Mediaboss Marketing

Its hilarious that some folks are having a fit over President Joe Bidens plan to put a Black woman on the Supreme Court to fill the seat of retiring Justice Stephen Breyer. Youd think it was the most outlandish and horrific presidential proclamation in recent history.

Ive lost track but it seems the whining has reached a crescendo. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas recently called Bidens pledge offensive and an insult to Black women on his podcast. (Query: Whats more amazingthat Cruz speaks for Black women or that theres an audience for his podcast?) He added that Biden was essentially dissing White America, if youre a White guy, tough luck. If youre a White woman, tough luck. You dont qualify.

Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi also chimed in, calling Bidens as yet unnamed nominee, the beneficiary of this sort of quota. And ex-presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard (remember her?) tweeted: Biden chose Harris as his VP because of the color of her skin and sexnot qualification. Shes been a disaster. Now he promises to choose Supreme Court nominee on the samecriteria. Identity politics is destroying our country.

For a woman whos yet to be identified as a contender, shes apparently already a bona fide catastrophe.

The Pied Piper of these rants is arguably libertarian Ilya Shapiro, former vice president of the Cato Institute, who started his attacks with a series of tweets on Jan. 26, right after Biden announced his plan to put a Black woman on the high court. Objectively best pick for Biden is Sri Srinivasan, tweeted Shapiro, alluding to the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. He added that Srinivasan is solid prog & v smart. Even has identity politics benefit of being first Asian (Indian) American. But alas doesnt fit into latest intersectionality hierarchy, so well get lesser black woman.

Theres a lot to unpack. And because of the outrage sparked by his tweets (since deleted), Shapiro has been put on administrative leave as the new executive director of Georgetown Law Schools Center for the Constitution.

Though hes apologized for what he calls an inartful tweet, I thought his tweets (not just one, as he claimed) were actually quite artful in delivering his message that no Black woman could be up to the job.

Shapiro was adept at using the specter of the unqualified woman of color to stir fears that one of our most sacred institutionsthe U.S. Supreme Courtwould be jeopardized. Simply put, he used a racist tropethe radical affirmative action queento argue that a policy that advances a Black woman is inherently racist.

Unless Shapiro has identified every potential Black woman nominee and can defend their inferiority to Judge Srinivasan, this is the worst sort of casual racism and sexism, says Adrienne Davis, a professor at both the law and business schools of Washington University in St. Louis. Or, as [African American feminist scholar] Moya Bailey would call it, misogynoir.

Ketanji Brown Jackson is sworn in at her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Kevin Lamarque/Reuters/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Indeed, the list of Black women who might be contenders for the Supreme Court is almost an embarrassment of riches, chock full of Harvard and Yale law school graduates and former Supreme Court clerks. The three top contenders, according to multiple press reports, are: Ketanji Brown Jackson, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and former clerk to Justice Breyer; Leondra Kruger, a judge on the California Supreme Court and former clerk to Justice John Paul Stevens; and J. Michelle Childs, a judge of the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina.

Other names rumored for consideration include: Holly Thomas, a judge on the Ninth Circuit; Eunice Lee, of the Second Circuit and Sherrilyn Ifill, president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. And the list goes on.

So what century are Shapiro and his cohorts living in when they suggest that theres no worthy Black woman to fill Breyers seat?

Also insidious is that Shapiro is stirring resentment between people of color. When he tweeted that Sri Srinivasan was the best pick, he signaled to Asian Americans to watch out because an unqualified Black or Brown Americanin this situation, a Black womanmight snatch away a coveted seat that rightfully belongs to them.

By all accounts, Srinivasan is an outstanding jurist but why is he suddenly being trotted out by foes of Biden? Is diversity suddenly a passion of the right?

Bringing Asian Americans in the picture can be done positively or negatively, says Frank Wu, president of Queens College, City University of New York, and the former chancellor at University of California, Hastings Law School. All too often, Asian Americans are introduced as spoilers, not in the spirit of civil rights and diversity, but instead to try to make Asian Americans an alternative to other people of color.

