Always Been At War With Oceana

There's always got to be a bad guy, and even though I find smoking to be vile and disgusting, I think political calls against it are to be resisted:

UC Davis officials announced in June that tobacco use will be banned starting Jan. 1 on all university property, including UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento, as part of a University of California systemwide policy...

One campuswide ban being considered by CSUS President Alexander Gonzalez would prohibit all smoking, tobacco chewing and use of electronic cigarettes on school property except within a personal vehicle as soon as 2015. Smoking is now allowed on campus as long as it isn’t within 20 feet from buildings, in Hornet Stadium or on major walkways...

“We are supposed to be a community that works together, and we are ostracizing students that are making legal decisions as adults,” he said...

A survey conducted in 2011 by the Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services found that 14 percent of CSUS students smoked, according to the task force report.

Henthorn points to the low number as evidence that new restrictions aren’t needed. Proponents of the ban say the data show a small number of smokers are impacting the vast majority who must endure secondhand smoke...

At Sacramento State, smokers were hard to find Wednesday. Senior Julie Martinez said she isn’t happy about the possibility of a tobacco ban. “I pay a fortune for tuition,” Martinez said. “There are nothing but adults here. … It’s not the school’s job to tell me to stop smoking.”

Martinez said that some of the areas on campus where smokers congregated in the past now have “No Smoking” signs. “I’m glad I’m graduating,” she said.

What group will be next?

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/29/5957665/csus-looks-at-smoking-ban.html#storylink=cpy

If Standardization Is The Problem, How Can A Czar Be The Solution?

Joanne asks this question in response to former NEA President John Wilson's contradictory article:

Well, one of my favorite Southern sayings may be even truer as it relates to those implementing Common Core State Standards: "A bureaucrat can screw up a two-car funeral procession!"

Who would have thought the "powers that be" could make such a mess of what started out as a powerful and game-changing idea...

The problem is not the standards; it is the implementation and the bureaucratic desire to standardize everything about the education process from lesson plans to testing. This must stop. Policy needs to change. Administrators must adjust practices. Teachers must be respected. The accountability system has to be overhauled or Common Core State Standards are doomed for failure.

To deal with the chaos, we desperately need a single authority to oversee the implementation, call out bad practices, and recommend policy changes to the politicians. We need a Common Core Czar. 

A "central planner" can solve any problem, right?  Those union types sure do like to think that way.

The TSA-holes Have Got To Go

Is the TSA doing anything of value that couldn't be done better, and more inexpensively, by private companies?

U.S. airport screening is run by the unionized Transportation Security Administration, which has a reputation for intrusive pat downs and inept management. Former TSA chief Kip Hawley called the agency "hopelessly bureaucratic." And studies have found that TSA security performance is no better, and possibly worse, than private-sector screening, which is allowed at only a handful of U.S. airports.

The TSA has a penchant for wasting money on useless activities, leaving it less to spend on things that benefit travelers, such as more screening stations. For example, a new Government Accountability Office report finds that TSA spends $200 million a year on a program to spot terrorists by their suspicious behavior — yet the program simply does not work.

Congress should move responsibility for screening to the airports, and allow them to contract out to expert security firms. Private firms would be able to flexibly adjust their workforces to reduce congestion, and they would end low-value procedures that wasted passenger time.

Is there anyone out there who truly believes that the TSA is making air travel safe?  Passengers have done more to stop terrorists (underwear bomber, shoe bomber) than the TSA has--unless you genuinely worry about Disney World snowglobes and shampoo.

Is there anyone out there who truly believes that keeping a paraplegic out of the country keeps us safe?

Ellen Richardson went to Pearson airport on Monday full of joy about flying to New York City and from there going on a 10-day Caribbean cruise for which she’d paid about $6,000.

But a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent with the Department of Homeland Security killed that dream when he denied her entry.

“I was turned away, I was told, because I had a hospitalization in the summer of 2012 for clinical depression,’’ said Richardson, who is a paraplegic and set up her cruise in collaboration with a March of Dimes group of about 12 others.

The Weston woman was told by the U.S. agent she would have to get “medical clearance’’ and be examined by one of only three doctors in Toronto whose assessments are accepted by Homeland Security. She was given their names and told a call to her psychiatrist “would not suffice.’’

