There is only one way to change things: we the people need to vote for leaders who will represent us. And I do mean vote. 

Without citizen leaders who are elected to serve the people back home, we will continue as a pseudo-democracy resembling monkeys playing in circus tents. What we the people need to remember is how to restore the great experiment of democracy that was once placed in that shining city on the hill.

None of this may surprise you. You may be thinking this is just one more story of politics gone badly. You’ve heard it all before, and it’s getting to be a bit boring.

Have we all forgotten how to blush? Have we forgotten what it is to be American, or have we forgotten how to be courageous?

Do we understand what we have?

Do we, as a nation of individuals bound by the U.S. Constitution, too often forget that the document enumerates the freedoms of all men and women in this great nation under God? Or are we all too comfortable sitting in our armchairs, letting someone else make decisions, vote, and lull us into giving away our freedoms one at a time?

Courage is not found in just those who ride out into battle or face down mortal enemies. Living each day well takes courage. Before I began writing this book, I was afraid—it is important that I admit that to you and to myself. I was afraid that speaking out would deliver problems to my door, problems that I could easily avoid by being quiet.

The larger problem, though, is that I was raised to face down my fears. In fact, it is now more important than ever that we all come together, to change the politics of the schoolyard bullies into what the courageous fifty-six signers of the Declaration of Independence gave their lives and sacred honor to create.

We need the press become the truth-seekers they can be, shining candles in the corners of dark rooms. We the people need to take our place as citizen leaders who vote, support integrity candidates or run for office ourselves.

Who knows? One day we just may get the government we deserve.

To continue reading this chapter, get your copy of “What Sex is a Republican in paperback or Kindle edition on Amazon.

About the Author:

Terri McCormick is an author, policy expert, educator, and former state representative to the Wisconsin State Legislature. Today, she offers her expertise in public and government relations through McCormick Dawson CPG Ltd., a trusted consultancy of independent contractors.

Ms. McCormick serves as president and CEO of the company, drawing from more than two decades of professional experience, a strong educational foundation, a host of industry-related publications, and a multitude of accolades, awards and formal recognitions. Holding a Master of Arts in administrative leadership from Marian University, and a Bachelor of Science in political science and public administration from the University of Wisconsin, Ms. McCormick received both degrees with high honors.

“What Sex is a Republican?” is sold on Amazon in both the paperback edition as well as Kindle edition.  Read reviews on Amazon here.

Little did I know that the Republican Party of my state, along with house assembly “leaders,” would take out its own sitting governor. These same leaders would be investigated and indicted within the same month for felony misuse of public office. This was more than simple “sibling rivalry”—it was something far more brutal. It involved Republican leaders smearing the reputation of their own political party’s governor and then ruining any future career he might have in public office. I was beginning to realize that the beautiful marble hallways, majestic paintings and ornately designed dome in the state capitol far outclassed many of its inhabitants.

It was 2001, just a month after my swearing-in as a freshman state legislator. I was about to receive my first official call from the press. No policy briefing, no amount of study of public policy options could have prepared me for what I was about to hear.

The reporter on the other end of the telephone began, “Your house Chairman of Joint Finance held a press conference earlier in the day. He blasted your party’s governor as not being a ‘real Republican’ and then he said that the governor’s budget was a sham!” I shook off the statement, at first thinking it was a joke. After I processed the question in my mind, I had a few questions of my own for the reporter. “Okay, back up the tape. What did my Joint Finance chair do?”

He repeated the same story. The Joint Finance chair, a young kid from Marinette, had held a television news conference and discredited his own sitting governor, right after Governor McCallum had announced his 2001 state budget to the press. I was at that budget announcement in Green Bay, with most of my Republican colleagues; I supported his budget. This was the most fiscally conservative governor the GOP had in a long time.

I responded, off the record, “That’s impossible. Governor McCallum is an innovator. He has brilliant ideas on economic development and technology. I know this governor; I worked with him four years prior as a private citizen. He is the reason our state has a charter school law.”