California Supreme Court Justice Leondra Kruger

Official Photo, California Supreme Court

Gabriel Chin, a law professor at University of California at Davis, adds that this is a familiar play. Critics of race-conscious policies try to pit people of color against each other, intentionally or unintentionally, he says, citing the Harvard admissions litigation in which the plaintiff argued that Asian American applicants are harmed by affirmative action, as an example. Chin says he believes breaking down historical patterns of discrimination benefits all groups. I do not think that if a Black woman wins, the potential Asian or other candidates lose.

Is Shapiro deliberately throwing fire at relations between people of color? I cant read his mind. (Ive attempted to reach out to Shapiro via Georgetown Laws press office, but I havent heard back.) But let me say this: Raising the bogeyman (or bogeywoman) of affirmative action is a distraction from those who truly enjoy the rights and privileges of power. Let me put it this way: Of the 115 justices on the Supreme Court since 1789, 108or 94% of them have been White men, as CNN reports.

All this brings up whats intrigued me for a long time: Why do we dissect the qualifications of minorities, particularly minority women, while White men seem to get an automatic pass?

I guess the answer should be apparent.

Read this article:
The Next SCOTUS Justice Will Be a Black Woman. Deal With It. - Bloomberg Law

The next pandemic might be more serious. But if the experts try to sound the alarm, the public will have no faith in them.

As the continued coronavirus lockdowns come to be gradually recognized as the grave error that they were, we must acknowledge the discomfiting fact that every single elite institution in the world got the pandemic response spectacularly wrong.

Governments were wrong. Virtually every nation, to varying degrees, went along with the CCP-inspired radical new lockdown model, as did most subnational governmental bodies.

Academics and experts were wrong. Leading scientists went far beyond their expertise in calling for sweeping policy changes, while the universities themselves scammed their students by switching to virtual learning but demanding full tuition.

The media was wrong. Most mainstream outlets fell in line as enthusiastic propagandists for the lockdown-and-mandate regime, mocking and censoring dissenting voices.

The entertainment industry was wrong. Actors, musicians, athletes, and other prominent cultural influencers used their considerable public sway to promote a new normal from whose worst impacts they were shielded.

International organizations were wrong. The World Health Organization misled the public again and again, while the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, and others saw the crisis as a springboard from which to implement a set of long-desired social changes.

Billionaires and major corporations were wrong. These institutions, which one would ostensibly expect to be the most libertarian, went above and beyond in acting as enforcers for mask and vaccine mandates. Indeed, some (no names need be said here) had a financial interest in perpetuating lockdowns.

The legal system was wrong. While the Supreme Court may have overturned the Biden vaccine mandate, the same federal court systemincluding many conservative judgeswere frequently happy to allow public health to serve as a constitutional workaround. So, for that matter, were many once-respectable civil libertarians.

There were a few exceptions, mainstream figures who were willing to go against the grain and speak out against lockdowns. But they were just that: exceptions. The overwhelming majority of these institutions were clearly and unequivocally wrong.

Never before has anything like this happened; it is a historical first. The 2003 invasion of Iraq is now widely considered to be a mistake, but even that did not receive unanimous institutional support. It was denounced by prominent celebrities, and several major allies, including France and Germany, refused to fight. Imagine if there had been such high-level dissent from the lockdown regime.

The simple truth is that everyone to whom we would look for guidance during a time of crisis completely bungled this one. The economic and social damage done by lockdowns will take decades to repair, and it has come about thanks to a group of leaders who confidently, self-assuredly, and condescendingly led us all in the wrong direction.

The damage to public trust, however, may be worst of all.

Contrary to some popular sentiment, it is not a bad thing that we have experts or elite institutions. None of us, no matter how bright or diligent, are able to solve every complex problem for ourselves. Reliance on expertise is a heuristic, and on the whole a useful one. The same goes for talented artists, news organizations which keep us aware of important information, and businesses which provide valuable consumer products. None of these are bad in their conception.