At the time, Richardson said, she was so shocked and devastated by what was going on, she wasn’t thinking about how U.S. authorities could access her supposedly private medical information. 

How is our "homeland security" enhanced by such stupidity?  Only in government....

It's A Small Start

The welfare state is dying--at least in one European country:

In an address to the people of the Netherlands earlier this year, the Dutch King Willem-Alexander declared the welfare state ‘dead,’ and said that the people of the Netherlands needed to look more after themselves in a ‘participatory society’ without depending so much on government.

The graphic showing public-debt-to-GDP is interesting:

It's about -3.8% in the Netherlands.

On A Lark

I was out Christmas shopping with a friend today, when out of the blue, it hit me:  want to go to Reno?  He'd never been, so off we went.

The drive over the summit was beautifully clear, and Reno itself was crisp and enjoyable.  Great way to spend an afternoon/evening!

Republicans, The Party of Civil Rights

From National Review Online:

This magazine has long specialized in debunking pernicious political myths, and Jonah Goldberg has now provided an illuminating catalogue of tyrannical clichés, but worse than the myth and the cliché is the outright lie, the utter fabrication with malice aforethought, and my nominee for the worst of them is the popular but indefensible belief that the two major U.S. political parties somehow “switched places” vis-à-vis protecting the rights of black Americans, a development believed to be roughly concurrent with the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the rise of Richard Nixon. That Republicans have let Democrats get away with this mountebankery is a symptom of their political fecklessness, and in letting them get away with it the GOP has allowed itself to be cut off rhetorically from a pantheon of Republican political heroes, from Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass to Susan B. Anthony, who represent an expression of conservative ideals as true and relevant today as it was in the 19th century. Perhaps even worse, the Democrats have been allowed to rhetorically bury their Bull Connors, their longstanding affiliation with the Ku Klux Klan, and their pitiless opposition to practically every major piece of civil-rights legislation for a century. Republicans may not be able to make significant inroads among black voters in the coming elections, but they would do well to demolish this myth nonetheless.

Even if the Republicans’ rise in the South had happened suddenly in the 1960s (it didn’t) and even if there were no competing explanation (there is), racism — or, more precisely, white southern resentment over the political successes of the civil-rights movement — would be an implausible explanation for the dissolution of the Democratic bloc in the old Confederacy and the emergence of a Republican stronghold there. That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

You should read the whole thing.

California's High-Speed Rail Derailed?

If this boondoggle fails for the "wrong" reasons, I'm still ok with that:

California’s bullet train boondoggle was sucker punched yesterday, as a Sacramento Superior Court judge blocked $68 billion in bond funding. The same case saw a separate ruling allowing the state to spend $3.4 billion in federal cash for the project, while a second case (same judge) rejected the rail authority’s request to issue $8 billion in bonds that voters approved in 2008. The judge ruled the project would need to meet various mandates, compliances and environmental clearances before the funding stream can be allowed to flow.

The convoluted rulings are yet another sign that California’s toxic regulatory and legal environment makes any public works project slow, expensive and Pyrrhic...

We’ve long argued that the train is an awful idea, but it looks like it’s starting to fail for all the wrong reasons. It would be good to see some common sense shape a consensus that the project’s exorbitant costs and marginal utility make it not worth the while. But no, the train is being derailed by red tape.

Hoist by their own big-government petard, some might say.

The judge didn't give the "derail it!" side everything it wanted, though:

By rejecting the state’s specious legal arguments, refusing to validate the issuance of state bonds, and insisting on a complete financial plan as the law requires, Kenny signaled a strict attitude that could bode ill for the project in another big legal challenge next year...

One of Kenny’s rulings says, in effect, that the state can’t build that short stretch in the San Joaquin Valley without a plan that lays out how a much longer stretch from Merced to Southern California can be financed.

Since the state has barely enough money for the first stretch, the barrier to meeting the larger financial standard is very high.

The judge’s strict constructionist attitude toward the law governing the project could bite again when he weighs another suit that alleges other ballot measure standards are being ignored – such as requiring a 160-minute ride from downtown San Francisco to downtown Los Angeles.