As shocking as that phone conversation was, nothing prepared me for what I saw when I pulled into my driveway. The television cameras were rolling. They wanted to know if I was willing to speak on camera.

I’d been in public office for a mere month, and I’d never dealt with the press. I began to ask them if any one of my esteemed colleagues would go on film. After they assured me that “none of them” was willing to give a comment, I agreed.

There was only one course of action to take: tell the truth. “I have all the respect in the world for all of my Republican Party colleagues. However, I have a far different opinion of Governor Scott McCallum. I believe him to be a fiscal conservative and a solid head of the Republican Party in Wisconsin.” Whew. That wasn’t so hard.

As I watched the news later that evening, I began to put the puzzle pieces together. This childish attack on the governor had been staged. There were maybe two people in the room with the television cameras. The immature young man, who somehow had enough years under his belt to be appointed as the chair of Joint Finance, was trying to take out his own party’s governor. He was finagling behind the scenes to take over the GOP house speaker slot, knowing his boss would be indicted on felony counts for misuse of public office. This soon-to-be junior speaker of the house assembly was on television, taking out the only Republican in his way—the sitting Governor.

What I couldn’t understand as a freshman legislator was why this attack was occurring at all. Little did I know that this was a tactic used by the GOP, my party, all too often to separate the chosen few of the political machine from the noisemakers—those people who were actually trying to effect real change for the people of our state.

The next Republican caucus in the house assembly was scheduled for the next week. It coincidentally overlapped with Take Your Daughter to Work Day, a tradition in my home. My then-fifteen-year-old daughter, Kristen, accompanied me to the legislative session. Sadly, she was the most mature one in the room, for there were grown men threatening each other and her mom during those meetings.

We have rules that prohibit sharing of information of what occurs in closed caucuses, so I will just share with you the actions that my daughter saw from the people we elected to guard principles and ethics and to provide leadership.

Kristen viewed what could only be described as staged political theatre.

The first lines were given by the chair of Joint Finance. With a pitiful look on his face, as though he were the wronged party, he began, “I don’t know why Terri got up on television and trashed me, but I don’t think that was right.”

He looked in my direction expecting a response; I didn’t provide it. I remembered what I carefully had told the television crew: “I respect all my Republican colleagues, but I reject any of those statements about our governor.” If anything, this kid should have been apologizing to us.

Next, his sidekick—a six-foot-ten guy with a Herman Munster appearance and a brutish temperament—raised his voice to the level of eardrum-shattering on a boom box in his attempt to create a smokescreen for his “wronged” friend. As he pointed his finger in my direction, I continued to tune him out. I saw no need to respond to the theatre; it was not amusing.

Maintaining his booming and thunderous roar, pushing his voice further toward me, he demanded my attention by asking, “Do you know who this man is?”

Racing through my mind were the retorts, “Who? That inexperienced child?” and “You mean this monkey at a circus?” But that wouldn’t do for this august body, the Wisconsin state legislature; I wouldn’t be disrespectful.

Still, I had had enough of the histrionics of the soon-to-be junior speaker and his sidekick. And it looked like no one else was going to say anything to pull this outrageous behavior in line. It was as though they were handing their school lunch boxes to the schoolyard bullies. As everyone else in Fourth Floor North in the state capitol slid down in their chairs, I realized that it was up to me … again. At least, I thought someone should say something in defense of our governor.

I began, “I do not know who you both think you are. The fifty-six thousand people who elected me to this body did not elect someone who would sit like a lemming and watch as her own party trashes its sitting governor. Unless you would like to start referring to Attorney General Doyle as “Governor Doyle” right now, I suggest we begin to start working with Governor Scott McCallum.”

My comments drew applause from the majority of my caucus, but the damage was done. Standing up for what was right that day would cost me dearly. From that day forward, our party’s next speaker would see me as competition—an upstart and someone who was in his way. Never mind the fact that the “team” was tearing apart one of its own— the governor. I was trouble, and they weren’t going to rest until they taught me how to fall in line.