Citizenship in a free society requires a certain healthy skepticism of these institutions, but it also requires some base level of trust. Institutional trust was badly battered in the Trump years, but it was still strong enough in March 2020 that when President Trump and Dr. Fauci stood side-by-side and told us that we would have to serve our nation by social distancing for two weeks, most of us went along.

That trust has now been lost. It is highly likely that a large section of the public will never do what elite institutions tell them to againand will in fact do the exact opposite. They will reflexively see a group of power holders who are at best incompetent and at worst malicious.

The problem with crying wolf, though, is that sometimes there is a real wolf. The next pandemic might be more serious. But if the experts try to sound the alarm, the public will have no faith in themand justifiably so.

The only hope we now have is to so thoroughly and transparently reform these institutions that they might regain some measure of public trust. It is not enough to move on from this purgatorial era of lockdowns, as we are (hopefully) now starting to do. After World War II, we did not merely bask in the victory. We also took steps to hold the direct perpetrators responsible and ensure that the lessons learned in the war would not be forgotten.

The same must be done here. We must have a full, exhaustive public audit that exposes exactly how and where it all went so badly wrong, how the most powerful people in the world could have come to implement a policy so massively misguided as planetwide lockdown, and to hold the globe in thrall to that self-evidently insane policy for two full years. Bad actors must be removed from these institutions whenever possible, and reforms must be put in place to prevent such a catastrophe from happening again.

If we can have a commission to investigate the riot at the Capitol on January 6, we can certainly have one dedicated to plumbing the depths of this great error.

It seems highly unlikely at this point that the major institutions will do anything other than stubbornly double down on their mistakes. But they must change. In the face of such massive failure, the only alternative to institutional reform would be institutional destruction, an outcome for which none of us should hope.

Jason Garshfieldis a freelance writer whose work has appeared in Townhall, RealClearPolitics, and numerous other publications.

Originally posted here:
All the Institutions Failed - The American Conservative

Welcome to Thursdays Overnight Health Care, where were following the latest moves on policy and news affecting your health. Subscribe here: thehill.com/newsletter-signup.

A new poll asked Italians about different ways to eat Italian food. Hint: Dont put pineapple on pizza.

Today, we delve into new CDC research, and the U.S. marks a shocking 900,000 COVID-19 deaths, on the way towards1 million.

For The Hill, were Peter Sullivan (psullivan@thehill.com) and Nathaniel Weixel (nweixel@thehill.com). Write to us with tips and feedback, and follow us on Twitter: @PeterSullivan4 and @NateWeixel.

Lets get started.

US passes 900K COVID-19 deaths

The U.S. death toll from COVID-19 topped 900,000 people, fueled by the highly contagious omicron variant, less than two months after the nation passed 800,000.

Despite three widely available vaccines that effectively prevent severe illness and death, only 64 percent of the population is fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The vaccination campaign has been beset by inequities, misinformation and political sabotage, and the unvaccinated are the ones suffering the most. More people have died in the 13 months since the vaccines have been available than before.

Data from the CDC show the total number of deaths involving COVID-19 in 2020 was 385,343.

The U.S. has one of the highest per capita rates of recorded COVID-19 cases in the world, with about 15,000 cases per 100,000 people, according to a New York Times tracker.

While increasing evidence shows omicron may be less likely to cause death or serious illness than the delta variant, the sheer infectiousness and the speed at which it spreads has overwhelmed hospitals, primarily with people who have not been vaccinated.

Read more here.

More vaccinated adults hospitalized with omicron

A higher proportion of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 during the period of omicron dominance were fully vaccinated compared to the period of delta dominance, according to a new analysis. Still those people were also less likely to be severely ill or die.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) analysis of a single hospital in Los Angeles found there were more hospitalizations during omicron compared to delta, but that among omicron-period patients, vaccination particularly vaccination plus a booster dose was associated with lower likelihood of admission to an intensive care unit.

Among adults at least 65 years old hospitalized during omicron, vaccination was also associated with a lower likelihood of death while hospitalized.

