no and Cloutier leaning yes. However, I have been told by a source close to the situation that Senator Hall Long is not in the no column. She is not in the yes column either. And right now she is being very negatively lobbied by the anti-equality, pro-bigotry side (no doubt supported by the Glasgow area Church with that Westboro sign in lights on 896), and it seems to be pushing her in the opposite direction. I am told she has gotten many hundreds of positive calls from constituents on the pro-equality side, so we need to keep up that positive lobbying. That goes ditto for Senator Cloutier too. The positive pressure on her needs to be continued. I am told she is leaning our way, and voting for marriage equality seems to be a no-brainer given the political and electoral considerations in her district. She has been very good this session living up to the moderate image she presents in her campaigns of her record. She needs to keep it up, because this vote is an important one. And here's why. Echoing back to a point I made in a comment concerning my profound disappointment in Representative Earl Jaques' vote on HB 75 earlier this week, this is a legacy vote. Whether you vote yes or no, it will be remembered. Vote yes, and in 40 years you will be remembered as a champion for civil rights. Vote no, and you will look as craven and ridiculous as those black and white photos of the protesters on the Supreme Court steps back in the 50's and 60's, decrying interracial marriage and integration. This vote will be remembered, no matter how you vote. And given that the younger generations do not look upon homosexuality as anything other than a distinction without a difference, i.e. it no more condemns you to hell than having been born with blue eyes versus brown eyes, being born with brown skin versus white skin, or being born gay or straight. We are all human, we all love, and we are all equal. And if you vote no to that, you are saying you disagree with the above statement, and it will be remembered. And not in a good way that places you in a positive light in the history books. Instead the students of the future will look upon your no vote with the same amount of confusion and puzzlement that one looks upon George Wallace as he stands in a doorway refusing to let a black girl get an education. So here is your update on the whip count in chart form. Senators Hall Long and Cloutier, your legacy. It's up for grabs.

Thursday Open Thread [4.25.13]

8 Comments
As George W. Bush is disgustingly lauded today by the other living Presidents, including President Obama, during the opening of his presidential museum (it's not a library, its a museum with exhibits and displays, so everyone stop calling it a library) in Dallas, a NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds just 35% of Americans view Bush favorably, versus 44% who view him negatively. That negative number has improved for W, probably because people don't care about him anymore. Meanwhile, here is Barbara Bush on her favorite son's possible run for the Presidency in 2016:
Appearing in an interview Thursday on NBC's "Today" show, Mrs. Bush was asked how she felt about Jeb, the former governor of Florida, seeking the presidency in 2016. Mrs. Bush replied, quote, "We've had enough Bushes." She went on to say she thought there were many worthy candidates, telling anchor Matt Lauer, "There are people out there" who are qualified. Mrs. Bush, who had a reputation for bluntness when her husband George H.W. Bush was president, spoke from the site of the presidential library.
Mrs. Bush, I couldn't agree with you more. But I wouldn't expect much from Jeb on Mother's Day.

The Stories Keep Coming

40 Comments
I'm probably going to regret this, but we need to talk about rape culture. We'll begin by looking at recent news. 1. Steubenville's football coach keeps his job.
Given Coach Saccoccia’s controversial behavior before and during the trial, which drew national scrutiny, many of us thought he at the very least would be shown the door after three decades of service. We all thought wrong. Today we learned that “Coach Sac,” as he is known, has been granted a two-year contract extension by the Steubenville school board. They made this decision despite the fact that a grand jury is meeting next week to assess whether he and others obstructed justice in the case. Saccoccia was legally required to report the sexual assault as soon as he was aware it took place. The grand jury will determine whether or not he in fact knew and tried to sweep it under the turf. Whatever the conclusions of the grand jury, the question of whether Saccoccia should remain in a position to mold the minds of young men should not have been difficult to answer. Not when there are text messages sent by now-convicted team quarterback Trent Mays that read, "I got Reno. He took care of it and shit ain't gonna happen, even if they did take it to court. Like he was joking about it so I’m not worried." Not when, after the boys were arrested and charged, Saccocia kept them on the team for eight more games in their ten game season. Not when Saccoccia went nose-to-nose with a woman reporter looking into the rape case and said, "You're gonna get yours. And if you don't get yours, somebody close to you will." Not when Coach Sac oversaw a locker room where the jock culture become inextricably connected to a rape culture.
I'm with Dave Zirin, author of the linked article. Getting rid of Coach Saccoccia seemed to be a no-brainer. The guy's behavior, across the board, was indefensible. And yet he keeps his job. Why?

General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thurs., April 25, 2013

1 Comment
The big news, as predicted here by one of the death penalty repeal opponents, is that SB 19(Peterson) did not have sufficient votes to make it out of the House Judiciary Committee. Opponents included families of victims, law enforcement, and the Attorney General. I apologize for somehow missing this during my preview yesterday. I don't understand how I did not see that this bill was being considered, but I didn't. Probably the most egregious (among scores of them) mistake I've ever made since I started doing these reports. Mea Culpa. According to Jonathan Starkey's coverage in the News-Journal, the bill is probably dead for this year. But this is the first year of a two-year legislative session, and things can change. This bill was a close call in the Senate, and it was destined to be close in the House as well. We've also learned that, in Delaware, the police get what the police want, including a lack of transparency (aka the Police 'Bill of Rights', which tramples on the very notion of a bill of rights), so this is to be expected. Don't lose heart. These things often take time, so just keep working at it.