Impossible? As you read this book you will begin to understand that the politics of governance is not about political party and ideology as much as it is about obedience to the “front row”—to those party bosses who pay for political elections and who dictate the front row’s actions. Politics is all about the party elites who hold the purse strings and command obedience—if you let them….To continue reading this chapter, get your copy of “What Sex is a Republican in paperback or Kindle edition on Amazon.

About the Author:

Terri McCormick is an author, policy expert, educator, and former state representative to the Wisconsin State Legislature. Today, she offers her expertise in public and government relations through McCormick Dawson CPG Ltd., a trusted consultancy of independent contractors.

Ms. McCormick serves as president and CEO of the company, drawing from more than two decades of professional experience, a strong educational foundation, a host of industry-related publications, and a multitude of accolades, awards and formal recognitions. Holding a Master of Arts in administrative leadership from Marian University, and a Bachelor of Science in political science and public administration from the University of Wisconsin, Ms. McCormick received both degrees with high honors.

“What Sex is a Republican?” is sold on Amazon in both the paperback edition as well as Kindle edition.  Read reviews on Amazon here.

Evidence shows constructive district reactions to presence of charter schools in urban districts

The McCormick Standard strongly recommends this article for the sake of an ‘honest’ dialogue about the future of public education in the United States. (Reposted from Educationnext.org)

Charter school enrollment in urban areas has increased by 59 percent in the past 6 years, and their presence is inducing traditional public schools to respond, innovate, and look for improvement. Although some districts still try to forestall the spread of charter schools, authors of a new study find that the urban school districts they examined made significant changes in policy or practice in response to the presence of charter schools in their district, indicating that school districts are choosing to emphasize the strengths of their own public schools and benefit from school choice in their areas.

After reviewing 8,000 media reports from the past five years regarding 12 different urban areas, authors Marc J. Holley, Anna J. Egalite, and Martin F. Lueken identified 132 pieces of evidence of competition awareness and constructive or obstructive responses, an average of approximately 11 per city. The authors then assessed how districts responded to competition from charters. Each news story was coded according to the “types of responses by public school officials.” The article, “Competition with Charters Motivates Districts: New political circumstances, growing popularity,” will appear in the Fall 2013 issue of Education Next and is currently available on the web at www.educationnext.org.

In Boston and New Orleans, the authors found evidence that traditional public schools were supportive and innovative in response to the introduction of charter schools to their district. For example, both districts collaborated with local charters, showed support for pilot and innovation schools (as did Denver), and expanded and improved their own school offerings. Even Atlanta, a district that was “previously relatively unwelcoming to charter schools” has showed willingness to collaborate with KIPP schools.

In urban areas in the Northeast, Midwest, South, and West where at least 6 percent of students attended choice schools, the authors found evidence of significant changes in the policies and practices of schools within districts where school choice had been introduced. The most common reaction to the presence of charter schools was one of “district cooperation or collaboration with charter schools.” Positive responses included partnerships with CMOs or for-profit school operators, replication of successful charter school practices, and increased efforts on the part of traditional schools to market their services to students and families.

According to the authors, “where school districts once responded with indifference, symbolic gestures, or open hostility,” they found “a broadening of responses, perhaps fueled by acceptance that the charter sector will continue to thrive, or by knowledge that many charters are providing examples of ways to raise academic achievement.”

While there were some instances of negative reactions in specific districts, such as challenging or delaying charters’ access to unused school buildings in Los Angeles and the District of Columbia, the authors say those instances were visibly fewer than those of positive change.

The authors conclude, “This evidence suggests that while bureaucratic change may often be slow, it may be a mistake to underestimate the capacity of these bureaucratic institutions to reform, adapt, and adjust in light of changing environments.”

About the Authors
Marc J. Holley is evaluation unit director at the Walton Family Foundation and research fellow in the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas, where Anna J. Egalite and Martin F. Lueken are doctoral academy fellows.