"COVID-19 vaccination, particularly a booster dose, continues to be critical in mitigating the health care burden of the omicron variant," the CDC concluded in its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

Omicron-period hospitalizations overall were associated with a lower likelihood of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation and death while hospitalized, compared with delta-period hospitalizations.

With COVID or because of it? According to the CDC, that distinction doesnt really matter. Even patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results admitted for non-COVID-19 conditions require isolation rooms and use of personal protective equipment and might transmit infection to health care workers, exacerbating staff shortages.

Read more here.

IOWA ANNOUNCES PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY END DATE

Iowa Gov.Kim Reynolds(R)announced on Thursday that the state's public health emergency proclamation for COVID-19 will end in February.

We cannot continue to suspend duly enacted laws and treat COVID-19 as a public health emergency indefinitely. After two years, its no longer feasible or necessary. The flu and other infectious illnesses are part of our everyday lives, and coronavirus can be managed similarly,Reynolds said in a statement.

State agencies will now manage COVID-19 as part of normal daily business, and reallocate resources that have been solely dedicated to the response effort to serve other important needs for Iowans, she added.

The governors officeannouncedthat the proclamation will end on Feb. 15.Only 16 of the hundreds of provisions under theproclamation are still active, according to the announcement, with those remaining focused onworkforce issues that the governors office said can be handled without the emergency executive powers.

The states two COVID-19 websites will be decommissioned, but data regarding weekly COVID-19 cases, positive tests since March 2020, deaths since March 2020 and vaccine information willremain on the states health department website, according to the announcement.

The Iowa Department of Public Healthwill "report relevant COVID-19 information weekly on its website, similar to how flu activity is reported,the governor's office said.

Read more here.

PAUL PROMISES INVESTIGATION OF FAUCI IF REPUBLICANS TAKE SENATE

Sen.Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulOvernight Health Care US tops 900K COVID-19 deaths Paul promises investigation of Fauci if Republicans take Senate Rand Paul praises removal of Neil Young songs from Spotify: 'Seeya' MORE(R-Ky.) says he plans to subpoenaAnthony FauciAnthony FauciOvernight Health Care US tops 900K COVID-19 deaths The Hill's 12:30 Report: Strong jobs report surprises economists Paul promises investigation of Fauci if Republicans take Senate MORE's records if Republicans retake theSenate in November's midterm elections and he becomes chairman of acommittee.

Paul stands to become chairman of the Senate Health Committee if Republicans flip the 50-50 upper chamber. The committee's current ranking member, Sen.Richard BurrRichard Mauze BurrOvernight Health Care US tops 900K COVID-19 deaths Paul promises investigation of Fauci if Republicans take Senate FDA nominee meets unexpected hurdles MORE(R-N.C.), is retiring.

"If we win in November, if I'm chairman of a committee, if I have subpoena power, we'll go after every one of [Fauci's] records," Paul said during an interview withconservativepodcast host Lisa Boothe. "We'll have an investigator go through this piece-by-piece because we don't need this to happen again."

During congressional hearings, Paul, a libertarian ophthalmologist, has repeatedly antagonized the nation's top infectious diseases doctor over the benefits of masks, vaccinations and the origins of COVID-19.

Read more here.

CDC: masks work, some better than others

People who said they always wore some type of face mask indoors were less likely to test positive for COVID-19 compared to those who did not.

High-quality N95 respirators and KN95 masks were better at stopping infections than other masks, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said Friday.

According to the study, surgical masks reduced the odds of testing positive for COVID-19 by about 66 percent compared to no masks at all. People who reported wearing N95 respirators while indoors were about 83 percent less likely to test positive compared with those who said they never wore a mask inside, the CDC found.

Takeaway: "These findings reinforce that in addition to being up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, consistently wearing a face mask or respirator in indoor public settings reduces the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection," the CDC wrote in the study, which was conducted by researchers at the California Department of Public Health.