So it could still happen, although the likelihood is now less.

This, California voters, is what happens when you vote what feels good instead of what makes sense.  Kinda like that stem cell research vote a few years ago; how much is that costing us, and why is it so important that California pay for that?

Let's close with some common sense:

Brown should acknowledge that the project as now planned is doomed and either kill it or go back to the voters with a revision that includes realistic routes and costs and lays out how it will be financed.

If it’s worth doing – a debatable point – it’s worth doing right and not with legal sleight-of-hand and pie-in-the-sky financing.

California doesn't need high-speed rail.  If it needs rail at all, it needs a car-train (and not one run by the government).  There are vast distances to be covered out here in the West, and putting your loaded car on a train one day and being in Portland or Seattle the next day sounds like a winner to me--at least, judging by the traffic on I-5 it does.

Update, 11/30/13:  Not surprised:

These are immense obstacles. Yet instead of acknowledging their seriousness, rail authority board Chairman Dan Richard depicted them as predictable “challenges,” and a spokeswoman said the authority would proceed with its plans to seize land for the project in the Central Valley via eminent domain.

So Many Interesting Points In One Article

From nearby UC Davis, aka Berkeley-lite:

A sustainability-focused UC Davis housing community is generating 87 percent of its own electricity, short of the university’s ambitious goal that the development produce all of the energy it consumes.

The $300 million West Village campus project opened to much fanfare two years ago, riding on the hope that it would serve as a model for future construction.

Touted as the largest planned “zero net energy” community in the nation, West Village elicited great interest from politicians and newspapers alike. Millions of taxpayer dollars went into the private project, including $17 million from UC Davis for infrastructure and $2.5 million from the California Energy Commission...

Though West Village is producing the amount of energy that models predicted, resident consumption is significantly higher than expected, according to the report. Residents at The Ramble Apartments consumed 131 percent more energy than expected, while those at Viridian Apartments consumed 141 percent more, including 306 percent more in common areas.

The clubhouse, which includes a pool, gym and theater, exceeded consumption projections by 178 percent...

Another problem lies in the way residents are charged for utilities. Energy costs are built into the rent rather than based on usage, eliminating one financial incentive to conserve. Residents also say high rental rates discourage conservation.

“I take pretty long showers and always keep the lights on,” said resident Meghna Bhatt, 21, who pays $850 a month for a single bedroom. “There’s no incentive to conserve. Of course they’re not getting zero net energy.”

England explained the complex cannot charge for electricity based on usage due to state utility regulations. Carmel Partners said it is exploring ways to encourage residents to reduce their usage...

Braun pointed to conflicting missions at West Village as part of the hurdle in achieving zero net energy. Student tenants can exercise at the gym, print for free at the business center or take a dip in the resort-style pool.

“This a real estate development. It has a purpose to not just house students, but also attract them,” he said. “Meanwhile, the university also has a sustainability goal.”

So we have conflicting goals, no real reasons to conserve (other than to be a "good person"), even more taxpayer money subsidizing some of the state's most privileged (to use a favorite term of lefties) young people who probably haven't signed up for Obamacare and are still on their parents' insurance--and surprise that these good, young, liberal students are wasting electicity.  Amazing.

But there's hope:

Despite the setbacks, England expressed hope that zero net energy is within reach. He predicted West Village would realize its goal in two years. A “biodigester” that would convert waste into energy is slated to go online in the next few months after being delayed.

How long will the solar panels last?  Will they recoup their cost?  How much does it cost to maintain this type of community; is it more or less than a "standard" community?  So many questions.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/26/5949323/uc-davis-west-village-progresses.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/26/5949323/uc-davis-west-village-progresses.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/26/5949323/uc-davis-west-village-progresses.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/26/5949323/uc-davis-west-village-progresses.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/26/5949323/uc-davis-west-village-progresses.html#storylink=cpy

California Is Losing Its Edge In Higher Education, But Not For The Reason Gavin Newsom Says

From the major Sacramento newspaper:

More attention must be paid to the California State University system and to the state's community colleges if California is going to produce the educated workers its economy needs, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom says in a report set to be issued Tuesday.