About Education Next
Education Next is a scholarly journal published by the Hoover Institution that is committed to careful examination of evidence relating to school reform. Other sponsoring institutions are the Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University, part of the Taubman Center for State and Local Government at the Harvard Kennedy School, and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. For more information about Education Next, please visit: http://educationnext.org.

The McCormick Standard strongly recommends this article for the sake of an ‘honest’ dialogue about the future of public education in the United States.

Beginning teachers subsidize handsome payoffs to superintendents, guardians of the public interest (Reposted from Educationnext.org)

The costs of retiree benefits for educators, including benefits for previous retirees, are consuming a large and growing share of public spending on K–12 education. Between 2004 and 2012, pension costs for public educators rose from 11.9 to 16.7 percent of salaries. Unfunded pension liabilities of state and local governments are estimated to be roughly $1 trillion. But that trillion-dollar number, as vast as it seems, understates the true liabilities, which more than double if calculated using standard methods in financial economics.

In spite of the need for pension reform as evidenced by Detroit’s recent bankruptcy filing, pension reform is unlikely, in part because administrators in charge of the system reap the largest benefits from it. The authors of a new Education Next study find that while superintendents contribute 53 percent more to pension plans over their career span than senior career teachers, their expected benefits upon retirement are 89 percent higher than those of teachers.

Authors Cory Koedel, Shawn Ni, and Michael Podgursky point out that using salary levels from the last three years of service to determine retirement benefits, “combined with the career-cycle timing of teachers’ promotions into administrative positions, results in senior management in K–12 education enjoying the largest net benefits from these plans.” Educators’ defined-benefit plans typically provide retirees with guaranteed lifetime benefits, with the annual payout based on the number of years of service and annual salary in the final years of active employment. The article, “The School Administrator Payoff from Teacher Pensions” can be found on educationnext.org and will appear in the Fall 2013 issue of Education Next.

In Missouri and other states, the authors note, “the pension system transfers wealth from lower-income professionals to higher-income professionals. Beginning teachers are subsidizing a handsome payoff to better-paid administrators, who are the appointed guardians of the public interest in the education system.” For example, a principal’s contributions are only 14 percent higher than those of senior career teachers, but their expected benefits are 37 percent higher. At the opposite end of the spectrum, because of turnover and mobility, a young teacher can expect to contribute 30 percent of what typical career teachers contribute, but he or she can expect to collect only 18 percent of the benefits.

As senior-level administrators are both the stewards of the pension system and the recipients of the highest net benefits, the authors conclude, “There is no reason to expect school administrators or their organizations to support reforms that would provide a more modern and mobile retirement system for young educators” and suggest that districts could be recruiting young teachers more effectively by putting money in upfront salaries rather than in end-of-career pension benefits.

About the Authors
Cory Koedel is assistant professor of economics, and Shawn Ni, and Michael Podgursky are professors of economics at the University of Missouri, Columbia. The authors are available for interviews.

About Education Next
Education Next is a scholarly journal published by the Hoover Institution that is committed to careful examination of evidence relating to school reform. Other sponsoring institutions are the Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University, part of the Taubman Center for State and Local Government at the Harvard Kennedy School, and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. For more information about Education Next, please visit: http://educationnext.org.

Soul-searching took me to my first inspiration and role model in political office, Representative Earl McEssy. It was this man’s act of kindness after my father had died that lingers with me still. “Go to Representative McEssy if you or Mom need me after I am gone,” Dad told me when he knew that his death was certain.

I remember standing in the hallway of Rep. McEssy’s large home on Forest Avenue, just down the block from ours. It was there that I would find the help my mother needed. It appeared there was a problem with Dad’s medical insurance coverage at the end of his life. The medical evacuation helicopter was not covered, and my father’s life insurance policy was being held up for that reason. Widowed, with only me to help, my mother could not find a way to pay for my father’s funeral.