"Using a respirator offers the highest level of personal protection against acquiring infection, although it is most important to wear a mask or respirator that is comfortable and can be used consistently," the CDC added.

Read more here.

WHAT WE'RE READING

STATE BY STATE

That's it for today, thanks for reading. Check out The Hill's healthcarepage for the latest news and coverage. See you Monday.

View post:
Overnight Health Care US tops 900K COVID-19 deaths - The Hill

OLYMPIA Washington lawmakers are considering whether they should allow voters to select multiple candidates in order of preference in some local elections.

A Senate bill would allow counties, cities, towns, school districts, fire districts and port districts to adopt ranked-choice voting for general elections and primary elections if certain conditions are met. Jurisdictions would have the choice to adopt ranked-choice voting and have the discretion on which races would use ranked-choice voting.

Ranked-choice voting allows a voter to rank their candidates in preferential order. All first choice votes are counted, and a winner is declared if they have over 50% of the vote. If no one reaches the 50% threshold in the first round, the person with the fewest number of votes is eliminated. Anyone who voted for that candidate has their votes count toward their next ranked candidate. That elimination process repeats until a candidate reaches the 50% threshold.

Prime sponsor Sen. Yasmin Trudeau, D-Tacoma, said allowing localities to adopt ranked-choice voting allows voters to make choices that best represent them.

It enables people to vote based on their values instead of having to settle for the lesser of what they consider to be two evils, Trudeau said at a Senate State Government and Elections hearing on Jan. 19.

Jurisdictions that use ranked-choice could get grants from the Washington Secretary of States office to adopt the system.

Spokane County Auditor Vicky Dalton said ranked-choice proposals have been floated over the past few years. She and other county auditors have been engaged in conversations with advocates about different proposals and their viability, she said.

This is a discussion that has evolved over the last several years, Dalton told The Spokesman-Review. Were working through this concept step-by-step.

Supporters of the proposal said the bill allows voters to have more options to choose from when electing leaders. Shae Dolan, high school senior from Tacoma and chair of the Legislative Youth Advisory Council, said youth voter turnout is so low not because of political apathy, but because candidates dont accurately represent them.

By increasing the choices on the ballot, preferential elections promote the viability of third party candidates, combat feelings of futility, improve representation and ensure young voters like me feel heard, Dolan said at the January 19 hearing.

Washington already has a top-two primary system, which allows the top two candidates in the primary, regardless of party, to advance to the general election. Proponents of that system, like proponents of ranked-choice, say the top-two system can lead to increased voter turnout and more competitive races.

Cornell Clayton, director of the Thomas S. Foley Institute of Public Policy and Public Service at Washington State University, said ranked-choice voting and the states top-two primary system both can theoretically lead to more moderate candidates. Ranked-choice, however, broadens the choices available to voters, Clayton said.

Travis Ridout, professor of government and public policy at WSU, said the theory that both systems can lead to more moderate candidates, while plausible, needs more studies.

Im not sure we yet have definitive evidence on the degree of moderation thats promoted, Ridout said. Though its very, very plausible.

In terms of the top-two system, a primary election that advances two members of the same party, Ridout said, doesnt offer people of the other party much choice in that general election.

Ridout said that voters in the current single choice system have to vote for the candidate they think has the best chance of winning which may not necessarily be their true preference. Under ranked-choice, they have more freedom to choose who they actually like.

You dont have to be worried about the viability of a candidate in order to vote for a candidate, Ridout said. If you want to vote for that Llbertarian, go ahead and vote for the Libertarian whether that Libertarians viable or not.

Opponents of the measure say ranked-choice voting can lead to voter confusion and delays in results. George Forman, a computer scientist from Port Orchard, said different vote tabulating algorithms could lead to different consensus results and the state shouldnt run that risk.

It would be better to have simple voting procedures everyone understands and not require running and trusting a computer algorithm to determine the winner, Forman said.

Dalton said ranked-choice voting cant be implemented right now. Outstanding issues like ballot design, rules relating to ballot counting and voter education need time to be fleshed out with auditors and advocates.