The report commissioned by Newsom argues that the state is losing its place as a national leader in higher education.

The report, prepared by the nonpartisan Committee for Economic Development based in Washington, D.C., finds that the percentage of young adults earning associate and bachelor's degrees in California already is below the U.S. average and predicts the trend will persist unless the system is overhauled to serve an increasingly diverse and low-income population.

Perhaps we could start improving higher education by not brainwashing our K-12 students into believing that they'll only be successful in life if they go to college.  Perhaps we could start improving higher education by refusing admittance to our universities to students who need remedial math or English classes, and requiring them instead to attend community colleges until they meet university standards.

Cut down on the number of university students.  Restore importance to the bachelor's degree, and don't treat people who choose not to get one as pariahs.  When everyone gets a trophy, a trophy has no value.

And then let's cut all the absolutely useless courses and degrees.  I'm not saying there shouldn't be some fun, interesting, cool classes at universities, but let's not pretend that all courses, or all majors, deserve the taxpayer's consideration.

Are You Surprised? I'm Not.

For all I know I'm just as guilty as anyone else, but at least I don't "round up" grades at the end of the semester just so a kid can get a higher grade:

The average college student’s GPA rose from 2.52 in the 1950s to 3.11 in 2006. At many universities, the most common grade is an ‘A.’

These and other statistics show that American four-year educational institutions have massively shifted their grading systems to award ‘A’ and ‘B’ grades to most students, according to USA Today.

Is it a problem if the average college student receives above average grades? Stuart Rojstaczer, a former Duke University professor who studies grade inflation, thinks so.

“In a fair grading system, you reward people for their outstanding achievements,” said Rojstaczer. Grade inflation “lowers the intensity and intellectual level in many classes.”

Of course, grade inflation is not even across the board. Elite and private universities inflate more heavily, while community colleges give comparatively honest grades and even flunk students. Yale University, for instance, gave an ‘A’ grade 62 percent of the time last year.

Lake Wobegon.

The Collective Mindset

"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."

Here's another, if you need it:


That's really all the commentary you need from me about this story:

A plan to squeeze most residents of the San Francisco Bay Area into multifamily housing offers a test case of whether land-use bureaucracies nationwide, encouraged by the Obama administration, should be allowed to transform American lifestyles under the pretext of combating climate change...

Owning a single-family home has long been part of the American dream, but Plan Bay Area embraces a dramatically different vision of the ideal community: crowded rows of high-rises and mass-transit platforms.

Population density in the region’s urban areas would increase by 30 percent during the next two decades under the plan. Nearly 80 percent of all new housing and 62 percent of new jobs would be located in just 5 percent of the region’s surface area.

Planners admit this will make single-family housing in the already high-priced Bay area even less affordable.

Who would want to live like that? And of those who do, why would you want to compel others to live that way?  The answer to the 2nd question is simple:  compulsion is central to the liberal way of thinking.

The Stats Survey Write-Up

Each year in early November my statistics classes conduct a survey of our school's students.  We spend days brainstorming questions, winnowing down the list, rewording, etc, until we get 20 questions we can ask.  Then we go into classes all over school, randomly select students to survey, gather the data, and input it into a spreadsheet (it's just easiest that way).  Then there's a write-up.

I don't give a lot of written instruction on the write-up for a couple reasons.  The first reason is best explained by an analogy:

When you're taking your driving test, the instructor doesn't say, "Put on your blinker, check your blind spot, merge into the right lane, and then turn right up at the next corner."  He says, "Turn right up at the next corner," and expects you to know that you're supposed to do all those other things.

If I tell them what to do I'm not evaluating if they know that they're supposed to do it.  I am also skimpy on the instructions because the students are all, with the exception of one junior, college-bound seniors.  They should be able to synthesize and create, contrast and hypothesize.  If I tell them everything I want them to do I may as well give them a fill-in-the-blank sheet instead of assigning a report.

I do, though, give a lot of verbal instructions and reminders of what I expect.  If they take notes in class, or have exceptionally good memories, great.  If they don't, well, they're probably not going to do well.  The overarching instruction is to demonstrate what you've learned in class so far.  I do list some specifics I want them to address; how they address those topics, and the detail they choose to employ, are up to them.