Our family sorrows became Rep. McEssy’s sorrows. My mother cradled her head in her hands in grief as she tried to work her way through the medical and ambulance bills on her desk. It was time for me to turn to my father’s friend for help.

I quietly phoned him from the next room. “Representative McEssy? I am George McCormick’s daughter. My father died last week, and we are running into some pretty difficult problems. I am sorry to bother you …”

The need to help my mother gave me the distance I needed to block my own grief and sorrow.

I went on, “Rep. McEssy, my mother needs help working through the requirements of the insurance company—they need proof that my father was on Medicare insurance in Minnesota before his death. “You see, Rep McEssy, we don’t know how to get the paperwork from Minnesota to the Social Security office in Washington,” I managed to finish before a sense of hopelessness felt its way down my face in the form of a tear.

McEssy’s voice was kind, steadfast and reassuring. “Terri, tell Ardys that she is not to worry about anything. Tell her that I will take care of this and it is not a problem.” He went on in soft tones, “Terri, don’t be afraid. I will help you.”

I managed to say the words “Oh, thank you … thank you so much” before I hung up the phone.

It was this memory that has acted as a pivotal moment for me, that shapes the way I view the responsibility of an elected official. It was Earl McEssy, our trusted family friend and state representative who cared for us and carried us through a difficult time with his integrity.

AN HONESTY TOUR CAMPAIGN

My campaign resembled more of a ragtag volunteer army than a well-oiled political machine. We had heart, a passion to serve and a sincerity that was welcomed, quite literally, into the homes and minds of the people who lived in the Fifty-sixth House Assembly District in Wisconsin. For me, it has not been easy. I’ve always wanted to make a difference but haven’t always wanted to be in the limelight. For that, I needed to believe and be convinced to run for elective office.

The voices of former students visiting my office encouraged me. “Stop talking about how things can change and how to change them, Ms. McCormick, and get out there and run for public office.” Before I knew it, “we” were running for the Fifty-sixth House Assembly seat in the Wisconsin legislature. Joining forces with me to form the best grassroots campaign the state had ever seen were Susan Menge, Jenny Vosters, Lauren Breithaupt, Jared Guzman, Michael Welhouse, Jeff Dercks, and Dan Brellenthin—and my own daughters and son. Ellen Breithaupt led our voter-list brigade, and Evie and Bob Kettner, the owners of Mr. and Mrs. K’s Restaurant, held countless town meetings in Greenville.

In the summer of 2000, I went door-to-door, asking the people for their confidence and trust to represent them in the state legislature. I was battle-tested, as they say, from my pioneering days with charter schools.

My old “pals” at the teachers union would be there, too, ready to “reward” me for passing that landmark legislation for public charter school reform—they would spend forty thousand dollars against me in my own Republican primary, and countless more dollars against me in the general election.

As luck would have it, my constituents were looking for something different, rather than the same old politics. The voters of the Fifty-sixth House Assembly District would stand with me in 2000, proving that it wasn’t about the money. Our band of citizen leaders and volunteers would carry us to victory.

I became a state legislator at my swearing-in in January 2001. Now, it was my turn to represent the people who elected me….To continue reading this chapter, get your copy of “What Sex is a Republican in paperback or Kindle edition on Amazon.

About the Author:

Terri McCormick is an author, policy expert, educator, and former state representative to the Wisconsin State Legislature. Today, she offers her expertise in public and government relations through McCormick Dawson CPG Ltd., a trusted consultancy of independent contractors.

Ms. McCormick serves as president and CEO of the company, drawing from more than two decades of professional experience, a strong educational foundation, a host of industry-related publications, and a multitude of accolades, awards and formal recognitions. Holding a Master of Arts in administrative leadership from Marian University, and a Bachelor of Science in political science and public administration from the University of Wisconsin, Ms. McCormick received both degrees with high honors.

“What Sex is a Republican?” is sold on Amazon in both the paperback edition as well as Kindle edition.  Read reviews on Amazon here.