I would say were not there yet, Dalton said. Theres still a lot of individual steps and impacts that need to be explored, need to be worked and need to be thought all the way through.

Dalton said the discussions should continue to take place allowing time so auditors can be ready to implement a thorough product.

All county auditors in Washington want to ensure that if were tasked with implementing something, that we are able to put that function into production successfully, Dalton said. We do not want to fail in anything we do, and we do not want to fail because a function has been mandated before the processes are available and ready.

The bill was passed out of committee on Jan. 26. It has been referred to the Senate Ways and Means committee where it is awaiting a hearing.

Follow this link:
What would ranked-choice look like in Washington? The Legislatures hoping to find out - Yakima Herald-Republic

To allow parents to scour lessons for elements of critical race theory, Arizona teachers would be required to upload a list of every book and worksheet they use in their classrooms online for parental review if a Republican-backed bill becomes law.

The goal, says state Sen. Nancy Barto, is to increase transparency for parents who are concerned about their childrens education. Senate Bill 1211 requires schools to publicly post all materials and class activities on their website at least 7 days after being used. That means the names, authors, and organizations associated with the materials, along with links if theyre available for free online or descriptions if theyre not. Materials encompass everything from textbooks and worksheets to YouTube videos and phone apps.

Lesson plans that include topics like race, gender, diversity and non-discrimination must be posted at least 72 hours before theyre carried out.

More sunshine on what our kids are involved in is a great thing, Barto, the Phoenix Republican who introduced the bill, said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

This is the second attempt to enshrine this into law, and a response to conservatives concern about so-called critical race theory being taught in classrooms. Conservatives have appropriated critical race theory as a catchall to describe basically any serious attempt to teach the history of race and racism in America.

Nicole Solas flew in from Rhode Island in support of the bill during a hearing on Tuesday afternoon. Solas was sued by the National Education Association after she filed more than 200 public records requests to determine whether her daughters school taught critical race theory. Solas said she was testifying on Arizona legislation so she could take the ideas back to Rhode Island.

She is being represented by the Goldwater Institute, a Phoenix-based libertarian think tank that drafted the bill and is using it as model legislation in other states. Matt Beienburg, Goldwater Institutes education policy director, said the organization supports other proposed bills of the same vein in 20 other states.

One proponent of the bill is Steve Daniels, the chairman of the right-wing extremist Patriot Party, who spent much of 2021 disrupting local school board meetings to protest mask mandates and how race is taught in schools. At one meeting, he was arrested for trespassing.

It is racist curriculum it singles kids out for the color of their skin and tells them: If youre white, youre a racist and you cant help it because you were born that way, he said of critical race theory education.

Critical race theory, in fact, is an analysis of how racism exists at a systemic level, and does not imply that white people are intrinsically racist. The Arizona chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union condemned the bill as an attempt to make it more difficult to teach inclusion.

Any bill that interferes with our childrens education by undermining teachers ability to facilitate discussions about our countrys history, including our struggles with race, sex and LGBQT+ rights, should not become law, Darrell Hill, the organizations policy director, said in an email.

You are handcuffing what your educators can bring into the classroom. Asking them to post everything except the test is untenable.

Joe Thomas, Arizona Education Association president

Several local parents also spoke in favor of the bill.

Amy Carney, a mother of six, held up a printout of a page from the Scottsdale Unified School Districts website and said that the majority of links to teacher syllabi were broken.

If our schools are proud of the materials theyre using in their classes, there should be no problem (uploading them), she said.

One mother, Kerwin Franklin, pointed out that her childs charter school sent her descriptions of the curriculum and even ISBN numbers for the textbooks being used so she could easily look them up. She was required to sign a form to acknowledge she read the curriculum paperwork.

The Arizona Charter Schools Association is opposed to the bill, and told the Arizona Mirror that it would unnecessarily increase the workload on already stressed schools and teachers. Matthew Ladner, the associations director of the Arizona Center for Student Opportunity, said member schools have reached out with concerns.