The write-ups were due last Thursday; I'm not so mean as to require them on the Friday before a break, and I thought it cruel to have such an assignment hanging over students' heads all break by having it due after break.  The reports are written by teams of 4 or 5 so there shouldn't have been that much work for any one person to do.  After all the data was entered there was a week and a half to do the write-ups.

The survey asked 20 questions on a variety of topics, and each team had to choose a topic of interest and focus their write-up on that topic of interest.  Some teams chose specific questions, others chose groups of questions that all related a topic; for example, some groups chose to focus on the three questions that had slightly different wording on the two different versions of the survey, and to write about the differences in responses to those questions.

I usually don't bring work home with me but chose to bring these surveys home over break and to grade only 4 per day; that should get me through all of them by the end of break.  The grades on the first four?  15/30, 17/30, 27/30, 29/30.

Update:  I've graded the next four.  The scores were 17, 21, 24, and 27.

Update #2, 11/26/13:  Tonight's scores were 24, 28, 29, and 30.

Update #3, 11/27/13:  Today's results were 24, 26, 27, and 29.

Update #4, 11/30/13:  I graded the final four today:  18, 28, 28, and 28.

Only In Education Could Someone Say Something This Stupid and Not Be Called On It

When men outnumbered women on university campuses it was a "problem" that needed a "bold solution".  Now that the numbers are reversed, though...

Alix Higgins has a total of three men in her four classes at Sacramento State. The gender imbalance is also apparent in campus libraries, restaurants and social spots where students – mostly women – gather...

While women have outnumbered men on college campuses since the 1980s, the gap has widened significantly over the last 15 years at local four-year public universities. At Sacramento State, nearly 3,400 more women than men are enrolled as undergraduates, a 30 percent difference. At UC Davis, the gender gap is nearly the same...

“I think this is just an exciting time,” (department chairwoman) Bellon said. “I think we are starting to see the real flowering of those seeds that were planted in the ’80s and ’90s, to make education more equitable between the genders.” 

How is this at all "equitable"?  This has been my point for decades--people who claim to want "equity" don't really want equity.  They want their people, whoever that may be, to be the ones on top.

Also interesting are the charts at the bottom of the linked article.  They show that at both CSUS and UC Davis, our two local universities, women undergraduates have outnumbered men undergraduates every single year since the 1980's.  This has been going on for 30 years now, and the charts show the trend is accelerating.  Worries about the patriarchy are a bit outdated and perhaps we should move past them, despite the howls of the entrenched interests who would lose power by accepting reality.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/20/5928262/gender-gap-widens-at-csus-ucd.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/20/5928262/gender-gap-widens-at-csus-ucd.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/20/5928262/gender-gap-widens-at-csus-ucd.html#storylink=cpy

Too Much Government, Redux

Yesterday I wrote about Vancouver's decision not to allow builders to install doorknobs in new houses.  Today's story comes from the People's Republic of California (as if you're surprised):

The city of San Rafael, CA, recently passed one of the most restrictive smoking bans in the whole country -- it’s now illegal to smoke in your own home if you share walls with another residence.

There is no more ardent opponent of cigarette smoke than I am.  To me it's just nastiness and I don't like being around it at all.  But is it the place of government to make this rule?

But that’s privately owned property. As a landlord, you have every right to ask your renters to not smoke inside. Or have dogs. Or paint the walls neon pink. That’s fine and dandy -- but it shouldn't be illegal...

Over-regulation is ridiculous and unnecessary. There is absolutely no reason for the government to come into our private homes and dictate which legal activities we may or may not participate in.

This is what happens when one group of people think they're smart enough to tell the rest of us how we're supposed to live.  Prohibition didn't work.

Juxtaposition: Race and Harassment in Higher Education

First, from UCLA:

Student demonstrators alleged that there is a “toxic” racial climate in the graduate school, including in Rust’s classroom...

In a letter sent to colleagues in the department after the sit-in, Rust said students in the demonstration described grammar and spelling corrections he made on their dissertation proposals as a form of "micro-aggression."

