CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
December 16, 2009 01:01 AM UTC
30 Comments
Let’s abolish the U.S. Senate instead
And increase the representation in the House to what it was 100 years ago.
Once upon a time-100 million Americans, 435 Reps.
Now – 300 million Americans, 435 Reps. the Senate should be increased to three per state.
or Sessionses or whatevers.
I’m always shocked how anti-government some conservatives can be. How can you vote for them?
It’s like electing an arsonist to head up the fire department.
I’m always shocked at how conservative they can become when they want something.
There’s a real difference.
To carry the fire department metaphor a little further: Once all the buildings are burned to the ground, there’s nothing left to burn, so you can then get rid of the fire department. It’s a very destructive philosophy that makes perfect sense to its True Believers.
What I really want to know is whether Norton favors eliminating the Department of Homeland Security, another “matter of legislation” that has pissed away at least as much money as the Department of Education in recent years.
Or a the NIH & CDC.
DOE.
Privatize the FAA! REagan wanted it- it must be good.
I read it as return it to the states and local jurisdiction. For those that compare it to the fire department, she’s saying the fire department should be a local government issue, not federal.
It’s an interesting question. Why do we have a federal dept of education? If it’s a question of the dollars, you can have the federal dollars delivered in block grants based on number of students and reduce ED to 4 accountants.
I’m not saying it’s a good idea, I’m just saying it’s not automatically a bad idea either.
I suppose that’s a fair point. You have to look at their motive, though. It’s certainly not the tiny fraction of the federal budget education represents.
To these nutjubs, eliminating the Department of Education is the first step toward fully dismantling the public education system.
I know a large number of conservatives that support the concept of taxpayer funded K-12 education. But they are frustrated with the horrible job the education industry has done the last 50 years and so are open to radical changes.
If college entrance opportunity is going to be equal, then a high school degree from Mississippi (no offense to southerners, just to your schools) has to be the same as one from Massachusetts. All schools should be held up to some national standard, which requires federal oversight and bureaucracy.
And plus just more generally, why would we ever for goodness sakes trust the states or more local jurisdiction. I know you rail a lot against the BVSD, you actually want to give them more power and authority?
I think the federal government is the only entity to make sure that we have national standards in our education, applicable to all students, to make sure no-one falls through the cracks — re-allocating resources as the need arises.
Education is monumentally important for the economy, crime, plus it is an intrinsic good. So again, why would we trust this to the states or locals?
The Federal government has taken on at least part of the job of maintaining our education system for the same reason Congress has created most of the rest of the Federal bureaucracy: because private industry and/or the state and local governments have failed to get the job done,and are usually actively opposing getting the job done. Social Security, Medicare, the EPA…
And what Raphael said: you gripe about your own local school district and you want to turn over the money from our Federal tax dollars to them without condition or oversight? Um… No.
It’s that they’re all incompetent. Jon Stewart had a great comment about the banks paying large bonuses during the crash to retain their “best people.” He said, “you have no best people – they all suck.”
The educational system in this country sucks. Yes there are a lot of good people doing their best and the vast majority trying to do a good job. But the system as a whole, and the educrats who fight any real change – it gives us crap.
As to needing federal guidelines to enforce minimum standards – unless that minumum is 50% drop-out rates in big city schools, that’s not happening.
What’s the answer? I don’t know. But I don’t see any good argument to keep any given part of it.
Which school (s) do you volunteer for?
For which school do you attend Accountability meetings? or otherwise engage?
I had nuns K-5. The beauty of the Catholic elementary education (at least 40 years ago) is that the parents had nothing to do with anything but writing the check and showing up on Sunday. As a parent of kids in public schools, I neither have nor want that luxury.
Perhaps you do engage. Perhaps you are present.
But answer this – which seems more likely to you:
a) In the 19th century, modified slightly in the 20th, we got the school calendar right forever? One size fits most, 184 days of instruction, a linear progression from K-12.
or
b) The whole thing needs the big re-think?
200 + days of instruction, K-3 gets compressed, 4-6 gets a new focus. And 7-10 is a path for the baccalaureate bound. (see Jefferson’s Children; Bottstein, Leon)
Why is it that in corp America when we want better more talented people we expect to pay for it but in the education profession we think we can make it better by wishing it were so and complaining about the status quo?
Until 20 or 30 years ago education (like nursing) benefitted from the availability of a relatively trapped, highly talented labor pool: women. But then women started getting sales jobs, and starting businesses and running HP and everything. Education can’t recruit. Just think how much college educated, motivated, talent you could recruit on $17/hr.
I hear your frustration David.
I’d love to help you, and Colorado and the nation fix this. But until we get past this we gotta do what we’ve always done and we gotta do it for the same or less as we’ve always spent we’re not going to see a whole lot of change.
I actually taught one day as a substitute when the teachers did a scik-out (or something like that). I’ve also served on several school and district committees.
I think we agree on a lot of the fundamental questions. But I think we must look for real change now.
they fund K-12 and higher ed about as well as Colorado.
We outperform still, but now that we’re seeing much much larger class sizes and other changes, we’ll catch up. down.
Was education bad before the federal government saved us from ourselves? Could we spend these billions better in local schools? Open you mind to new ideas and don’t dismiss them just because they are from the other party.
What billions?
are you saying you agree that the Department of Education should be abolished?
getting a “yes” or “no” answer from a politician.
he used to be my Senator.
The Dept. of Ed. was created in 1979. But already it’s sacred to you socialists, isn’t it? Couldn’t possibly roll it back, could we?
Why do conservatives hate liberals? Because we know what you’re up to, piece by piece. The Fabian Freeway all over again.
Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.
— Buddha —
but I can’t believe this is really going to be an issue in the 2010 senate race. Are there a significant number of voters who consider the existence of the U.S. Department of Education (one way or the other) a top priority? I find it hard to believe this will even be on the radar screen for most voters.
I think Ms. Norton mentioned it because it does to a small extent appeal to the right wing base but it also is a diversion until she can figure out what to say about the issues voters really care about. She doesn’t want to get too far ahead on those issues until she sees where the election cycle is going next year.
because education isn’t that big an issue these days (for good or ill), but it’s a credential that will be mentioned from now on as part of a pattern — “She’s one of us,” by her conservative supporters, and “Look out! She’s nuts!” by her Democratic opponents.
I’m far more concerned with eliminating the Patriot (ha!) Act, unbundling the DHS, eliminating the tax breaks to big oil, big pharma, and so on.
As far as education goes, let’s face reality–property taxes in Colorado are FAR too low to support even a mediocre system of public education. Look at the states that consistently rank highly in terms of K-12 education quality–they also have much higher property taxes.
I view the atrocious state of our educational system as the #1 issue this country faces. I rank it above jobs, the GWOT, energy/carbon, & health-care in terms of it’s impact long-term.
I don’t know if Norton has any real answers to this other than what appears to be a throw-away line for the fringe on the right. But substantive proposals on this – that to me is major.