(Theyre) not philosophically opposed to the concept of transparency, he said.

Educators said the bill has problems. Former Mesa public school teacher Judith Simons said policies like those in SB1211 are part of the reason she retired after 33 years. She referred to it as creeping micromanagement, and said it would constrain the creativity and responsiveness of teachers.

Every student is different and requires curriculum adjustments, Simons said. Having to report all of their instructional decisions constitutes extra work with no commensurate compensation and may disincentivize personalized teaching. Rather than mandate more work for teachers, Simons said parents who are concerned about their childs education should simply communicate directly with their childrens teachers.

Please treat teachers with respect and trust their professionalism, she said.

Sen. Christine Marsh, D-Paradise Valley, who used to be a high school teacher, said she sometimes had to provide abridged versions of difficult literary works to struggling students. The requirement to report those books could result in confusion and arguments with parents about who is using the abridged versions and why.

Another former teacher, Rachael Clawson, said that requiring teachers to report their curriculums would prevent them from making quick changes - something that has become more commonplace during the pandemic. Clawson herself had to trash all of the teaching guides she drew up in advance of her maternity leave when her school switched to remote learning. Ultimately, curriculum concerns are best left to be resolved by one- on- one communication between parents and teachers.

This is not transparency, it is government overreach, she firmly concluded.

Melissa Ewing, a substitute teacher for six years, said approving the measure would exacerbate the already difficult task of being an educator and would likely add to the shortage by convincing current teachers to leave the profession and dissuading future teachers from joining because it implies a deep distrust of them.

The results of a survey conducted last October by the Arizona School Personnel Administrators Association estimated that as much as 25.9% of teacher vacancies in Arizona remained unfilled and 55.4% of the vacancies were remedied by teachers who dont meet state certification standards.

The Arizona Department of Education opposes SB1211 because it places a high administrative burden on schools and teachers. The department advised parents to take advantage of curriculum nights and parent-teacher conferences to resolve concerns.

We know parents and teachers share the same goal of helping their students learn and grow, that goal is best met by building stronger, trusting relationships, instead of accusatory rhetoric and burdensome policy proposals, the departments spokesperson, Morgan Dick, said in an email to the Arizona Mirror.

If our schools are proud of the materials theyre using in their classes, there should be no problem.

Joe Thomas, the president of the Arizona Education Association, the states largest teachers union, said the bill would dissuade teachers from engaging their students in off-the-cuff ways and not deviate at all from the lesson plan. Thomas shared the story of a highly awarded teacher who was gifted an apple by a student before class and shifted his lesson to include discussing how bacteria can accumulate by making a show of dropping it after he bit into it in front of his class and examining samples from it later.

You are handcuffing what your educators can bring into the classroom. Asking them to post everything except the test is untenable, Thomas said.

The bill does allow for lessons about non-sensitive topics that dont include discussions of race or gender to be uploaded within seven days after theyre taught.

Sen. Rick Gray, R-Peoria, heatedly said committee members have been contacted by numerous parents, which should have been solved by school officials but hasnt been.

Thomas replied that cases where parents and teachers arent communicating effectively arent systemic enough to warrant legislation, and resolutions are best handled at the local level.

Gray challenged Thomas to come up with a better solution, to which Thomas laughed and thanked him for being afforded seconds to respond. Later, Chairman Paul Boyer, R-Glendale, stated he himself successfully thought up some ideas in seconds and said school districts could post curriculum on their websites which would be required under this bill and host curriculum nights. Members of the audience yelled out they do in response.

Boyer is a high school teacher at a Valley charter school.

SB1211 was approved by the committee along party lines. It awaits approval by the Senate floor.

Barto, who sponsored the bill, said she hoped it would help repair the trust broken between parents and teachers, and that parents concerned about what their children are exposed to in the classroom deserve answers.

Our kids belong to our parents, not the schools, she said.

Read more here:
To expose 'critical race theory' in classrooms, Republicans move to have teachers post all lesson materials online - Arizona Mirror