As the Instapundit said, "If you can’t take having your grammar errors corrected, you’re too dumb and immature to be in college, much less graduate school. Unsurprisingly, this was in the school of Education."

Next, from Minneapolis Community and Technical College:

The reprimand was due to the discomfort of two white male students who said they were being personally attacked while Professor Gibney led a discussion about structural racism in her political science and communications course.  These very students interrupted Professor Gibney during the discussion, expressing that it was upsetting to them that it was being discussed at all.   MCTC went so far as to identify Professor Gibney’s conduct in the class as a violation of the Non-Discrimination Policy and she was directed to meet twice with the Chief Diversity Officer to learn how to be more welcoming to people of  all backgrounds.

It is an outrage, albeit not a surprise, that MCTC would embrace such a backwards philosophy that places the comfort of two white male students as a healthy center for a discussion on structural racism.

If you think there should me two (or more) standards for discussion, (at least) one for dark-colored students and one for melanin-challenged students, then you are a racist--and a real one, not one of the fake ones that liberals always scream about when they don't get their way or someone criticizes the president.

The English were pretty good about coming up with "rules of thumb" about life, and there's one that fits this latter example to a T:  what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Petty Thuggery and Snobbery

I know what's best for your child, and if you don't see things my way, I'll make life difficult for both your child and you.

That's essentially the message that was sent to parents in this note:

What is the single most depressing aspect of this letter? Is it the idea of labelling eight-year-olds racists? Is it the moronic conflation of religion and ethnicity? Is it the ugly grammar ("As such our expectations are that all children in years 4 to 6 attend school on Wednesday…")? Is it the bullying tone? Is it the unconscionable choice of font? Is it that someone can write that way and yet hold a position of authority in a school?

Or is it this: that how ever many times prime ministers declare multi-culturalism to be a failed ideology, a petty, officious, bossy, self-righteous, self-serving, Leftist chunk of the public sector remains stuck in 1980?   link to the original story

Guys Won't Be Railroaded As Fast As Some Want Them To Be

Again, thank God for FIRE:

The federal government is backing away from the nationwide “blueprint” for campus speech restrictions issued this May by the Departments of Education and Justice. The agencies’ settlement with the University of Montana sought to impose new, unconstitutional speech restrictions, due process abuses, and an overbroad definition of sexual harassment and proclaimed the agreement to be “a blueprint for colleges and universities throughout the country.” 

But in a letter sent last week to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), the new head of the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), Catherine Lhamon, said that “the agreement in the Montana case represents the resolution of that particular case and not OCR or DOJ policy.”

They will still be railroaded in Montana, but not in other places--at least, not by federal fiat.

Too Much Government

Good idea or not, why would anyone need or want government to make this type of decision?

In Vancouver, the humble doorknob is being phased out. Kind of. Effective in March, new housing will be required to install levers on doors and faucets, instead of the good-ol' round knobs of our forefathers.

If you want a handle, have handles installed in your house.  This is the very definition of nanny state.

Teachers Wouldn't Support Their Current Unions If They Weren't Required To

This is why states like California, with strong unions, are not right-to-work states--because given a choice, teachers would opt out of unions:

Two Wisconsin public sector unions failed to achieve re-certification Thursday, the latest sign that Gov. Scott Walker's sweeping reforms to the state's rules for public employee unions are causing workers to abandon labor organizations.

Wisconsin Association for Correctional Law Enforcement and the education unit of Council 24 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees both lost bids to re-certify Thursday, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

In the case of the teacher's union, it just barely missed, winning 49.5 percent of its 664 eligible members. It needed a bare majority of 51 percent to continue. The union said it may challenge the results.

If allowed to I'd voluntarily join my local teachers union. Their rule, not mine, states that if I want to be a member I must also be a member of the CTA and the NEA, which I absolutely do not want to be.  Mandatory association--it's thuggish, it's wrong, it's a sign that they don't really have anything of value to offer that people would choose.

Good Advice, Or Bad?

Mike Rowe, host of Dirty Jobs, didn't like one of the posters in his high school counseling office.  He's now made a new one.

Was he right?  Was it the worst advice ever?  It's certainly kind of elitist....